Disaster Risk Management

Division 4300
Health, Education, Nutrition, Emergency Aid
Disaster Risk Management

Working Concept
Published by:
Deutsche Gesellschaft fr
Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH
Dag-Hammerskjld-Weg 1-5
P.O.Box 5180
D-65726 Eschborn
Telephone: + 49 (0) 6196-79-0
Telefax: + 49 (0) 6196-79-6170
Internet: http://www.gtz.de
Activity Area Emergency and Refugee Aid
(Section 4334)
Person responsible:
Bernd Hoffmann, GTZ
Written by:
Wolfgang Garatwa, GTZ Dr. Christina Bollin
Special advisers:
Dr. Roland F. Steurer, GTZ Nadira Korkor,
GTZ Network for Development-oriented
Emergency Aid (NDEA), GTZ
Layout and editorial revision:
Nadira Korkor, GTZ
Printed by:
O.K.KOPIE GmbH, 65719 Hofheim-Wallau
Eschborn, April 2002
gtz
Deutsche Gesellschaft fr
Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH
PREFACE
Disaster risk management is a comparatively new area of social concern and practice. However, it is a very relevant concern for development cooperation given that
natural disasters have devastated an increasing number of regions, destroyed investments and set back progress in development. Often, countries victim to the
large-scale impacts of earthquakes, tornadoes, typhoons, floods or droughts are
barely able to respond, and recovering can take years or decades. Following the
United Nations initiative for an International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction
(1990-99), this theme has climbed much higher on the international agenda. An increasing number of development cooperation actors are trying to cater for more prevention in their activities. And, the more vulnerable countries of the South are also
beginning to make efforts to protect their populations and national economies from
future disasters.
The link between disasters and development is now apparent to everyone, and disaster risk management is gaining increasing currency as an effective form of investment. But, most developing countries are limited in their ability to effectively integrate
a strategic approach to the theme into national policy. It is the poor populations in
the disaster areas that are hardest hit by losses and setbacks.
Development cooperation supports political, economic, ecological and social development worldwide. It helps improve living conditions and promotes sustainable development. Natural disasters do not just pose a challenge to southern hemisphere
countries. They are also a challenge for development cooperation and therefore for
the Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ): Strategies must
be developed and implemented to reduce the vulnerability of populations in partner
countries, as well as measures to decrease disaster risk.
GTZ aims to bridge the gap between the perceived challenges and the necessary
practical steps for addressing them. The present working concept provides a review
of current approaches and GTZ services in disaster risk management. Our intended
audience includes relevant professionals, national and international institutions and
organizations, and GTZ staff.
Special thanks are due to the authors, Wolfgang Garatwa and Dr. Christina Bollin,
who compiled the working concept, and other colleagues within and outside of GTZ
who provided comments and suggestions.
Bernd Hoffmann
Dr. Roland F. Steurer
Head of Division
Senior Planning Officer
April 2002
Contents
CONTENTS
List of abbreviations.....................................................................................................6
Summary........................................................................................................................8
GTZ a service enterprise for international cooperation.........................................9
1.
Disasters a challenge for developing countries and development

cooperation ..................................................................................................10
1.1
1.2
1.3
Causes and effects........................................................................................12

Action needed................................................................................................14
Obstacles to implementation .........................................................................14
2.
Approach and definitions ...........................................................................16
2.1
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.1.3
The growing risk ............................................................................................16

Hazard ...........................................................................................................17
Vulnerability ...................................................................................................18
Disaster risk management.............................................................................19
3.
From disaster relief to disaster risk management ...................................20
3.1
3.2
The scope of disaster relief and the actors involved .....................................20

The international path towards integrated disaster risk management ..........21
4.
GTZ activities in disaster risk management .............................................24
4.1
4.2
4.2.1
4.2.2
4.2.3
4.2.3.1
4.2.4
4.2.5
4.2.6
4.2.6.1
4.2.6.2
4.3
The political background in the Federal Republic of Germany .....................24

Activity areas in disaster risk management...................................................25
Risk assessment ...........................................................................................26
Disaster prevention and mitigation ................................................................27
Disaster preparedness ..................................................................................28
Early-warning systems ................................................................................. 28
Disaster risk management as part of rehabilitation and reconstruction ........29
Mainstreaming disaster risk management in development cooperation
sectors ...........................................................................................................31
Multisectoral approaches ..............................................................................31
Raising awareness ....................................................................................... 32
Strengthening local disaster risk management capabilities ......................... 33
Future challenges ..........................................................................................34
5.
GTZ services ................................................................................................35
Sources and selected references..............................................................................37

Selected internet addresses ......................................................................................41
Annex 1 Selected GTZ reference projects in disaster risk management...........45
Annex 2 Key terms in disaster risk management.................................................47
List of abbreviations
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AA
ADB
ADPC
BID/IDB
BMELF
BMZ
CEPAL/ECLAC
CEPREDENAC
CRED
DAC
DEA
DIPECHO
DKKV
DSE
ECHO
ECLAC/CEPAL
EU
FAO
FEMID
GDP
GTZ
German Federal Foreign Office (Auswrtiges Amt)

Asian Development Bank
Asian Disaster Preparedness Centre
Inter-American Development Bank (Banco
Interamericano de Desarrollo)
German Federal Ministry for Food, Agriculture and
Forests (Bundesministerium fr Ernhrung,
Landwirtschaft und Forsten)
German Federal Ministry for Economic
Cooperation and Development (Bundesministerium
fr Wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und
Entwicklung)
Economic Commission for Latin America and the
Caribbean (Comisin Econmica para Amrica
Latina y el Caribe)
Coordination Centre for the Prevention of Natural
Disasters in Central America (Centro de
Coordinacin para la Prevencin de los Desastres
Naturales en Amrica Central)
Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of
Disasters
Development Assistance Committee
Development-oriented Emergency Aid
European Community Humanitarian Office
Disaster Preparedness Programme
German Committee for Disaster Reduction reg.
soc. (Deutsches Komitee fr Katastrophenvorsorge
e.V.)
German Foundation for International Development
(Deutsche Stiftung fr Internationale Entwicklung)
Economic Commission for Latin America and the
Caribbean (Comisin Econmica para Amrica
Latina y el Caribe)
European Union
Food and Agriculture Organization
Strengthening of Local Structures for Disaster
Mitigation
(Fortalecimiento de Estructuras Locales en la
Mitigacin de Desastres)
Gross domestic product
Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Technische
Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH
List of abbreviations
IATF
IDB/BID
IDNDR
IDRM
IFRC
IPCC
ISDR
LA RED
OAS
OCHA
RELSAT
THW
TC
UN
UNDP
WHO
WMO
ZENEB
Inter-Agency Task Force for Disaster Reduction (of

ISDR)
Inter-American Development Bank (Banco
Interamericano de Desarrollo)
International Decade for Natural Disaster
Reduction
International Institute for Disaster Risk
Management
International Federation of Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
International Strategy for Disaster Reduction
The Network for the Social Study of Disaster
Prevention in Latin America (La Red de Estudios
Sociales en Prevencin des Desastres)
Organization of American States
Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
Reforzamiento de Estructuras Locales y Sistemas
de Alerta Temprana
Technical Support Service (Technisches Hilfswerk)
Technical Cooperation
United Nations
United Nations Development Programme
World Health Organization
World Meteorological Organization
Centre for Natural Risks and Development
(Zentrum fr Naturrisiken und Entwicklung
Bonn/Bayreuth)
Summary
Summary
There has been an increase in the incidence of natural disasters worldwide with
increasing loss of life and damage to property. The risk of disasters can also be expected to rise in the future, particularly for
developing countries populations. There
are two reasons for this trend:
An increase in extreme natural events,

primarily due to climatic change
Increased vulnerability of populations
to these natural events
Natural disasters are closely bound up with

the development status of a region: They
disrupt or impair development and, at the
same time, a low level of development increases the chances of them occurring.
Supported in part by bilateral and multilateral donors, many countries are stepping
up their efforts to prevent disaster. The idea
is that effective precautions will avert future
disasters or at least mitigate them. This in
turn will help stabilize development in partner countries. We can lower disaster risk by
containing the hazards and reducing vulnerability. The general economic and social
conditions in a country are a major determinant for both factors. All measures must
therefore be assimilated into the 'normal'
institutional, regional and sectoral development strategies employed in threatened regions.
poverty alleviation (2001)1, GTZ has put together a service package for disaster risk
management. It has identified five activity
areas for cooperation with partner countries:
Risk assessment
Disaster prevention and mitigation
Disaster preparedness
Disaster risk management as part of rehabilitation and reconstruction
Mainstreaming disaster risk management in development cooperation sectors
In addition to this, two multisectoral strategies are described for supporting measures
in disaster risk management. Firstly, we
outline ways of raising awareness amongst
endangered populations and policymakers
as a precondition for sustainable efforts in
disaster risk management. Secondly, we
discuss the role of local resources for disaster risk management and the practical
experience gained. The working concept
concludes with a summary of GTZ services
for disaster risk management.
Mainstreaming this issue in development

cooperation sectors is a major challenge.
Cooperation with projects for decentralization and/or community development, rural
development, environmental protection and
resource conservation, housing, health and
education are of particular importance.
Based on the German Federal Government's policy papers on BMZ emergencyoriented development aid (1996) and global
BMZ, Poverty Reduction a Global Responsibility:

Program of Action 2015. The German Government's Contribution Towards Halving Extreme Poverty Worldwide, Bonn 2001.
GTZ a service enterprise for international cooperation
GTZ a service enterprise for international cooperation

The Deutsche Gesellschaft fr Technische
Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH is a government-owned corporation for international
cooperation with worldwide operations. Its
development-policy mandate is to help improve the standard of living and prospects
of people in partner countries all over the
world, whilst stabilising the natural resource
base on which life depends. GTZ is responsible for designing, planning and implementing programmes and projects in partner countries oriented by the German Governments development-policy guidelines
and objectives. The GTZs main commissioning body is the German Government
through the Federal Ministry for Economic
Cooperation and Development (BMZ) and
other ministries such as the Federal Foreign Office. Other clients of GTZ include the
European Commission, UN organizations,
the World Bank and regional development
banks. Increasingly, foreign governments or
institutions also directly commission GTZ
services.
Technical Cooperation is playing a growing
role in strengthening the capabilities of both
people and organizations in partner countries. In achieving this, the institution is itself
changing in the process. In the past, answers were found to clearly delineated
problems. But, todays intricate and complex issues call for more sophisticated approach Sustaining improvements in peoples living conditions in our partner countries in the long term crucially depends on
the political, economic and social frameworks in place.
Where crises, conflicts or disasters create
acute needs that threaten survival, GTZ
provides development-oriented emergency
aid (DEA). It has become increasingly apparent in recent years that loss and dam-
age can be averted by preventive measures, so approaches, instruments and measures have been developed to manage conflicts and prevent crises and disasters.
Both the international community and partner governments are attaching increasing
importance to disaster risk management.
The measures developed for disaster risk
management are designed to supplement
existing sectors of development cooperation. Comprehensive approaches are adopted
that aim to reduce the disaster risk associated with potentially highly destructive
natural events. This is designed to make
development more sustainable.
The present document is a working concept
for disaster risk management. It outlines
some project case studies and presents
GTZ services in this field.
The first chapter contains a description of
the situation in developing countries and
the rationale for addressing this theme. The
second chapter deals with the underlying
policy approach and the specific cause-effect matrix.
The ongoing paradigm shift towards focusing emergency aid intervention on disaster
risk management is outlined in the third
chapter.
In Chapter 4 we identify the link between
German development cooperation and disaster risk management and describe the
specific operational areas of a comprehensive approach. The fifth chapter summarizes the specific services GTZ provides in
this operational area, outlining GTZ's service delivery profile. Reference projects are
listed in annex 1.
1. Disasters a challenge for developing countries and development cooperation
1. Disasters a challenge for developing countries

and development cooperation
A number of well documented studies show
that there has been a significant increase in
natural disasters2 over the last decade.
List of some disasters from 1998 to

