Role of Disaster Governance in Disaster Risk Management

Abu-hena Mostofa Kamal1

Lecturer (Sociology)
Department of Humanities
Khulna University of Engineering & Technology (KUET)
mostofakamal@hum.kuet.ac.bd

Mohammed Moniruzzaman Khan2

Associate Professor
Department of Sociology, Jagannath University, Dhaka
zontu75@yahoo.com 1
 Introduction and Background
 Geographic location has made Bangladesh as one of the most
climatic vulnerable countries of the world.
 Bangladesh is located between the -Himalayas and the Bay of
Bengal.
 It's a low and flat country.
 The mighty river system and their nearly unpredictable courses,
soil conditions, the agriculture industry and livelihoods of
millions of people depend extensively on the locational context.
 The more alarming fact is that we are very near to three tectonic
plates; any movement of these plates and their adjacent faults
can generate catastrophic situations.
 The history of a hundred years and the recent experiences from
the occurrences in regional countries lead us to believe that we
are very vulnerable to seismological events, particularly
earthquakes.

2
 Natural Disaster: Overview

Year No. of Natural Disasters Year Death toll caused by natural disasters
2015 376 2015 22,765
2005-2014 380(Avg.) 2005-2014 76,416(Avg.)

Year Economic damage(US$ billion)

2015 70.3
2005-2014 159.7(Avg.)

Source: Annual Disaster Statistical Review 2015: The Numbers and Trends;
https://reliefweb.int/report/world/annual-disaster-statistical-review-2016-numbers-and-trends

3
4
5
 Natural Disaster and Bangladesh

Disaster Overview:1980-2010

Natural Disaster Occurrence  Top 10 Natural Disasters

Disaster Year No. of Affected people
Flood 1988 45,000,000
Storm 108 Flood 2004 36,000,000
Flood 1984 30,000,000
Mass Mov. Wet2
Flood 1987 29,700,000
Flood 68 Drought 1983 20,000,000
Storm 1991 15,438,849
Epedemic 27
Flood 1998 15,000,050
Exm. Temp 19 Flood 2007 13,771,380
Flood 1995 12,656,006
Earthquake 7
Flood 1993 11,469,537
Drought 3 Cyclone 2007 8,923,259(2,064,026)
SIDR
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Cyclone 2009 545,954(118,757 families)
Aila
Occurences

Source: www.prevention.web.net; Unnayan Annyasan; http://www.lcgbangladesh.org/

6
 Statement of the Problem
•Bangladesh is one of the first line victims of ongoing and upcoming threats of climate change
due to its geographical location, poverty and higher dependence on climate sensitive sectors
(e.g. agriculture).
•28% of the total population who live in coastal areas are in the risk of absolute increasing level
of climate change and disasters.
•GO and NGO initiatives in risk management and
• Weak institutional framework and vulnerability of the people of coastal region (Azam, 2009).
•Socio-economic consequences of cyclone Aila (e.g. food crisis, drinking water crisis, diseases
etc)
•Death tolls:
• Highest Mortality Rate by Disaster in Bangladesh- lost 5,16,239 men, women and children
between 1970-2005, during the total 171 disaster incidents (UNDP VI).
• In 1991’s cyclone and flood- 90% were women died out of 140,000 people (Gupta, 2010).
• lack of social services (Nasreen, 1995).
To reduce vulnerabilities and ensure effective disaster governance institutional responses are
needed to be addressed.

7
 Sociological significance of the Study
• Achievement of Bangladesh in disaster management (CDMP, FFWC, CMS)
• Increasing rate of global warming and its severe impact on weather
pattern(increase in temperature and rainfall averages, more frequent and intense
monsoons and cyclones, drought, salt water intrusion in inland areas, riverbank
erosion etc.)
• Emerging need to address vulnerabilities to climate change through disaster
governance (viz-adaptation efforts, complementing mitigation efforts aimed at
reducing the rate and magnitude of climate change)
• Governance is becoming more important as it involves the structures and
institutions that determine the amount and quality of social protection people
have access to
• Lack of disaster governance will increases people’s day-to-day vulnerability.
• A detailed understanding of local politics, power relations and resources are
required to ensure that international funds and policy frameworks are accessed
by the most vulnerable groups.

In these regard this study is sociologically important to seek the strength and
weakness of the disaster governance system in the coastal areas. 8
Conceptualizing Disaster Governance

9
 Objectives of the study
 Broad objective
To explore the efficacy of the existing disaster governance system is in the
coastal communities to mitigate the vulnerabilities of the disaster prone
people of the coastal area.
 Specific objectives
o To know the pattern and frequency of the disaster and
techniques of responses of the community.
o To understand the role of GOs in disaster governance in local
areas.
o To understand the role of NGOs in disaster governance in the
study area.
o To evaluate the effectiveness of the GOs and NGOs activities in
disaster risk reduction.
o To find out the gender role differences in disaster management.

10
 Hypotheses of the Study

 The higher the rate of experiencing disaster, the higher is the capability of
diminishing disaster caused vulnerability.
 Disaster affects both women and men but the burden of disaster coping
falls heavily on women.