2001:
The three-months of flooding in Bangladesh

and India in the summer of 1998 left more
than 4,700 dead and 66 million homeless,
destroyed 1.2 million buildings and indirectly
caused several hundred deaths due to
epidemics.
At the end of October 1998 Hurricane Mitch

in Central America claimed a death toll of
more than 9,000 with almost 13,000 injured
and it left 2 million homeless. Altogether
11% of the total population was affected.
The total damage came to over US$ 7
billion.
In August 1999, the earthquake in northwestern Turkey claimed over 17,000 lives
with 44,000 injured. In November 1999, the
same region was hit by another earthquake.
The two earthquakes are estimated to have
destroyed or badly damaged a total of
400,000 buildings.
Heavy rains in Venezuela in December

1999 caused floods and landslides that
destroyed more than 23,000 houses. This
disaster caused the death of about 30,000
people.
Since the end of 1999, Kenya has been

suffering from the worst drought in 40 years.
This drought, which reached its worst point
in July 2000, affected over 4 million people.
For several months more than 3 million had
to rely on external food aid.
At the beginning of 2000 over 650,000 people were made homeless by 2 cyclones and
flooding in Southern Africa. Mozambique
was particularly hard hit by this disaster.
Over 2 million people in this country suffered in the aftermath.
Two severe earthquakes that shook El

Salvador in January and February 2001
took a toll of more than a thousand lives. In
the hardest hit Department, La Paz, 90% of
the houses in urban and rural areas were
damaged or destroyed. Material loss
amounted to US$ 1.3 billion.
Total number of reported natural

disasters worldwide from 1966-2000
1.600
1.200
800
400
0
1966-70 1971-75 1976-80 1981-85 1986-90 1991-95 1996-00
Fig. 1: Number of natural disasters worldwide from

1966 to 2000.
Source: CRED, University of Louvain, Belgium 2001.
There are also many small-scale, local

disasters that are not recorded in official
statistics.3 Even more pronounced than the
increase in the numbers of disaster events
is the magnitude of the physical damage
caused and particularly the loss of human
life.
Natural disasters are caused by extreme
occurrences in nature for which society is
unprepared. They destroy the basic conditions of life for the victims, who lack the resources to recover in the short or medium
term. Disasters often have a very significant
detrimental impact on past development
efforts.
10
The present paper concentrates on so-called natural disasters that have to do with natural events
such as earthquakes, hurricanes or tornadoes. We
leave aside technological disasters that are often
caused by people taking inadequate safety precautions, such as reactor accidents, and the disastrous
impacts of political-military conflicts (cf. Eikenberg,
C., Journalisten-Handbuch zum Katastrophenmanagement 2000, Typologie von Katastrophen,
DKKV, Bonn 2000, p. 6-7).
Cf. BMZ, Entwicklungspolitik zur Vorbeugung und
Bewltigung von Katastrophen und Konflikten, BMZ
spezial 082, Bonn 1997, p. 9.
A vast majority of natural disasters occur in

emerging economies (medium human developed) and developing countries (low
human developed).4
Material damage in high, medium and low

human developed countries from 1991-2000
600.000
457.091
400.000
329.615
200.000
0
Natural disasters in high, medium and low

human developed countries from 1991-2000
Total material loss in US$ millions

High human developed countries
1.838
2.000
Fig. 4: Material damage in high, medium and low human developed countries from 1991-2000.
1.500
1.000
Medium and low developed countries
719
Source: IFRC, World Disasters Report 2001, Geneva

2001.
500
0
Number of natural disasters
Fig. 2: Natural disasters in high, medium and low

human developed countries from 1991-2000.
2001.
The loss of life in the emerging and developing countries is also much higher than in
the industrialized countries.
Loss of life in high, medium and low human
developed countries from 1991-2000
800.000
649.398
600.000
400.000
200.000
16.200
0
Number of deaths
Fig. 3: Loss of life in high, medium and low human developed countries from 1991-2000.
2001.
In absolute figures, however, the material

damage in industrialized countries (high
human developed) is greater.
We use the definitions of UNDP. They categorize

countries according to their level of human development. See also, UNDP, Human Development
Report 2001, New York, Oxford 2001.
If, however, we compare the size of the

damage caused with gross domestic product (GDP), the ratio shifts substantially.
Take the following comparison as an example: The colossal earthquake that destroyed the Japanese town Kobe on 17
January 1995 caused damages totalling
US$ 100 billion (see Fig. 5). This amounted
to approximately 2% of Japanese GDP in
the same year.
In contrast, a study5 put the US$ 1,255 million in total damages after the earthquake
in El Salvador at the beginning of 2001 at
about 10% of national GDP (as much as
20%-35% in most of the departments affected). World Bank figures for small island
states indicate an even heavier burden: In
the state of Niue in the South Pacific cyclone Ofa in 1990 caused damage to government and administrative buildings worth
US$ 4 million, which made up 40% of
GDP.6
A comparison between Venezuela and
France gives us a similar picture: Landslides in Venezuela and severe storms in
France in December 1999 caused similar
economic losses in both countries about
US$ 10 billion. The death toll in France was
5
Cf. CEPAL/BID, El terremoto del 13 de enero de

2001 en El Salvador. Impacto socioeconmico y
ambiental. Naciones Unidas, LC/MEX/L.457, 2001.
Cf. World Bank, Managing Disaster Risk in

Emerging Economies, Disaster Risk Management
Series No. 2, Washington 2000, p. 13-14.
11
123. In Venezuela, however, it amounted to

30,000. Venezuela will take years to recover from the aftermath, whereas France
was quick to get over the worst hanks to
effective public and private system of disaster management and damage sharing.7
Loss of life and material damage worldwide
after natural disasters between 1990 and 1999
Damage in Mio.US
$
250.000
200.000
**
People killed
200.000
150.000
150.000
100.000
100.000
50.000
50.000
0
0
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
Total amount of estimated damage in mio. US $
Total amount of people killed
Fig. 5: Loss of life and material damage worldwide

after natural disasters between 1990 and 1999.
2001.
* The year 1991 claimed a particularly high number of deaths.
The floods in Bangladesh alone left about 139,000 people
dead.
** 1995 was the year with the heaviest material damage. The
big earthquake in Kobe, Japan, alone caused losses worth
about US$ 100 billion.
It is no coincidence that 95% of the deaths

caused by natural disasters in 1998 were in
developing countries.8 The vulnerability of
these countries is much higher than in the
industrialized nations. We shall look at the
reasons for this in the following section.
1.1
Causes and effects
Due to their geographical location developing countries are particularly exposed to

extreme natural phenomena. Storms, heavy
rains and landslides are more frequent and
severe in the subtropical and tropical regions of the South. Hydrometeorological,
seismic, volcanic and other natural events
pose a permanent ongoing threat to the
people living in these regions. The comparatively low level of development, as evident in the fragile infrastructure, the poor
building fabric of housing, the vulnerability
of productive activities, the low level of political and social organization and the absence of warning systems, makes them
more vulnerable to natural disasters.
The doubling of the world population since
1950 to more than 6 billion and its impact
on settlement patterns and natural resources also makes itself particularly felt in
the developing countries. Moreover, the
rapid rise in world population has not just
caused a drastic increase in the density of
settlements; it has also altered their distribution pattern and land use. There is, for
example, a growing migratory trend towards
valleys and slopes under threat of flooding,
land-slides and earthquakes, particularly on
the outskirts of large and medium-sized
conurbations. These are growing too fast
for the requisite planning and building
regulations to be drafted and supervised.
Modernization without the necessary safety
precautions (e.g. when building bridges) increases the vulnerability to and risk of adverse impacts resulting from a natural
event.
Finally, another cause of the increase in
natural disasters is the widespread human
intervention in the climatic system9 and in
the equilibrium of fragile ecosystems (forest
clearance, soil erosion, single cropping
practices).
Natural disasters have direct and indirect
effects on developing countries. First, dur9
Cf. World Bank, Managing Risk, A Special Report

on Disaster Risk Management, ProVention Consortium, undated, p.2.
Cf. CEPAL/BID, Un Tema del Desarrollo: La Reduccin de la Vulnerabilidad Frente a los Desastres, LC/MEX/L.428, no loc. 2000.
12
The scientific findings of the IPCC report show

clearly that the rise in global temperatures correlate
with the increase in greenhouse gas emissions.
The inference in this connection is that human
activities exert an influence on the global climate
(cf. IPCC, Third Assessment Report Climate
Change 2001, http://www.ipcc.ch/). To date, however, there is no scientific proof that this is the
cause of climate change.
ing and after a disaster people lose their

homes, their belongings, the very basis of
their livelihood. The poorer population is
much harder hit than the middle and upper
classes because their vulnerability is far
greater. This is due to social, economic and
political factors. The poorest people often
have nothing left with which to resume their
daily battle for survival. It is very difficult for
them to recover from the losses they have
suffered and many migrate elsewhere in
the hope of finding better conditions of life.
large-scale assets (e.g. infrastructure, industrial plant, technology). Unlike the developing countries, material losses far outweigh human loss. Also, population and
governments have the capacity to make
good these losses, at least in the medium
term. Most are insured and part of the costs
of rebuilding and rehabilitation are borne by
the insurance firms. Nor does local and national economic stability depend on a few
marketable products. This signifies far
lower levels of economic vulnerability.
Then, the direct losses in productive sectors are followed by indirect impacts. In the
largely agrarian economies the production
losses lead to the dismissal or unemployment of day labourers. The loss of jobs reduces income and curbs spending power in
families that already live under very precarious conditions. This in turn affects trade
and transportation as well as other services. Finally, losses can occur in the financial sector and even result in economic
collapse if deposits and large amounts of
savings are withdrawn. Disasters thus impoverish the population further, and increase their vulnerability. A vicious circle of
vulnerability to more frequent extreme natural events is established.
The figure below illustrates the different

medium-term economic effects of disasters,
taking capital formation as a benchmark.
The international community often provides

assistance for reconstruction but this is a
huge burden on the economy. Since economic rationale demands that destroyed
infrastructure are restored first, little funding
is left for years to pursue coherent development strategies. Disasters often have a
destabilizing political impact as well given
the worsening situation of large sectors of
the population in the medium and long
term.
In the industrialized nations, the damage
caused by extreme natural events is also
on the increase. This increase may be explained in good part by the higher density of
Formation of Capital
Impact of disasters on capital formation in

smaller national economies
*
Time
Disaster
Developing countries
Industrialized countries
Fig. 6: Impact of disasters on capital formation in

smaller national economies.
Source: ECLAC/IDB, La reduccin de la vulnerabilidad
frente a los desastres: Una cuestion de desarrollo,
presentation at IDB anual meeting in March 2000, New
Orleans 2000.
The disaster itself causes disruption to economic development, which is overcompensated at first by the rapid provision of additional capital. After the additional funds for
emergency aid and reconstruction have
been consumed, the local economy has to
cope with the remaining adverse effects on
its own. While the industrialized countries
13
manage this relatively quickly, in the developing countries the disaster depletes capital formation for a long time.
1.2
Action needed
As we showed in the previous section, vulnerability to extreme natural events comprises various factors that bear a close relation to the development of a country or
region. These provide a number of starting
points for bilateral and international development cooperation.
In many development cooperation projects
and programmes efforts are underway to
reduce development constraints and shortcomings. This implicitly translates into lowered vulnerability in developing countries.
Nevertheless, as BMZ points out, "the connections between poverty and vulnerability
are quite complex" and "not every kind of
development effort in areas threatened by
disaster qualifies as disaster prevention".10
On the other hand, as the term itself implies, disaster risk management is frequently aimed at finding practical remedies
for current problems. There is need here for
a wider vision to include the systematic reduction of hazards and vulnerability. This
means extending the mandate beyond
emergency assistance. "Assistance in disasters and conflicts and the related preventive measures (development-oriented emergency aid) cannot properly be treated as an
isolated field of activity; it must be assimilated into development cooperation as
an integral component."11
GTZ's concern is to mainstream this theme
in other sectoral projects and programmes
(in decentralization and rural development,
10
Cf. BMZ, Entwicklungspolitik zur Vorbeugung und

Bewltigung von Katastrophen und Konflikten, BMZ
spezial 082, Bonn 1997, p. 4.
11
Cf. ibidem, p. 17.
14
health and education, for example). These

sectors are either heavily affected by disasters and their consequences and/or strive
to reduce the vulnerability of the population
with the aim of promoting sustainable development. "Development can only be
sustained if it enables a society to prevent
or cope with disasters."12
Most developing countries are still a long
way from assimilating disaster risk management in national development strategy,
despite the verifiable economic costs of
disasters and the demand for effective disaster risk management voiced at the national and international level for years. The
United States Geological Survey estimates
that investing US$ 40 billion worldwide in
preventive measures in the 90s would have
reduced economic loss through disasters
by US$ 280 billion.13 With the help of a costbenefit analysis for eight towns in Argentina
the World Bank also worked out that investments of US$ 153 million in flood prevention would have been more than offset
by an estimated saving of US$ 187 million.14
1.3
Obstacles to implementation
There are many different reasons why governments are reticent as regards disaster
risk management. However, these are compounded by the following difficulties found
in mainstreaming disaster risk management
in development strategy:
Preventive measures are seen by government and the private sector as cost
12
Plate, E., Merz, B. and Eikenberg, C., Naturkatastrophen Strategien zur Vorsorge und Bewltigung, Bericht des Deutschen IDNDR-Komitees
zum Ende der "International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction", Deutsche IDNDR-Reihe 16,
Bonn 1999, p. 16.
13
Cf. IFRC, World Disasters Report 2001, Focus on

Recovery, Geneva 2001, p. 12.
14
Weltbank, Weltentwicklungsbericht 2000/2001

Bekmpfung der Armut, Bonn 2001, p. 212.
factors and not as profitable investments. On the other hand, external aid
supplies and reconstruction measures
expected in the event of a disaster are
mostly cost-free transfers.
Pure emergency measures taken after

disasters are spectacular. And it is easier to make political capital out of them
than out of disaster risk management.
Donors are still more prone to react with

reconstruction models rather than with
preventive action.
Expanding infrastructure is often a way

of attracting votes during elections.
When implementing these measures,
however, construction quality standards
that are important for disaster risk reduction are often neglected (e.g. streets
without drainage systems).
Uncertainty as to whether an extreme

natural event is actually going to occur
often deters decision makers from investing scant existing funds in risk-reduction measures. In addition, many
disaster risk management technologies
are still too costly and sometimes too
complicated to be easily applied by
poorly equipped and funded organizations and populations.
Some well-established local political

and economic institutions hamper disaster risk management (land law and
land distribution, for instance). Reforms
meet with strong opposition from all
kinds of pressure groups.
15
2. Approach and definitions

Extreme natural events can become disasters if people are affected directly or indirectly. At present, the term disaster is not
used to mean only one thing; the definition
of the term can differ greatly depending on
the standpoint (e.g. victim, insurer or scientist) and the cultural setting.
Nevertheless, in all definitions, there are
two common elements: one, the extent of
damage and loss, which is considered to be
very high, and two, the inability of the people, regions or countries affected to cope in
the short or medium term on their own.
Under the auspices of the International
Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR) an
updated glossary was issued in May 2001,
which marks a major step forward in standardizing terms in disaster risk management.15
GTZ's disaster risk management strategy is
based on the United Nations' definition of
disaster.
Definition of 'disaster'
"A serious disruption of the functioning of society, causing widespread human, material or environmental losses which exceed the ability of
affected society to cope using only its own resources."16
This notion of disaster draws a distinction

between sudden and slow onset disasters.
Amongst natural disasters extreme droughts
are the only ones that are slow onset by
nature. The causes and effects of a drought
disaster are far more difficult to ascertain
than sudden natural events such as
earthquakes, tsunamis or landslides. Due
to the gradual nature of the process, often
15
ISDR, Updated and Expanded Terminology on Disaster Reduction, Geneva 2001.
16
Cf. ibidem, p. 24.
16
taking place over months and even years,

the causes are more complex and it is often
only possible to identify the effects indirectly.
However, not every extreme natural event
is a disaster. A volcanic eruption in an unoccupied area is a natural event but not a
disaster. Floods can also have many beneficial effects the soil is supplied with fresh
nutrients and made more fertile again, resulting in higher yields. So, disasters always have adverse impacts but specific
approaches to them must cater for the dual
nature of such events, i.e. disaster risk
management searches to maintain the
positive impacts while reducing the adverse
consequences of extreme natural events.
2.1
The growing risk
In many regions of the world the threat of

natural events such as volcanic eruptions,
earthquakes and tsunamis, hurricanes and
tornadoes extreme rainfall, droughts or forest fires are permanently present. People
living in these regions are exposed to these
natural hazards, but they may be able to
prevent them having grave consequences
(e.g. earthquake-resistant building, a dyke
or a good insurance policy). People who
are unable to protect themselves sufficiently
against the adverse effects of a natural
event are particularly 'vulnerable' to disaster.
The disaster risk (of a region, a family, or
a person) is therefore made up of two elements: hazard and vulnerability.
Hazard
Vulnerability
ing vulnerability, i.e. the possible repercussions in the event a natural phenomenon
should occur.
2.1.1 Hazard
Disaster risk
Disaster
Fig. 7: Components of disaster risk.

Source: GTZ, Eschborn 2001.
The following formula is used to calculate

disaster risk:
Disaster Risk =
Hazard x Vulnerability17
In this equation risk is the product of the
two factors, hazard and vulnerability. Therefore, it is clear that a risk exists only if there
is vulnerability to the hazard posed by a
natural event. For instance, a family living in
a highly earthquake-resistant house would
not be vulnerable to an earthquake of 6 on
the Richter scale. So, they would not be at
risk. If the hazard approaches zero, because, for example, buildings have been
constructed in areas far away from continental plate subduction zones and tectonic
faults, a house built with minimum precautions will be a safe place for the family, because they would only be vulnerable to very
extreme events.
Risk identification starts with identifying the
hazard and then assesses the correspond17
Cf. amongst others Wilches-Chaux, Gustavo, Auge,

Cada y Levantada de Felipe Pinillo, Mecnico y
Soldador o Yo Voy a Correr el Riesgo, LA RED,
Peru 1998, p. 142.
Hazards are extreme natural events with a

certain degree of probability of having adverse consequences. A distinction also needs
to be drawn between a real natural hazard
and a socio-natural hazard. Given the complex set of influences this distinction is
difficult to make, but it is useful in helping
define disaster risk management measures.
Whereas with truly natural phenomena
people exert no influence as regards their
occurrence, socio-natural hazards are induced or aggravated by a combination of
extreme natural events and human interventions in nature. Only a few hazards,
earthquakes for example, occur as purely
natural phenomena; most others, such as
forest fires, floods and landslides, can come
about with and without human intervention.
Some examples of extreme natural events
are listed and classified in the following
box.
List of natural hazards18
Volcanic eruptions
Earthquakes and seaquakes
Floods
Droughts
Storms
Hurricanes and tornadoes
Forest fires
Landslides
Avalanches
Heat and cold waves
Tsunamis
18
X
X
X
X
X
Hazard posed by pure natural phenomena

Hazard also due to human intervention
This list does not claim to be complete. See also

the typology in Eikenberg, C., Journalisten-Handbuch zum Katastrophenmanagement 2000, Bonn
2000, p. 6-7.
17
Hazards can be narrowly confined to a locality or threaten entire regions. So a hazard is a variable whose intensity and probability can differ by place. This has a considerable influence on the levels of possible
damage.
Fig. 8: Aftermath of Hurricane Mitch: roof of a clay

house in mud following floods, Honduras 1998.
To be able to reduce hazards or prepare for

them, we have to ascertain their potential.
To a certain extent, it is possible to obtain
quite a full picture of possible hazards from
the history of past events. To exactly identify the possible size of the hazard, however, this information must be supplemented by professional assistance and
modern technology.
2.1.2 Vulnerability
Vulnerability denotes the inadequate means
or ability to protect oneself against the adverse impacts of natural events and, on the
other hand, to recover quickly from their
effects.
Vulnerability comprises very diverse, often
mutually reciprocal, factors that have to be
taken into account to determine the vulnerability of a family, a village or a country. The
main vulnerability factors are summarized
below:
Political-institutional factors
18
Legislation is lacking, is not commensurate with the hazard or is not imple-
mented (regional development and land

use planning, building regulations).
The personnel and financial resources

available for disaster risk management
and preparedness are inadequate.
Roles are not properly or clearly assigned and there is a lack of coordination in and amongst the responsible institutions (including centralism: insufficient power for local actors).
The political culture is conducive to

vested interests and corruption, which
hampers consistent disaster risk management (e.g. in the building trade) and
effective disaster preparedness.
Democratic institutions are underdeveloped: The low level of participation of

the population in democratic processes
diminishes their self-help capabilities.
Mechanisms and instruments for spreading financial risks are lacking or inadequate (e.g. disaster funds, insurance).
A culture of prevention is obstructed or

insufficiently promoted.
Economic factors
Governmental financial resources are

insufficient for disaster risk management (e.g. for flood protection infrastructure).
Poverty in general limits the self-help

capabilities of large parts of the population, although very effective traditional
mechanisms to cope with disasters still
exist in many regions. Poverty increasingly compels people to settle in endangered areas (on riverbanks and
steep slopes, in gulleys or ravines or on
the slopes of volcanoes). Partly through
environmental degradation (e.g. unofficial garbage dumps or slash-and-burn
clearance), poor people often contribute

to their own higher disaster risk.
The economies depend on a few products (low level of diversification) and the
danger is particularly great if these
sectors are vulnerable to disaster (e.g.
agriculture).
Not enough account is taken of the

influence of economic activities on disaster risk (e.g. consumption of natural
resources).
Sociocultural factors
Due to poor education and insufficient

knowledge of the cause-effect matrix,
people are less able to respond appropriately in a changing environment.
Fatalism is widespread as a consequence of the belief that natural disasters are willed by God and are therefore
inevitable.
The tradition of slash-and-burn clearance or the application of out-dated

production methods can result in
greater vulnerability for people and their
property. On the other hand it may result in greater hazard due to the adverse impact on the natural environment (e.g. erosion through deforestation).
The population is not prepared to engage in mutual support schemes and

organize themselves in order to negotiate competing interests in the search
for greater levels of general welfare.
help reduce poverty, facilitate the application of appropriate production methods and
raise organizational abilities. This in turn
can motivate people for prevention, thus
generating a positive influence on the political factors through greater participation.
2.1.3
Disaster risk management
Technical Cooperation defines disaster

risk management as a series of actions
(programmes, projects and/or measures)
and instruments expressly aimed at reducing disaster risk in endangered regions, and mitigating the extent of disasters.
Disaster risk management includes risk assessment, disaster prevention and mitigation and disaster preparedness. It is used in
the international debate to underscore the
current trend of taking a proactive approach
to hazards posed by extreme natural phenomena. The intention is a comprehensive
reduction in disaster risk accounting for all
the factors that contribute to risk (risk management), as opposed to a focus on each
individual danger.
These political, economic and cultural factors are interconnected in a complex way.
They have a reciprocal relationship and often compound each other. Progress in individual aspects, therefore, may well also
have a positive effect on other vulnerability
factors. A general improvement in school
education, for instance, can be expected to
19
3. From disaster relief to disaster risk management

The notion of a continuum of crises and
disasters, as coined by the UN, conveys the
idea that the phases of emergency aid, rehabilitation, reconstruction and the resumption of development are concurrent but
nevertheless interconnected. From this
standpoint, they must be viewed as an interactive process.19 Until a few years ago,
disaster relief was a major intervention area
whenever sudden events disrupted the
functioning of society and overstretched
available self-help capabilities. Due to the
close link between disasters, development
and development cooperation an increasing
number of national and international actors
are calling for the introduction of disaster
prevention measures in development planning, and the establishment of national
systems for comprehensive disaster risk
management. Kofi Annan, the Secretary
General of the United Nations, has also expressly demanded a paradigm shift from
the prevalent 'culture of reaction' to a 'culture of prevention'.20
3.1
The scope of disaster relief and

the actors involved
The main organizations and institutions involved with disaster relief (humanitarian aid
in the phase of emergency assistance and
reconstruction) are:
Friendly governments which proffer

their help immediately,
the various suborganizations of the

UN, particularly the UN Office for the
19
See EU, Communication from the Commission to

the Council and the European Parliament Linking
Relief, Rehabilitation and Development An assessment, COM (2001) 153 final, 2001.
20
20
Annan, K., Facing the Humanitarian Challenge. Towards a Culture of Prevention, Report on Work of
Organization, New York 1999.
Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs

(OCHA),
the European Union (EU) with its specialized ECHO office and
non-governmental organizations, such

as the well renowned International
Federation of Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies (IFRC).
The main responsibility remains, however,

with the government and civil society of the
affected country. However, developing countries in particular are usually incapable of
coping with the magnitude of the financial
and technical-organizational tasks. As a
rule, state institutions in these countries
lack sufficient technical equipment and they
do not have the same organizational capabilities as institutions in industrialized countries.21
Due to the existence of many national and
multilateral institutions as well as the rapid
growth in the number of small non-governmental organizations, it is difficult to keep
track of all of the actors involved. For this
reason it is very difficult to arrive at exact
figures as regards the financial scope of
disaster relief. Another problem is that the
phases of emergency aid, reconstruction
and the resumption of development cooperation are often hard to demarcate such
that it turns out to be very difficult to exactly
allocate costs for each phase. However, it
can be clearly established that the share of
emergency and disaster relief in total public
development cooperation spending by the
21
Aside from the public agencies, the health services,

police and fire departments in Germany the technical relief organization (THW) for example is a
leading actor when it comes to rapid response to
disasters. The THW does not confine its relief operations to Germany; it also engages abroad.
OECD countries in the 90s was much

higher than in the 80s.22
3.2
The international path towards

integrated disaster risk management
The United Nations International Decade

for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR),
which ended in 1999, made a major contribution to raising international community
awareness of the need to move from reactive measures towards integrated disaster
risk management. The decade was inaugurated in 1989 by the General Assembly of
the United Nations with the overall goal of
mitigating the adverse consequences of
disasters, particularly in developing countries (Resolution 44/236). A secretariat under OCHA was established to coordinate
IDNDR activities. The IDNDR initiative also
prompted the establishment of national
committees for disaster risk management.
In Germany the IDNDR committee was appointed in 1989 and renamed German
Committee for Disaster Reduction DKKV
(reg. soc.) once the decade expired in
1999. The committee focuses on combining
activities in science and practice, innovation
development and know-how transfer, social
dialogue and raising public awareness, as
well as strengthening local disaster preparedness capabilities.23 GTZ is currently represented on the executive board and in
the operative advisory board of the DKKV.
In the course of the decade, the early more
technical approach of the IDNDR was supplemented with the incorporation of socioeconomic factors in the cause-effect matrix
of disasters, hazards and vulnerabilities. A
major milestone in this process was the
22
23
See OECD, The DAC Journal, Development Cooperation Report 2000 Efforts and Policies of the
Members of the Development Assistance Committee Volume 2 Issue 1, Paris 2001.
Plate, E. und Merz, B. (Pub.), Naturkatastrophen.
Ursachen, Auswirkungen, Vorsorge, Stuttgart 2001.
United Nations Conference on Natural Disaster Reduction celebrated in Yokohama in

1994.24 In the Yokohama Declaration,
disaster prevention, mitigation, preparedness and relief were specified as the basis
for a sustainable development policy.
In December 1999 the United Nations
General Assembly adopted a resolution
(No. 54/219) on actions to be taken following the end of the International Decade for
Natural Disaster Reduction. Since then, the
issue has been followed up in an International Strategy for Disaster Reduction
(ISDR), whose organization (IATF secretariat and task force) is to concentrate on
raising political awareness, assisting regional networks and stepping up scientific
research.
Between 1989 and 1999 other major UN
international conferences took place that
highlighted the interdependence between
disaster risk management and other global
challenges facing the international community. Of particular note here are the summits
in Rio de Janeiro (1992) and Kyoto (1997)
on environment and development. In Rio de
Janeiro, Agenda 21 was adopted. With regard to disaster risk management, Agenda
21 points in particular to the threat of sea
level changes for densely populated coastal
regions, the need to combat drought and
desertification and the paramount role of
local authorities in prevention/preparedness. In September 2002, the World Summit on Sustainable Development (Rio + 10)
will take place in Johannesburg. Its aim is
to review how sustainable changes have
been achieved in the world since the 1992
world summit in Rio. The prime concern in
Kyoto was to reduce the greenhouse effect
24
United Nations, World Conference on Natural Disaster Reduction, Yokohama Strategy and Plan of
Action for a Safer World Guidelines for Natural
Disaster Prevention, Preparedness and Mitigation,
Yokohama 1994.
21
worldwide through the implementation of

definite measures. Major progress in implementing the Kyoto Protocol was made at
the climate conferences in Bonn (July
2001) and Marakkesh (November 2001),
although the original targets had to be
rolled back.
The UN international conference HABITAT
II in Istanbul in 1996 also dealt explicitly
with the issue of disaster risk management.
As does Agenda 21, the final document
stresses the role of local action: "The most
efficient and effective disaster preparedness systems and capabilities for post-disaster response are usually provided
through volunteer contributions and local
authority actions at the neighbourhood
level."
In 1996, the World Food Summit took place
in Rome under the auspices of the United
Nations Food and Agriculture Organization
(FAO).25 Amongst other things, the 186 nations and 32 international organizations
pledge to combat drought and desertification and improve preparedness for natural
disasters, with a view to preventing a shortage of basic foodstuffs due to extreme
natural events. A follow-on conference is
planned for 2002 to review the results.
At the operative level of the United Nations,
disaster risk management is the responsibility of the United Nations Development
Programme. The focus of UNDP activities
is on strengthening national disaster risk
management capabilities in developing
countries. UNDP's approach comprises
short, medium, and long-term measures.
Scheduled for publication in spring 2002,
the first World Vulnerability Report will
analyse disaster risk and outline measures
in disaster risk management worldwide.
25
22
The final declaration and plan of action are printed

in BMELF, Nahrung fr alle. Welternhrungsgipfel
1996. Dokumentation, Bonn 1997.
Despite its priority of providing rapid emergency aid, the International Federation of
the Red Cross and the Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) has for many years attached
importance to disaster risk management.
To promote this it supports relevant activities by its members worldwide and as of
1993 publishes an annual World Disaster
Report containing developments, facts and
analysis on natural disasters and crises and
conflicts.26
There is also a discernible trend amongst
the international development banks towards assimilating disaster risk management in projects. Via its Disaster Management Facility, the World Bank launched the
ProVention Consortium in 2000. This initiative centres on mitigating the impacts of
disasters by means of comprehensive disaster risk management. The World Bank
underpins its activities in this field with market incentives for investment in disaster risk
management.27 When planning its finance
investment projects the Inter-American Development Bank now also includes risk assessment and investigation into appropriate
and feasible disaster risk management
measures.28
As of 1994, the European Union finances
projects for disaster risk management via
its European Community Humanitarian Office (ECHO). Since 1996 the focus has
been on programmes (DIPECHO) for
26
Reconstruction was a priority topic in the latest

report: IFRC, World Disaster Report 2001. Focus
on recovery, Geneva 2001.
27
Market Incentives for Mitigation Investment (MIMI):

http://www.worldbank.org/html/fpd/urban/dis_man/
mimi/default.htm.
28
Cf. for example IDB, Action Plan Facing the

Challenge of Natural Disasters in Latin America
and the Caribbean. Special Report, Washington
2000, pp. 24-26.
Central America,
Southeast Asia.29
the
Caribbean
and
In Central America and Southeast Asia,

where disasters are particularly severe and
frequent, there are now a good number of
regional institutions that coordinate comprehensive disaster risk management across
national borders. Particularly worthy of
mention are the Coordination Centre for the
Prevention of Natural Disasters in Central
America (CEPREDENAC) based in Panama, the Asian Disaster Preparedness
Centre (ADPC) based in Thailand and the
International Institute for Disaster Risk
Management (IDRM)30, which maintains its
office on the Philippines.
29
See DIPECHO, Action Plan Central America,

South-East Asia, Caribbean. Financing Proposal
1998.
30
Formerly known as the Asia Pacific Disaster

Management Centre (ADPMC).
23
4. GTZ activities in disaster risk management

4.1
The political background in the

Federal Republic of Germany
and regions with high levels of vulnerability.34
The GTZ is a government-owned corporation for international cooperation with worldwide operations. Therefore, its activities in
disaster risk management are bound by the
policy directives of the German Federal
Government. These directives are set out in
the policy paper entitled "BMZ's31 Development-oriented Emergency Aid" (1996). In
this document BMZ defines disaster risk
management as a major trans-sectoral task
in development cooperation and specifies it
as follows: "Based on an analysis of []
factors causing disasters, the existing instruments of development cooperation should
be deployed more to eliminate these or reduce possible damage".32
The German Federal Foreign Office (AA)

also supports disaster risk management
and as of 2001 provides funds for projects
in this area. In 2000 the AA drew conclusions from the Decade of Natural Disaster
Reduction (IDNDR), stating in its Policy Paper on Disaster Prevention after the IDNDR
Decade: "In the transition from the 'decade'
to 'strategy' prime importance must now be
attached to the operational implementation
of the tasks and objectives of disaster risk
management."35
It points out that various instruments of development cooperation such as "Technical

Cooperation already combine food security
with agricultural early warning systems or
training [...] with the prevention of natural
disasters as major tasks." 33 The obligatory
environmental appraisal for each project
also includes an assessment of natural disaster risk and caters for preventive measures.
The German Federal Government's Action
Programme 2015 headed by BMZ as of
2001 places renewed emphasis on the
need for disaster risk management. This is
why the Federal Government is involved in
shaping and defining UN policy in this area
and promotes [...] projects to protect people
better against natural events in countries
31
German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation

and Development.
32
BMZ, Entwicklungsorientierte Nothilfe des BMZ,

BMZ aktuell 065, Bonn 1996, p. 5.
33
Ibidem, p. 5.
24
The paper specifies the following priorities

for future activities:
Application-oriented project promotion,

Building up interdisciplinary networks
in disaster risk management (e.g.
ZENEB)36,
Setting up an international coordinating
body for early warning in Germany and
Co-shaping and co-defining UN policy
in disaster risk management.
34
BMZ, Poverty Reduction a Global Responsibility:

Program of Action 2015. The German Government's Contribution Towards Halving Extreme Poverty Worldwide, Bonn 2001, p. 20.
35
Auswrtiges Amt (ASHH), Konzept zur Katastrophenprvention nach der IDNDR-Dekade, Berlin
2000, p. 4.
36
The Centre for Natural Risks and Development

Bonn/Bayreuth (ZENEB) was founded in 2000 for
the purpose of developing and implementing approaches to reducing vulnerability to natural hazards in a collaborative effort between scientists and
practitioners (including GTZ). On behalf of the German Federal Foreign Office ZENEB currently coordinates the German contributions to the UNDP
World Vulnerability Report.
4.2
Activity areas in disaster risk

management
toral approaches in TC with specific contents in disaster risk management.
Based on the need for disaster risk management as explained in Chapter 1 and the
conceptual approach outlined in Chapter 2,
a basic concern must be to avoid isolated
individual activities and put together an 'intervention package' of concerted measures
wherever possible. Based on a systematic
analysis of hazards and vulnerabilities and
involving all the major actors, this must define and link the necessary fields of activity
for risk reduction.
Five interdependent fields of activity have

been identified for strengthening disaster
risk management, which will be described
in more detail in this chapter:
In line with the policy directives for development cooperation, an approach has been
developed for Technical Cooperation that
facilitates this integral way of dealing with
disaster risk management. It links up sec-
Risk assessment (see Section 4.2.1)

Disaster prevention and mitigation
(see Section 4.2.2)
Disaster preparedness (see Section
4.2.3)
Disaster risk management as part of
rehabilitation and reconstruction (see
Section 4.2.4.)
Mainstreaming of disaster risk management in development cooperation
sectors (see Section 4.2.5.)
Activity areas in disaster risk management in the context of Technical Cooperation

Technical Cooperation
Environmental and natural
resources management
Transport and communication
Health
Technical Cooperation in the context

of crises, conflicts and disasters
Disaster risk management
Risk assessment
Disaster prevention
and mitigation
Crisis prevention and conflict management
Emergency aid and humanitarian aid
Rehabilitation and
reconstruction
Education
Demobilisation and reintegration of
ex-combatants
Refugee programmes
Integrated de-mining
Decentralisation
Other sectors and issues
Rural development
Fig. 9: Activity areas in disaster risk management in the context of Technical Cooperation.
Source: GTZ, Eschborn 2001.
25
In addition, two other multisectoral approaches merit special attention. We shall

also look at these more closely after presenting the operational areas:
Raising
4.2.6.1)
awareness
(see
persons/households,
condition
of
buildings, production activities, vehicles, animals, special abilities and
needs in the case of an emergency).
Section
Strengthening local disaster risk management capabilities (see Section