11
 Methodology of the Study
 Mixed method

 Data collection procedure • Study area:

 Quantitative No. of Village: 06
o Semi-structured questionnaire survey (111) Union : 02 (Mohesripur and North
 Qualitative Betkasi)
o In-depth Interview (10) Sub-districts: Koyra
o Key Informant Interview (10) District: Khulna
o Focus Group Discussion (5)
Age group: 15-80 year
 Sampling procedure
o Purposive
 Data Analysis
 Quantitative
o SPSS version 17
 Qualitative
o Developed a coding system manually and reviewed
data to identify common research themes and
concepts, and summarized the coded data according to
the study objectives. 12
 Findings and Discussion

Table: Impact of Cyclone Aila

Response N %

Damage of agri crops 95 85.6

Damage of dwelling place 82 73.8

Death of livestock 58 52.2

Psychological problem 56 50.4

Death of family members 48 43.2

Physical injury 45 40.54

Occupational predicament 32 28.9

(*n=111*More than one response counted)

13
 Findings and Discussion
Table: CBDM initiatives in the study area Table: Recommendations to Improve DBDRM
Responses Responses
Initiatives N % N %
Recommendations
Early warning dissemination 102 91.9
Increase collaboration with 103 92.8
Emergency rescue 99 89.2 organization

Training 95 85.6 Increase community engagement 82 73.9

Relief 61 55.0 Increase GO and NGO patronization 70 63.1

Post disaster reconstruction 53 47.7 Strong administrative structure 62 55.9
Others 8 7.2 Advance training 62 55.9
(*n=111*More than one response counted) Provide modern equipments 58 52.3

Financial arrangement 46 41.4

(*n=111*More than one response counted)

14
 Findings and Discussion

Table: GOs initiatives in the study area

Responses
Initiatives N %
Early warning dissemination 111 100
Emergency rescue 94 84.7
Training 78 70.3
Relief 76 68.5
Sheltering 61 55.0
Post disaster reconstruction 44 39.6
Others 4 3.6
(*n=111*More than one response counted)

15
 Findings and Discussion

Table: Malpractice in GO Relief distribution program

16
 Findings and Discussion
Table: NGOs initiatives in the study area
Responses
Initiatives N %
Awareness building 111 100
Medicare 101 91.0
Provides clothes 72 83.8
Structural reconstruction 65 64.9
Sheltering 42 58.6
Early warning 36 37.8
Emergency rescue 28 32.4
Others 3 11.0
(*n=111*More than one response counted)
Table: Satisfaction about NGO measures

17
 Findings and Discussion

Table: Women’s participation in Disaster Governance

Nature of participation N %
Structural reconstruction 94 100
Awareness building 78 83.0
Nursing injured people 65 69.1
Emergency rescue 61 64.9 Table: Women’s Responses after Early Warning

Others 3 3.10
(*n=94*More than one response counted)

X2=10.042; df=2; Phi=.233; p= .000***

18
 Hypothesis Tests
 Table :The higher the rate of experiencing disaster, the higher is the
capability of diminishing disaster caused vulnerability.

Χ² = 17.41, df= 6, V=0.396, p= .001**

Table : Disaster affects both women and men but the burden of disaster coping
falls heavily on women.

19
Root Causes Service availability Risk exposure
-Lack of knowledge, Limited access to -Hygiene practices
mobilization & resources -Food & water -SRH problem
-Politicization - Shelter -Domestic violence
-Inadequate relief -Medical services -Insecurity in shelter center
management - GO & NGO relief -Migration of male
- Early warning members

Engendering disaster: Nature of Vulnerability Vulnerable Society:

-Exposure to risk -Emergency Special groups: older
-Risk perception communication women, women with
-Preparedness -Decision making disabilities, pregnant and
-Physical impact -Dual work burden nursing women, and those
-Psychological impact -Income disparity with small children
-Reconstruction & recovery

20
• Limitations:
• -Self-reported data
• -Recall bias
• -Socio-Religious stigma

• Acknowledgement
• -Participants
• -Hon’ble supervisor Mohammed Moniruzzaman Khan
• -Department of Sociology, Jagannath University
• -Field assistants

21
 Conclusion and
Recommendations
Successful operations of GOs, NGOs and Community based
organizations have reduced disaster risk and vulnerabilities of the study
area.
Although GOs are working in collaboration with NGOs and community
people but GO initiatives required intensive monitoring and supervision to
avoid politicization, nepotism.
NGO measures seem to be more adequate compared to GOs but
engaging community people is recommended.
Findings indicates less domination of gender identity during disaster but
women’s participation in decision making processes requires further
consideration
More research is needed in this nascent field of study on factors that
contribute to effective governance and on other topics, such as the extent
to which governance approaches contribute to long-term sustainability

22
 Final Words

Accountability, resource availability, selection of target groups, and

prioritizing of activities have to be ensured.

This slide is made possible by the support of American people through the United States Agency for
International Development (USAID). The contents are the sole responsibility of the presenter and do
not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States government. 23
24