4.2.6.2)
4.2.1 Risk assessment
Risk assessment measures aim at ascertaining disaster risk in a certain region or
sector of the population. Taking the equation for risk provided in Chapter 2.1, the
specific hazards and vulnerabilities of a society or group are assessed.
To make a realistic assessment of the hazard it is important to determine the probability and the possible intensity of the expected natural event. In the vulnerability
analysis the different political-institutional,
economic and sociocultural factors must be
taken into account and a vulnerability profile drawn up accordingly. Risk assessment
is the outcome of the investigation of the
cause-effect matrix between hazards and
vulnerabilities.
The main tools in risk assessment are:
Records of past disasters and major

natural phenomena.
As precise as possible studies on the

specific geological, climatic and other
hazards in the national and/or regional
context.
Drafting and updating hazard maps and

vulnerability profiles with a maximum
level of participation.
Surveys of the endangered population

by gender and vulnerability (especially
26
Fig. 10: Example of a hazard map of the Ro Piura

river in Peru, GTZ, Peru 2000.
A thorough analysis of these factors using

the available tools enables us to identify
specific disaster risk management measures for the endangered population.
Project case study: Risk assessment for
reconstructing La Masica, Honduras
(1999)
Much of the physical and social infrastructure of
La Masica municipality in the North of Honduras
was destroyed in October 1998 as a result of the
heavy rainfall during Hurricane Mitch. Alongside
reconstruction, the aim of the rehabilitation project financed by ECHO was to reduce the present vulnerability through applied disaster prevention and mitigation. Before the individual
measures could be implemented the flood risk
for the infrastructure scheduled for rehabilitation
had to be identified. This was possible with the
help of an analysis of the impacts of Mitch.
In workshops with community members the
hazard (probability and possible magnitude) and
the vulnerability of the physical and social infrastructure and the production systems was ascertained. On this basis maps were drawn up to
cater for the relationship between both factors
and provide a sound basis for adjusting the rehabilitated infrastructure to suit the natural/geographical conditions: Investments were
not made in high-risk zones, whereas appropriate adjustments were made to infrastructure in
zones with medium or low risk.
The heavy rainfall in November 1999 (up to 373

mm in 24 hours), which only caused minor damage, showed that catering for present risk when
planning and implementing rehabilitation measures was successful in reducing vulnerability by
a large margin.
Strengthening local prerogatives and

responsibilities through decentralization
and democratisation.
4.2.2
Training the population and local and

national institutions on the causes, impacts and means of prevention of disasters.
Assistance to the population and local

and national institutions in the adequate
organisation of disaster risk management and the building up effective cooperation capabilities.
Introduction of mechanisms and instruments for spreading risk and/or risk

transfer (e.g. insurance, safety reserves).
Disaster prevention and mitiga-
heights of bridges, retrofitting buildings,

drainage and irrigation systems.
tion
Disaster prevention and mitigation denotes
activities that prevent or mitigate the adverse effects of extreme natural events,
above all in the medium and long term.
These include on the one hand, political,
legal, administrative and infrastructure
measures to address the hazard situation,
and, on the other, influencing the lifestyle
and behaviour of the endangered population in order to reduce their disaster risk.
Measures designed to achieve these aims
include:
National and local regulation of land

use: regulations for the zoning of residential and commercial districts and
nature reserves. Detailed land surveys
and registers are required in order to
achieve this.
Sustainable management and expansion of forestland: control of deforestation and slash-and-burn forest clearance, reafforestation and implementation of sustainable forest management
schemes.
Zoning natural reserves on river flood

plains, planting of trees and other
vegetation types on riverbanks and
possible reinforcement using infrastructure such as dams, dykes and
embankments.
Adjusting infrastructure to anticipated
events including relevant legal and administrative regulations: raising the
Project case study: Fire prevention in

Mongolia (1997-2000)
Due to the climatic conditions in the forests and
steppes of Mongolia fires is a regular occurrence. They recurrently deprive many families of
the essentials of life (housing, major household
articles and livestock). The Government of Mongolia has so far been unable to effectively prevent and fight forest and steppe fires. Fire-fighting has mainly been the job of the local population, but without systematic deployment, organization, communication and suitable equipment.
BMZ therefore commissioned GTZ to assist the
population in reducing the levels of damage
caused to forests and people by fires and in improving fire management. The project raised
awareness on forest fires and their causes
amongst the local population. The project also
aimed at improving their capabilities for efficient
fire-fighting.
The following measures were supported:
Drafting a fire management strategy for the

project region.
Devising and implementing a scheme for
educating, mobilizing and training the target
group.
Setting up a communication system for firefighting.
27
Building up and training decentralized fire

prevention and fighting units in the project
area.
Setting up information and training centres in
selected areas.
4.2.3
Preparation is the third main operational

area. The intention is to prevent or minimize
deaths or other losses and damage in the
case of an extreme natural event.
Prior to the event it is necessary to prepare
the institutions involved (above all disaster
preparedness and civil protection, the fire
department, the health service, administration, police) and the endangered population
as to possible situations, and take precautionary steps. Measures may include:
Establishing a legal framework and

specifying government assistance for
disaster preparedness.
Establishing a deployment and coordination apparatus, task allocation and

communications structure; drawing up
emergency plans: clarifying the competences, resources available and
tasks of the population; evacuation
plans; securing contingency supplies
(first aid, food, drinking water, medication).
Building up or strengthening local and

national disaster preparedness capabilities and rescue services (particularly, personnel and financial resources,
logistics and communications).
Infrastructure measures: fitting out possible emergency accommodation, securing lines of communication and
evacuation routes.
Training: conducting disaster protection

exercises in evacuation, recovery, rescue, emergency medical measures, occupation and organisation of emergency accommodation.
28
Improving abilities for rapid assessment

of the requisite assistance as well as
damage in the case of an emergency in
order to ensure rapid and systematic
delivery of needed.
Building up appropriate decentralized

early-warning systems to ensure that
endangered population relevant local
and national actors receive timely information.
4.2.3.1
Early-warning systems
Early warning is comparatively easy in the

case of floods. In higher-lying areas or the
upper reaches of rivers rainfall and water
levels are monitored continuously (markings 1 to 5 in Fig. 11). These measurements are conveyed by radio or other
means of communication to a base for
evaluation (the town of Cartago in Fig. 11).
Based on the risk assessment, this centre
can then judge whether, where and when
flooding may occur. Personnel then assume a state of readiness, and the endangered inhabitants are alerted and possibly
evacuated (markings 6 to 8 in Fig. 11). The
organised population and responsible institutions can then perform specific tasks as
allocated in the disaster preparedness plan.
Fig. 11: Example of a participatory early-warning

system for floods, GTZ, Cartago, Costa Rica 2000.
This kind of early-warning system requires

appropriate technical equipment (above all
measuring instruments and means of communication), trained operators and test
runs.
Early-warning systems also exist for food
crises due to drought or for volcanic eruptions (see project case studies). Unfortunately, however, early warning systems are
not appropriate for all types of hazard. This
is why special importance must be attached
to permanent readiness in the case of sudden events such as earthquakes.
The volcanoes Fuego and Pacaya in Guatemala

have shown signs of increased activity for the
last two years. The poor population living on the
slopes of these volcanoes are in particular danger. This population has grown considerably in
recent years and lives largely from subsistence
farming. Apart from larger volcanic eruptions this
population and its life basis is frequently threatened by ash rain. With German assistance (GTZ
on behalf of the Federal Foreign Office) the national disaster control authority CONRED is now
developing a local disaster risk management
system for selected communities living near the
volcanoes. This has the following components:
Project case studies: early-warning systems
1.
Early-warning systems for food crises due

to drought in the Sahel Zone (1986-1995)
The Sahel Zone suffers recurrently from extreme

droughts, which have often resulted in food crises in the past. So on behalf of BMZ GTZ developed an early-warning system for food crises
during droughts and assisted in its implementation from 1986 to 1995 in Mali, Burkina Faso,
Niger, Mauritania and Senegal. The aim is the
early detection of incipient food crises in these
countries in order to be able to plan and carry
out suitable prevention measures avoiding escalation into crises.
A core element of this system is the collection
and evaluation of data for checking the current
and future food situation using crisis indicators.
Signs of drought (e.g. low rainfall and water levels) are examined alongside measures of food
shortage (e.g. high death rate amongst animals
or marked increases in food prices).
Based on the data evaluation those responsible
must instigate risk management measures - this
is the second core element of the early-warning
system. This is why political will and organizational and financial capacity are crucial for an
operational early-warning system.37
2.
37
Participatory risk assessment,

Raising the awareness of population and authorities,
Adequate monitoring system to control volcanic activities,
Evacuation and emergency plans.
4.2.4
Disaster risk management as

part of rehabilitation and reconstruction
The reconstruction phase after a disaster is

a good time to implement integrated disaster risk management measures. Reconstruction affords the opportunity to make
use of experience gained with the latest
natural events and it is also a time when
the institutions and the population are particularly amenable to preventive approaches. Disaster risk management is an
elementary component of reconstruction
measures. First of all, the causes and impacts of the last event and the possible
changes in risk are analysed. The findings
are then taken into account in defining the
necessary precautionary measures in prevention and preparedness. The intention is
to prevent the disaster from recurring.
Early warning at volcanoes in Guatemala

(2001)
Project case study: Emergency aid and

reconstruction measures for victims of
the earthquake in Colombia (1999)
Cf. GTZ, Frhwarn- und Marktinformationssysteme,

Erfahrungen im Sahel, Eschborn 1995, and GTZ,
Ernhrungskrisen. Instrumente zur Vorsorge und
Bewltigung, Eschborn 1998.
In January 1999 an earthquake in Colombia

measuring force 6 on the Richter scale caused
the collapse of thousands of houses in the
29
provinces of Armenia and Pereira. The GTZ

supported reconstruction assistance targeted
particularly vulnerable families of day labourers
in the coffee-growing area. In the municipalities
of Quebrada Negra, Crdoba, Barcelona and
Pereira (Dep. Quindo) 280 earthquake-resistant
houses were built using local materials (particularly bamboo). One new aspect of the project
was the participatory approach employed which
involved affected people in all phases of planning and implementation. Another novel aspect
was the high quality buildings constructed using
teamwork, which now set an example for the region. As well as constructing the new houses,
the project also strengthened the self-help capabilities of the population in other areas (e.g.
drinking water, basic education). Thanks to the
joint approach employed the municipalities can
now earn additional income by passing on their
know-how.38
Fig. 12: Collapsed house in Armenia, Colombia after

the earthquake in January 1999.
Fig. 13: Earthquake-proof bamboo construction.

Source: Cooperacin Colombo Alemana: Gua para
Autoconstruccin utilizando la Guadua como elemento
principal, Pereira 1999.
38
30
The role of the project for Quebrada Negra is

described in a booklet: Ospina Marn, S., Quebrada
Negra: Una perla en el Quindo, Colombia 1999.
Fig. 14: Rebuilding an earthquake-resistant house,

Colombia in June 1999.
Project case study: El Nio reconstruction and disaster risk management, Peru
(Phase 1: 1998-2001)
The northern departments of Peru suffered extremely high rain-fall levels between December
1997 and April 1998 as a result of El Nio.
Floods in the Piura region caused direct damage
amounting to more than DM 500 million. The region has been suffering from malaria and dengue epidemics for more than two years. The indirect effects of severed road connections and
the destruction of the irrigation infrastructure
with a subsequent drop in agricultural output,
were devastating nationwide and particularly for
the poor population in the rural areas.
Despite prior warnings about El Nio disaster
preparedness was inadequate. Hardly any risk
assessments were carried out and the lack of
coordination and preparation of emergency
measures caused delays and shortcomings in
relief measures.
BMZ therefore commissioned GTZ to assist the
population, government and non-governmental
organizations in coping with the economic damage using direct transfers and advisory measures. To reduce vulnerability to El Nio the medium-term reconstruction measures are geared
towards improving disaster risk management in
the region. Building on risk assessment, the
project promotes measures in rural development, resource management in watersheds and
flood protection measures (incl. a flood protection early-warning system). This will reduce the
risks of flooding. At the same time the project
supports the integration of risk management
tools in the operations of the local and regional
organizations (municipalities, ministries and nongovernmental organizations) to prepare them
better for the periodical recurrence of El Nio.
4.2.5
Mainstreaming disaster risk

management in development
cooperation sectors
Disaster risk management needs to be

more closely integrated into development
cooperation sectors that are either very vulnerable to disaster that are capable of contributing to improving disaster risk management. Particularly relevant sectors are
rural development/environmental and resource management, decentralization/community development, health, housing and
education. Here are some examples.
Disaster risk management in rural development/environmental protection and
resource conservation starts by addressing
issues of land use. Regulating resource
management and land settlement policy
can reduce disaster risk. This also includes
specific development projects in watersheds that mitigate the risk of drought disasters and prevent floods. Disaster risk
management in rural development is also
directly related to the creation of alternative
sources of income. Efficient drainage systems can reduce the extent of flooding.
Disaster risk management both promotes
and calls for personal participation and responsibility and solidarity on the part of
communities. So it is important to strengthen
the prevention/preparedness and local disaster risk management capabilities of municipal authorities through decentralization.
In the health sector, measures to provide
health care to casualties and/or to counter
the risk of diseases and epidemics are of
particular importance in the event of a disaster. The role of basic health care in general should not be underestimated in terms
of its contribution to the reduction of disaster risk. A healthy population is better able
to withstand the adverse effects of an ex-
treme natural event than people who are

debilitated by illness and undernourishment.
Secure housing is an elementary human
need. Nevertheless, a growing number of
families in endangered areas occupy
houses that cannot withstand extreme natural events. This is why the housing sector
is essential for sustainable development
through disaster risk management. Land
use planning, building supervision planning
and building with earthquake-proof material
or flood-protection methods can tangibly
improve the conditions of life for many people.
In order to institutionalise disaster risk
management in selected development cooperation sectors practical recommendations need to be worked out in collaboration
with them. The aim with this and other
measures (e.g. mainstreaming this issue in
sector policy papers, training) is to raise
awareness amongst personnel as to the
need and opportunities for disaster risk
management and provide them with definite
practical proposals for implementation.
4.2.6 Multisectoral approaches
Disaster risk management is not the sole
prerogative of specialists. For effective implementation it is necessary to gain the interest and the broad support of the population and of government institutions. On the
other hand, it is necessary that public-sector institutions and other social organizations are open to such measures and take
initiative themselves.
Multisectoral approaches can help increase
self-help capabilities. These include awareness raising, particularly among political
decision-makers and the endangered
population, as well as strengthening local
risk management capabilities.
31
4.2.6.1
Raising awareness
Raising awareness involves helping people

and institutions to better grasp the hazard
problem and current levels of vulnerability,
as well as the cost and benefit connection
in disaster risk management at the economic, social and political level.
The awareness of decision-makers and experts in different local and national institutions (e.g. municipal administration, construction and health sector, civil protection)
can be raised through a combination of
training, and joint implementation of practical measures. The following aspects must
be taken into account here:
The cost-benefit analysis should be as

realistic as possible in order to convince decision-makers in particular.
Beneficial side-effects (e.g. gain in
prestige) can also play a role.
In order to motivate experts and decision makers and make the topic more
amenable to them, disaster risk management should not be conveyed as
something new, but rather as an additional development to their activities to
date.
High personnel turn over rates and
strict hierarchical structures that limit
consciousness raising to individual
specialists are common problems. The
topic should be introduced to as broad
(horizontal and vertical) a section of
the institutional personnel as possible
in order to bring about lasting change.
Awareness in the population can also be

raised through a number of measures. Information campaigns (e.g. radio or brochures) can draw short-term attention to
definite dangers and needed precautions
(e.g. at the beginning of the rainy period),
or promote acceptance for forthcoming pre-
32
ventive activities (e.g. a law on environmental protection or a vaccination campaign). Provided it is long-term (e.g. in
schools) training/education can also alter
people's attitudes and behaviour. The most
effective way to raise awareness, however,
is to actively involve as many people as
possible in implementing measures in the
different operational areas of disaster risk
management.
Disaster risk management approaches that
aim at mobilizing the population in this way
are called participatory disaster risk management. They proceed from the precept of
motivating people on a voluntary basis in
order to:
build up a sufficient pool of informed

and trained personnel for an emergency,
inculcate disaster risk management

attitudes and behaviour in broad sectors of the population using the volunteers involved and
ultimately strengthen the self-help capabilities of the endangered population.
Project case study: RELSAT Mobilizing

the population with participatory earlywarning systems (1999)
On behalf of the EU/ECHO in 1999 GTZ introduced participatory early-warning systems in six
areas in Central America threatened by floods.
They aimed at alerting the population and local
institutions of impending floods in a timely fashion enabling them to take the necessary preparatory measures (cf. previous Chapter 4.2.3).
This was achieved without any major involvement of national authorities.
Project experience indicates that the participatory early-warning systems introduced under
RELSAT are one of the most effective ways of
raising awareness in the population, for the following reasons:
They provide tangible help in an emergency.
The tasks make up part of the daily life of

those involved, so that other members of the
family are also actively engaged.
Measurement instruments and radiotelephones are a kind of status symbol and can
also be used for emergency calls in the
event of illness, for example.
They make for a permanent link between the
municipality and the population.
This kind of system does, however, require intensive upkeep, permanent coordination and secure finance. When it works, though, it is a key
element in disaster risk management at the municipal level.
often reach the endangered population

too late or not at all. So endangered areas must rely on their own capabilities
of taking precautionary measures.
A way of helping to build an effective local
disaster risk management system is by
stimulating community-based disaster risk
management. The local system should form
part of a national system and should assure
the participation of all relevant social actors
at the municipal level.
Project case study: CEPREDENAC Disaster risk management in Central America/FEMID (1997-2002)
Fig. 15: Early warning volunteer on the radiotelephone

in Corintho, Nicaragua 1999.
4.2.6.2
Strengthening local disaster risk

management capabilities
High priority is attached to strengthening

local capabilities for two reasons:
Disaster risk frequently varies significantly by microregion. This is why use

must be made of local knowledge, and
disaster risk management tailored at
the local level to local hazards and vulnerabilities, as part of the national and
regional systems.
National disaster preparedness authorities are at present still centrally organized in most developing countries and
unable to provide effective help in an
emergency, particularly to rural populations. Even national early-warning systems (e.g. information on hurricanes)
Central America is one of the worlds regions

that is most frequently hit by extreme natural
events. Volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, hurricanes, landslides, etc. occur in a region where
there is little regional planning, land use is uncontrolled, population density is high, buildings
are badly constructed, the disaster preparedness agencies are ill equipped and most of the
population is poor and unprepared. In all, Central America is a high disaster risk zone.
In order to contribute to the solution of this problem, the FEMID project was implemented by the
Coordination Centre for the Prevention of Natural Disasters in Central America (CEPREDENAC)
was originally entrusted (1997-1999) with the job
of strengthening local capabilities for disaster
risk management in one municipality in each of
the six Central American countries. This was
done on a trial basis with a view to subsequently
transferring the experience gained and a strategy of community-based disaster risk management (2000-2002) via the national and regional
organizations to other areas exposed to disaster
risk. This work is conducted in close collaboration with the national disaster preparedness authorities and more recently with other sectors as
well (above all community development). To set
up and strengthen local capabilities the priority
activities are as follows:
Setting up or strengthening local disaster

risk management groups involving the municipal administration and volunteers,
Training the members of these groups in
risk assessment methods and preventive
33
and preparatory measures,

Drawing up hazard maps and evacuation
plans and carrying out disaster preparedness exercises jointly,
Improving communication and coordination
amongst local, national and regional actors
involved in disaster risk management.
their reduction. Depending on the type

and geography of the hazard a crossborder approach should be applied.
Such an approach already exists to a
greater or lesser extent in Central
America, the Caribbean, the Andean
states and the Mekong countries. This
process of incorporating disaster risk
management in projects and programmes across sectors and borders
is still at an early stage and support
needs to be stepped up further.
Experience and know-how on community-based

disaster risk management is also being exchanged in regional seminars.
4.3
Future challenges
In view of the higher priority accorded disaster risk management in international discussion it needs to be far more closely assimilated in development cooperation. The
issue should be mainstreamed in national
and local development strategies and policies through specific measures and activities.
A major factor in sustaining risk reduction in the long term is the active inclusion of the private sector in disaster risk management. Objectives
here relate to production and income
diversification as well as cooperation
with the insurance sector to mitigate
the medium-term and long-term effects
of disasters. To get the private sector
to engage in this area, though, government must first put in place appropriate infrastructural, institutional and
organizational frameworks. Experience
has been gained here in more advanced countries but nothing has so
far been done in the less advanced
partner countries.
Another key factor for the effective implementation of disaster risk management strategies is coordination and
cooperation amongst international/bilateral Technical and Financial
Cooperation. Only by coordinating
measures and making deliberate use
of the comparative advantages of individual partners can the various challenges be mastered.
Applied research must be stepped

up and experience to date systematically collated to improve the economic viability of preventive measures
and shed more light on the climatic
and ecological cause-effect matrix.
The paramount concern of disaster risk

management is to advise partner countries
in developing an efficient risk management
system of their own. The focus is on the
following aspects and issues:
34
Political awareness of disaster risk

management amongst national, regional and local decision-makers, recognized authoritative persons and
leaders of opinion has increased notably in recent years. It needs stepping
up further, however.
The major role of civil society in disaster risk management, particularly at
local level, is still not fully recognized
in many countries where disaster
management is organized by the military and/or central government. Confidence-building measures and coordination mechanisms are essential here.
Mainstreaming disaster risk management in development cooperation sectors that are vulnerable to
natural disasters or can contribute to
5. GTZ services
5. GTZ services
As with other Technical Cooperation projects, the prime concern of disaster risk
management projects is to improve the conditions of life for the population in partner
countries. In specific disaster risk management projects the focus is on the hazard
posed to the population by extreme natural
events and their possible consequences.
These may erode the progress made through
years of development efforts.
Disaster risk management measures pursue short-, medium-, and long-term objec-
tives. In the short-term the aim is to raise

awareness of the existing risks and improve
the organization for emergencies. The medium-term intention is to foster a culture of
prevention that pervades all sectors of daily
life, thus contributing to sustainable social
development.
GTZ services in disaster risk management
can only be provided when different sectors
interact and can be broken down into the
following, interdependent categories:
Activity areas in disaster risk management

1. Risk assessment
y Registering past disasters and major natural events,
y Precise studies, including specific geological and climatic hazards and their
causes, in the national or regional setting,
y Surveys of the endangered population by gender and vulnerability,
y Participatory preparation and updating of hazard maps and vulnerability
profiles.
2. Disaster prevention and mitigation
y Setting and enforcing regional development and land use plans, building
supervision plans as well as zoning ordinances and building regulations,
y Training the population and representatives of institutions,
y Building up/Strengthening local and national disaster risk management
capabilities (incl. clear responsibilities),
y Sustainable resource management (e.g. watershed management),
y Improving Infrastructure (dams, embankments, more stable buildings
better capable of withstanding a disaster).
3. Disaster preparedness
y Participatory drafting of emergency plans,
y Infrastructure measures (emergency accommodation, etc.),
y Carrying out disaster preparedness exercises,
y Building up and/or strengthening local and national disaster preparedness
capabilities and rescue services,
y Coordination and deployment planning,
y Early-warning systems:
- Setting up and operating communications systems,
- Delivery of technical equipment,
- Operator training.
35
5. GTZ services
4. Disaster risk management as part of rehabilitation and reconstruction

y Conducting risk assessments,
y Infrastructure, e.g. earthquake-resistant or floodproof construction
methods, development schemes, shelters,
y Institutional set-up, e.g. demarcating roles and improving cooperation
amongst individual actors,
y Organizational set-up, e.g. strengthening local capabilities (see below),
y Developing and promoting measures for future prevention (e.g. watershed
management, resource conservation, flood protection schemes).
5. Mainstreaming disaster risk management in development cooperation
sectors
Prevention needs to be integrated into development cooperation sectors that
are very vulnerable or capable of contributing to improving disaster risk
management. Particularly eligible sectors include decentralization and/or
community development, rural development, environmental protection and
resource conservation, housing, health and education.
Multisectoral approaches
1. Raising awareness
y Support for raising awareness of the connection between cost and benefit
in disaster risk management at the economic, social and political level,
y Raising awareness amongst populations living in risk areas of the hazards
and vulnerabilities and the opportunities for disaster risk management,
y Implementing appropriate early-warning systems,
y Participation of the population, the municipal administration and other
institutions in all phases of disaster risk management.
2. Strengthening local disaster risk management capabilities
The cornerstone of effective disaster risk management is the establishment
and/or strengthening of a local system containing the above listed activity
areas and incrusted in an overall national system, mobilizing all possible
social and political actors at the municipal level and getting them to shoulder
responsibility in the process.
36
Sources and selected references
SOURCES AND SELECTED REFERENCES

Alexander, D., The Study of Natural Disasters, 1977-1997: Some Reflections on a
Changing Field of Knowledge, in: Disasters, 21 (2), 1997, p. 284-304.
Albala-Bertrand, J. M., The Political Economy of Large Natural Disasters: With
Special Reference to Developing Countries, Oxford 1994.
Anderson, M. B. and Woodrow, P., Rising from the Ashes: Development Strategies in Times of Disaster, Boulder 1989.
Annan, K., Facing the Humanitarian Challenge. Towards a Culture of Prevention,
United Nations, Report on Work of Organization, New York 1999.
ADB, Disaster and Mitigation in Asia and the Pacific, Manila 1992.
Auswrtiges Amt (ASHH), Konzept zur Katastrophenprvention nach der IDNDRDekade, Berlin 2000.
Banerjee, M. M. and Gillespie, D. F., Linking preparedness and organizational
disaster response effectives, in: Journal of Community Practice 1 (3), 1994.
Beatley, T., Promoting Sustainable Land Use: Mitigating Natural Hazards through
Land Use Planning, in: Natural Disasters: Local and Global Perspectives, Boston
1995.
Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., Davis, I. and Wisner, B., At Risk. Natural Hazards,
Peoples Vulnerability and Disasters, London and New York 1994.
Blaikie, P. et al., Vulnerabilidad. El Entorno Poltico, Econmico y Social de los
Desastres, LA RED, Bogot 1996.
BMELF, Nahrung fr alle. Welternhrungsgipfel 1996. Dokumentation, Bonn 1997.
BMZ, Entwicklungsorientierte Nothilfe des BMZ, BMZ aktuell 065, Bonn 1996.
BMZ, Entwicklungspolitik zur Vorbeugung und Bewltigung von Katastrophen und
Konflikten, BMZ spezial 082, Bonn 1997.
BMZ, Poverty Reduction a Global Responsibility: Program of Action 2015. The
German Government's Contribution Towards Halving Extreme Poverty Worldwide,
Bonn 2001.
Bohle, H.-G., Geographie und Entwicklungsforschung. Beitrge der Sozialgeographie zum Problemkreis von "Global Change", in: H. Karrasch (Ed.): Geographie:
Tradition und Fortschritt, HGG-Journal 12, Heidelberg 1998, pp. 71-86.
Chambers, R., Vulnerability, Coping and Policy, in: Institute of Development Studies Bulletin 20, 1989, pp. 1-7.
Cohen, D., Aftershock: The Psychological and Political Consequences of Disaster,
London 1991.
Council of Europe, International Organizations and Major Hazard Management,
Strasbourg 2000.
Cuny, F., Disasters and Development, New York and Oxford 1993.
Dams, T. and Gocht, W., Konzept fr die Einbindung der Katastrophenvorbeugung in die entwicklungspolitische Zusammenarbeit der staatlichen Trger und
Nichtregierungsorganisationen, Gutachten im Auftrag des Deutschen IDNDR-Komitees, no loc. 1993.
37
Deutsches IDNDR-Komitee fr Katastrophenvorbeugung (Pub.), Jahresbericht

des Deutschen Komitees fr Katastrophenvorsorge, Schriftenreihe des DKKV Nr.
20, 2000.
DSE, Katastrophenvorbeugungspolitik fr nachhaltige Entwicklung, Schriftenreihe
des Entwicklungspolitischen Forums (DOK 1706 A IT 04- 05- 94), Berlin 1994.
Development Initiatives (Ed.), Global Humanitarian Assistance 2000, no loc.
2000.
ECLAC and IDB, A Matter of Development: How to reduce Vulnerability in the
Face of Natural Disasters, Mexico 2000.
ECLAC and IDB, La reduccin de la vulnerabilidad frente a los desastres: Una
cuestion de desarrollo, presentation at IDB anual meeting in March 2000, New
Orleans 2000.
ECLAC, Manual for Estimating the Socio-Economic Effects of Natural Disasters,
no loc. 1999.
Eikenberg, C., Journalisten-Handbuch zum Katastrophenmanagement 2000,
Deutsches IDNDR-Komitee fr Katastrophenvorbeugung (Ed.), Bonn 2000.
ECHO (Pub.), DIPECHO Action Plan, Central America, South-East Asia and
Caribbean 1998.
GeoForschungszentrum Potsdam (Ed.), International IDNDR-Conference on
Early Warning Systems for the Reduction of Natural Disasters, Programme and
Abstracts, no loc. 1998.
Gilbert, R. and Kreimer, A., Learning form the World Banks Experience of Natural Disaster Related Assistance, World Bank, Disaster Management Facility,
Washington 1999.
GTZ, Frhwarn- und Marktinformationssysteme, Erfahrungen im Sahel, Eschborn
1995.
GTZ, Entwicklungsorientierte Nothilfe (EON), Arbeitskonzept der GTZ, Eschborn
1998.
GTZ, Ernhrungskrisen, Instrumente zur Vorsorge und Bewltigung, Eine Orientierung fr die Projektarbeit, Eschborn 1998.
GTZ, German Technical Cooperation in Disaster Prevention and Mitigation,
Eschborn 2000.
GTZ (Ed.), Snchez del Valle, R., Lecciones aprendidas de FEMID, Ciudad de
Guatemala 2000.
GTZ/ECHO (Ed.), Villagrn de Len, J. C., Lecciones aprendidas de RELSAT,
Ciudad de Guatemala 2000.
GTZ (Ed.), Villagrn de Len, J. C., Aportes para la gestin de obras para la
prevencin de inundaciones, Ciudad de Guatemala 2001.
Hewitt, K., Regions of Risk, Essex 1997.
Hoffmann, B., Entwicklungszusammenarbeit im Spannungsfeld zwischen Katastrophenbewltigung und nachhaltiger Entwicklung, in: Entwicklung + lndlicher
Raum, Issue No. 4, 1999, pp. 3-8.
38
IDB, Taller sobre Vulnerabilidad Ecologica y Social, Washington 1999.

IDB, Action Plan Facing the Challenge of Natural Disasters in Latin America and
the Caribbean. Special Report, Washington 2000.
IFRC, World Disasters Report 2000, Geneva 2000.
IFRC, World Disasters Report 2001. Focus on recovery, Geneva 2001.
ISDR, Updated and Expanded Terminology on Disaster Reduction, Geneva 2001.
ISDR, Strategy for Action for World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD),
no loc. 2001 (draft).
Ingleton, J. (Ed.), Natural Disaster Management, London 2000.
Kreimer, A. and Munasinghe, M. (Ed.), Managing Natural Disasters and the
Environment, World Bank, Washington 1991.
Kreimer, A. and Arnold, M., Managing Disaster Risk in Emerging Economies,
Disaster Risk Management Series No. 2, World Bank, Washington 2000.
Kron, W. and Plate, E. J., Natural Disaster and Disaster Reduction, Deutsche
IDNDR-Reihe No.1, 1996.
Lavell, A. (Ed.), Viviendo en Riesgo: Comunidades Vulnerables y Prevencin de
Desastres en Amrica Latina, LA RED-FLASCO-CEPREDENAC, Bogot 1994.
Maskrey, A. (Ed.), Los Desastres no son Naturles, LA RED, Bogot 1993.
Merz, B. and Plate, E. J., Ende der Internationalen Dekade fr die Reduzierung
von Naturkatastrophen ein Resmee, in: IDNDR Forum (Geographie aktuell) der
Geographischen Rundschau, Issue 11, 1999.
Mitchell, J. (Ed.), Crucibles of Hazard: Mega-cities and Disasters in Transition,
Tokyo, United Nations University Press, 1996.
Munasinghe, M. and Clark, C. (Ed.), The IDNDR and the World Bank, A Report
from the Yokohama World Disaster Conference on Natural Disaster Reduction,
May 23-27, 1994, Disasters Prevention for Sustainable Development, no loc. 1995.
OAS, Disasters, Planning and Development: Managing Natural Hazards to Reduce
Loss, Department of Regional Development and Environment, Washington 1990.
OECD (Ed.), Development Assistance Committee: Guidelines for Aid Agencies on
Disaster Mitigation, No. 7, Paris 1994.
OECD (Pub.), The DAC Journal, Development Cooperation Report 2000 Efforts
and Policies of the Members of the Development Assistance Committee Volume 2
Issue 1, Paris 2001.
OKeefe, P., Westgage, K. and Wisner, B, Taking the Naturalness out of Natural
Disasters, in: Nature, 1976.
Ospina Marn, S., Quebrada Negra: Una perla en el Quindo, Colombia 1999.
Quarantelli, E. L., Ten Criteria for Evaluating the Management of Community Disasters, in: Disasters 21 (1), 1997, pp. 39-56.
Plate, E., Merz, B., Eikenberg, C., Naturkatastrophen Strategien zur Vorsorge
und Bewltigung, Bericht des Deutschen IDNDR-Komitees zum Ende der "International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction", Deutsche IDNDR-Reihe 16, Bonn
1999, p. 16.
39
Plate, E., Merz, B. and Eikenberg, C., Natural Disaster Strategies for Mitigation
and Disaster Response, Deutsche IDNDR-Reihe No. 17, Bonn 1999.
Plate, E. and Merz, B (Ed.), Naturkatastrophen Ursachen, Auswirkungen, Vorsorge, Stuttgart 2001.
Plate, E. et al. (Ed.)/Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Naturkatastrophen
und Katastrophenvorbeugung, Bericht des Wissenschaftlichen Beirats der DFG fr
das Deutsche IDNDR-Komitee, Weinheim 1993.
Schaef; T. and Steurer, R., Reduzierung von Katastrophenrisiken im Rahmen
Technischer Zusammenarbeit, Katastrophenvorsorge El Nio Piura/Peru, in:
Dokumentation zum Gefahrentag 2001 (i. E.).
Siegel, P. and Alwang, J., An Asset-based Approach to Social Risk Management:
A Conceptual Framework, Social Protection Discussion Paper 9926, World Bank,
Washington 1999.
Steurer, R. and Bollin, C., Mobilisierung der Zivilgesellschaft fr die Katastrophenvorsorge, Mglichkeiten und Beispiele, Gemeindeorientierte Katastrophenvorsorge in Entwicklungslndern, in: Notfallvorsorge Issue No. 4, 2001 (i.E.).
UNDP, Disaster Mitigation, Cambridge 1994.
UNDP, Disaster Profiles of the Least Developed Countries, Geneva 2001.
United Nations (Ed.), General Assembly Resolution 44/236, International Decade
for Natural Disaster Reduction, 1989.
United Nations (Ed.), World Conference on Natural Disaster Reduction, Yokohama Strategy and Plan of Activities of a Saver World Guidelines for Natural Disaster Prevention, Preparedness and Mitigation, Yokohama 1994.
United Nations (Ed.), General Assembly Resolution 54/219, International Decade
for Natural Disaster Reduction: successor arrangements, 1999.
Wilches-Chaux, G., Auge, Cada y Levantada de Felipe Pinillo, Mecnico y
Soldador o Yo Voy a Correr el Riesgo, IT Per y LA RED, Peru 1998, p. 142.
Wisner, B., Wetgate, K. and OKeefe, P., Poverty and Disaster, in: New Society,
Issue No. 9, 1976.
Wisner, B., Disaster Vulnerability Geographical Scale and Existential Reality, in:
H.-G. Bohle (Pub.): Worlds of Pain and Hunger: Geographical Perspectives on
Disaster Vulnerability and Food Security, Saarbrcken and Fort Lauderdale 1993.
WHO (Ed.), Community emergency preparedness: a manual for managers and
policy-makers, Geneva 1999.
World Bank, Managing Disaster Risk in Emerging Economies, Disaster Risk Management Series No. 2, Washington 2000.
Worldwatch Institute (Ed.), State of the World 2001 A Worldwatch Institute Report on Progress Toward a Sustainable Society, New York 2001.
40
Selected internet addresses
SELECTED INTERNET ADDRESSES

Please note that the internet addresses listed below may have changed.
Arbeiter-Samariter-Bund Deutschland e.V.
http://www.asb-online.de
Asian Development Bank
http://www.adb.org
Asian Disaster Preparedness Centre
http://www.adpc.ait.ac.th
Asian Disaster Reduction Centre
http://www.adrc.or.jp/top.asp
Canadian Intern. Development Agency
http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca/index.htm
CARE
http://www.care.de
http://www.care-international.org
Caribbean Disaster Mitigation Project
http://www.oas.org/EN/CDMP
Caritas
http://www.caritas.de
http://www.caritas-international.de
Centro de Coordinacin para la Prevencin de los Desastres Naturales en
Amrica Central (CEPREDENAC)
http://www.cepredenac.org
Centro Rgional de Informacin sobre Desastres (Amrica Latina y el Caribe)
http://www.disaster.info.desastres.net/crid
Comisin Econmico para Amrica Latina y el Caribe (UN)
http://www.eclac.cl
CRED
http://www.cred.be
Department for International Development
http://www.dfid.gov.uk
Deutsches Komitee fr Katastrophenvorsorge
http://www.dkkv.org
Deutsches Rotes Kreuz
http://www.drk.de
Directory for Disaster Reduction Institutions
http://www.unige.ch/idndr
41
Disaster Information Network

http://www.disaster.net
Disaster Preparedness ECHO (DIPECHO)
http://www.disaster.info.desastres.net/dipecho
Disaster Relief Worldwide Disaster Aid and Information via the Internet
http://www.disasterrelief.org
Earthquake Research Institute
http://www.eri.u-tokyo.ac.jp
http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/echo
FEMID (Fortalecer Estructuras Locales para la Mitigacin de Desastres)
http://www.cepredenac.org/10_femid/10_index.htm
GeoForschungsZentrum Potsdam
http://www.gfz-potsdam.de
German Federal Foreign Office/Auswrtiges Amt
http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de
HazardNet (IDNDR Demonstration Proj.)
http://hoshi.cic.sfu.ca/hazard/index.html
Inter-American Development Bank
http://www.iadb.org
International Committee of the Red Cross
http://www.icrc.org
International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction
http://www.idndr.org
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
http://www.ifrc.org
International Institute for Disaster Risk Management
http://www.idrmhome.org
International Panel on Climate Change
http://www.ipcc.ch
International Strategy for Disaster Reduction
http://www.unisdr.org
Johanniter-Unfall-Hilfe e.V.
http://www.johanniter.de
Kreditanstalt fr Wiederaufbau
http://www.kfw.de
La Red de Estudios Sociales en Prevencin de Desastres en Amrica Lat.
http://osso.univalle.edu.co/tmp/lared/lared.htm
42
Malteser-Hilfsdienst
http://www.malteser.com
Medecins sans Frontires
http://www.msf.org
Mnchener Rckversicherungsgesellschaft
http://www.munichre.com
Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
http://www.reliefweb.int/
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
http://www.oecd.org
Oxfam International
http://www.oxfam.org
Pan American Health Organisation
http://www.paho.org
ProVention Consortium
http://www.proventionconsortium.org
Technisches Hilfewerk
http://www.thw.de
UN Development Programme
Disaster Management
http://www.undp.org/erd/disaster.htm
Disaster Management Programme

http://www.undp.org/erd/dmp.htm
Sustainable Energy and Environment Division

http://www.undp.org/seed
UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

http://www.unesco.org
Unit for Natural Disaster Reduction

http://www.unesco.org/environment
UN Environment Programme
http://www.unep.org
UN Food and Agriculture Organization
http://www.fao.org
Global Inform. and Early Warning System

http://www.fao.org/giews/default.htm
Geoweb
http://geoweb.fao.org
43
UN High Commissioner for Human Rights

http://www.unhchr.ch
U.S. Agency for internat. Development
http://www.info.usaid.gov
World Bank Group
http://www.worldbank.org
World Food Programme
http://www.wfp.org
World Health Organization
http://www.who.int
Division of Emergency and Humanitarian Action

http://www.who.int/eha
World Meteorological Organization

http://www.wmo.ch
Zentrum fr Naturrisiken und Entwicklung Bonn/Bayreuth
http://www.zeneb.de
44
Annex 1
ANNEX 1
Selected GTZ reference projects* in disaster risk management
Project
Country/Region
Duration
Completed TC projects lasting several

years
Strengthening Fire Prevention
Mongolia
07/97 - 06/00
Management Consultancy to the Commission

for Disaster Prevention and Preparedness
(CDPP)
Ethiopia
05/93 - 12/96
Support in Fire-fighting
Mongolia
05/96 - 06/96
Fire-fighting and Fire Prevention
Mongolia
09/96 - 12/96
Strengthening Early Warning Systems
Antigua, Barbuda
10/97 - 05/99
Assistance for Self-help Measures in

Disaster Risk Management in Managua
Nicaragua
01/98 - 12/98
Equipment of Vehicles for Disaster Prevention
Bolivia
02/97 - 05/97
Study on Raising Efficiency in Disaster

Prevention
Thailand
11/97 - 03/98
Diagnosis on Prevention and Mitigation of

Disaster Risk in the Andean Community
Andes
05/99 - 07/99
Diagnosis on Disaster Prevention in South

Asia
South Asia
05/99 - 07/99
Strengthening Local Capabilities with Early

Warning Systems
Central America
11/98 - 12/99
Study on Experience with Community-based

Disaster Risk Management
Central America
10/99 - 03/00
Strengthening a Community Self-help Network

in Disaster Risk Management
Central America
01/00 - 03/01
Reconstruction La Masica
Honduras
03/99 - 10/99
Reconstruction in the Department of Atlntida
Honduras
11/99 - 03/00
Completed individual measures
* GTZ-assisted projects.
45
Annex 1
Project
Country/Region
Duration
TC projects lasting several years

Ongoing projects
Disaster Risk Management in Central America
Central America
1996 - 2002
Disaster Risk Management in Piura
Peru
1998 - 2003
Disaster Risk Reduction in the Buzi Region
Mozambique
El Salvador
2001 - 2003
Disaster Risk Management as part of

Reconstruction
Reconstruction in Areqipa
2001 - 2002
Peru
Planned projects
Establishment and Implementation of a
Regional Disaster Risk Management Strategy
Disaster Risk Management in two
Endangered Regions
Restoring the Production Base
Vietnam, Thailand,
Cambodia, Laos
Bolivia
as of 2002
Peru
as of 2002
as of 2002
Ongoing individual measures

Municipal Disaster Management Plans
Bolivia
2001
Flood Early-warning System
Peru
2001
Flood Early-warning System
El Salvador
2001
Early Warning at Volcanoes
Guatemala
2001
Forest Fire Prevention
Guatemala
East Caribbean
Islands
2001
2001
Decentralized Disaster Risk Management
46
Annex 2
ANNEX 2
Key terms in disaster risk management
HAZARD
Hazards are extreme natural events that can have adverse consequences. The
extent of the hazard depends on its probability within a certain period of time and
region and the severity of the event.
DISASTER
A disaster is a disruption in the normal functioning of a society which leads to loss
of human life, property and environmental resources, and which exceeds the ability
of the affected communities to cope unaided.
VULNERABILITY
Vulnerability denotes the inadequate means or ability to protect oneself against the
adverse impacts of external events on the one hand and on the other to recover
quickly from the effects of the natural event. Vulnerability is made up of many political-institutional, economic and sociocultural factors.
DISASTER RISK
Disaster risk designates the extent of the damage and loss a natural event is expected to cause. It is determined as the product of the factors hazard and vulnerability. Hazard includes the probability and the magnitude of the anticipated natural
event; vulnerability comprises a number of political-institutional, economic, sociocultural and geographical factors. The following formula is widely used to calculate
disaster risk as the product of these two factors:
Risk = Hazard x Vulnerability
DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT/DISASTER RISK REDUCTION
In Technical Cooperation disaster risk management comprises action (programmes, projects and/or measures) and instruments whose intended impacts are
expressly aimed at reducing disaster risk in endangered regions and mitigating the
extent of disasters. Disaster risk management is the generic term for the operational areas risk assessment, disaster prevention and mitigation and disaster preparedness.
RISK ASSESSMENT OR RISK ANALYSIS
A survey is made of the current hazards posed by extreme natural events as well
as the respective local vulnerability of the population and their basis for livelihood
to ascertain the specific risks within a region. Based on this information disaster
risk can be purposively reduced.
DISASTER PREVENTION AND MITIGATION
Disaster prevention and mitigation denotes activities that prevent or mitigate the
adverse effects of extreme natural events, above all in the medium and long term.
These include on the one hand political, legal, administrative and infrastructure
47
Annex 2
measures to address the hazard situation and on the other hand influencing the
lifestyle and behaviour of the endangered population to reduce their disaster risk.
DISASTER PREPAREDNESS
Preparedness comprises measures that can be carried out for fast and effective
evacuation, to save human life, mitigate loss and damage and provide emergency
assistance. Full-scale preparedness includes: early-warning systems, deployment
and coordination capabilities, emergency plans, emergency supply reserves and
training.
48

Disaster Risk Management

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Disaster Risk Management

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Disaster Risk Management

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Division 4300

Health, Education, Nutrition, Emergency Aid

Disaster Risk Management

Dr. Roland F. Steurer

Senior Planning Officer

Disasters a challenge for developing countries and development

Causes and effects........................................................................................12

Approach and definitions ...........................................................................16

The growing risk ............................................................................................16

From disaster relief to disaster risk management ...................................20

The scope of disaster relief and the actors involved .....................................20

GTZ activities in disaster risk management .............................................24

The political background in the Federal Republic of Germany .....................24

GTZ services ................................................................................................35

Sources and selected references..............................................................................37

German Federal Foreign Office (Auswrtiges Amt)

Inter-Agency Task Force for Disaster Reduction (of

An increase in extreme natural events,

Natural disasters are closely bound up with

Mainstreaming this issue in development

BMZ, Poverty Reduction a Global Responsibility:

GTZ a service enterprise for international cooperation

GTZ a service enterprise for international cooperation

1. Disasters a challenge for developing countries and development cooperation

1. Disasters a challenge for developing countries

List of some disasters from 1998 to

The three-months of flooding in Bangladesh

At the end of October 1998 Hurricane Mitch

Heavy rains in Venezuela in December

Since the end of 1999, Kenya has been

Two severe earthquakes that shook El

Total number of reported natural

Fig. 1: Number of natural disasters worldwide from

There are also many small-scale, local

1. Disasters a challenge for developing countries and development cooperation

A vast majority of natural disasters occur in

Material damage in high, medium and low

Natural disasters in high, medium and low

Total material loss in US$ millions

Medium and low developed countries

Source: IFRC, World Disasters Report 2001, Geneva

Medium and low developed countries

Fig. 2: Natural disasters in high, medium and low

Medium and low developed countries

In absolute figures, however, the material

We use the definitions of UNDP. They categorize

If, however, we compare the size of the

Cf. CEPAL/BID, El terremoto del 13 de enero de

Cf. World Bank, Managing Disaster Risk in

1. Disasters a challenge for developing countries and development cooperation

123. In Venezuela, however, it amounted to

Fig. 5: Loss of life and material damage worldwide

It is no coincidence that 95% of the deaths

Causes and effects

Due to their geographical location developing countries are particularly exposed to

Cf. World Bank, Managing Risk, A Special Report

The scientific findings of the IPCC report show

1. Disasters a challenge for developing countries and development cooperation

ing and after a disaster people lose their