Posted: 26 Aug 2009, 1100 hours (Time is GMT +8 hours)

Minister of State for Defence A/P Koo Tsai Kee

Distinguished Co-Chairs,

Assistant Secretary-General Catherine Bragg,

Assistant Director General Jamie Isbister,

BG Tung Yui Fai,

Distinguished Participants,

Good morning,

To all our guests from overseas, a warm welcome to Singapore.

Impact of the global financial crisis

This workshop is being held at a particularly challenging time for the international community. Many countries have been hit hard by the global financial crisis. In Singapore, for example, our economy contracted by 6.5 percent in the first half of this year. In the US, the unemployment rate hit 9.5% in June, the highest in 26 years. Although the global economic situation appears to have stabilised somewhat in the recent months, the outlook for the next few years remains uncertain. We are not out of the woods yet. For the less-resourced and more vulnerable countries, many of which were already hard pressed to ensure adequate resourcing for disaster management efforts, the global economic crisis has compounded the numerous challenges that they face

Increasing Incidence and Severity of Disasters

Against this economic backdrop, we have a landscape where the demand for humanitarian assistance as a result of natural disasters is likely to grow quite dramatically. Scientists have warned that climate change will increase the incidence and severity of natural disasters. We can expect to see - in fact, we are already seeing - more severe floods, cyclones, droughts, wildfires, and other disasters each year, affecting and displacing more people than before. This is particularly worrying as rapid urbanisation leads to ever more people being compressed into smaller geographical areas. Densely populated areas that have been haphazardly developed, and lacking adequate infrastructure and essential public services, will be especially hard hit by disasters.

Asia, which is home to some of the world's most populous as well as most vulnerable countries, is likely to continue to be the region worst afflicted by natural disasters. The largest number of disasters occurred in Asia last year. So did some of the most severe disasters. Cyclone Nargis, which struck Myanmar last May, was estimated to have claimed some 140,000 lives, while the earthquake that struck Sichuan province in China in the same month was estimated to have killed around 90,000 people. Taking into account the people displaced and the effect on livelihoods, the number of people affected by both these disasters run into the millions. Most recently, we saw how Typhoon Morakot has affected communities across China, Japan, the Philippines and Taiwan, unleashing floods and landslides, leaving scores dead and displacing hundreds of thousands of people.

Challenges in Disaster Management

What these disasters have demonstrated time and again is that it is often difficult for a country hit by a natural disaster, no matter how large and well-endowed, to muster an independent, effective relief effort to respond speedily and completely to the needs of the victims. In many cases, comprehensive assessment of the scale of the damage and the needs of disaster victims as well as the delivery of much needed aid are hindered by the lack of communications, logistical constraints and damaged infrastructure. Effective coordination between the many diverse parties involved in disaster relief efforts can also be extremely challenging. Civilian and military agencies from many countries, international aid agencies and NGOs, all with different working cultures and practices, are thrown together at short notice following a disaster. It is not always easy to avoid a duplication of efforts, unnecessary competition, gaps in responses, or worse, parties working at cross-purposes.

Another challenge is the lack of preparedness. In some cases, comprehensive disaster preparedness plans and SOPs between local, national, and international actors were not drawn up and regularly exercised. Authorities and local communities are then left reeling when a disaster strikes. And as national authorities struggle to coordinate a response, international responders and relief supplies arriving on scene may not be speedily directed to areas where they are needed most. The impact of natural disasters can be significantly mitigated if authorities and communities in disaster-struck areas as well as international responders are well-prepared so that smooth, rapid and integrated relief efforts can be carried out.

Even when the immediate relief phase is over, the recovery phase to restore the lives of the affected communities to status quo or better presents its own host of challenges. A clear, overarching recovery and re-construction strategy based on the needs and priorities of the affected communities is sometimes lacking. Close coordination between local and national authorities, donors, international aid agencies and NGOs also remains a challenge. Where such challenges are not overcome, efficient recovery efforts are impeded, resulting in the less than ideal use of valuable resources. As international attention on a disaster fades, progress in recovery efforts also slows down, with some communities left in limbo years after the disaster struck.

Building a Culture of Strong Partnerships

These are just some of the many challenges in disaster management. To overcome these and other challenges, a humanitarian culture that emphasises strong multi-stakeholder and multi-level partnerships between the many groups of stakeholders in disaster management is essential. From local authorities and communities to national governments, from regional players like ASEAN to global players like the UN, and from NGOs to the private sector. Only through pooling together the experience, ideas and resources of all these stakeholders can coherent and comprehensive disaster management strategies emerge.

While it is widely accepted, this notion of having strong multi-stakeholder partnerships at the local, national, regional and global levels is less easily achieved in practice. There appears to be many obstacles to be overcome before such a culture can become a reality. I cited some of these obstacles earlier. Others include a lack of appreciation for the need to work with local actors and to understand local needs and conditions, competing mandates and constituencies, and a lack of trust between different actors.

How can these obstacles be overcome? Clearly, all stakeholders involved in disaster management already share a fundamental interest - in saving lives. The challenge is to build upon this shared interest to strengthen the partnerships between all the stakeholders.

One way in which this could be done is through the articulation of clear principles on which partnerships between stakeholders at various levels can be based. UN and non-UN humanitarian organisations participating in the Global Humanitarian Platform or GHP, for instance, have drafted "Principles of Partnerships" for GHP participants. The World Economic Forum and OCHA have also devised "Guiding Principles for Public-Private Collaboration for Humanitarian Action", following a process of consultations between the humanitarian community, the UN and other international organisations, NGOs and the private sector. At last year's Shangri-La Dialogue, an annual gathering of Asia-Pacific as well as some European security ministers, the participating Ministers had a robust discussion on the issues surrounding the offering and receiving of humanitarian assistance. As it just so happened, the Dialogue was held in the aftermath of Cyclone Nargis. The Ministers were able to agree on a set of principles to guide affected countries, and those countries and international organisations offering assistance, on the modalities of the provision of assistance. Over time, as more and more such principles are articulated, with the principles reinforcing each other and forming a tightly interwoven web, a culture of strong multi-stakeholder and multi-level partnerships would be entrenched.

Equally important is the building up of trust and familiarity between different stakeholders, so that the principles articulated can be put into effect. We want to ensure that in the event of a disaster the stakeholders are comfortable with one another's working cultures, practices and interests. Robust people-to-people networks based on trust and familiarity have proven valuable in fostering strong partnerships between stakeholders across the spectrum of disaster management. Let me illustrate with the Singapore Armed Forces' experience in Aceh during the Tsunami relief efforts of 2004 and 2005. A critical factor that enabled the SAF to contribute smoothly and meaningfully to the relief effort in Aceh was our ability to work closely with the personnel of the Indonesian Armed Forces, the TNI, who were overseeing relief efforts on the ground. Many of our soldiers spoke Bahasa and had attended training courses in Indonesia. A number of our officers found themselves working closely with former classmates from the TNI. Our people-to-people networks enabled us to establish an instant foundation of trust that helped both sides work effectively together during the relief efforts. Such trust and rapport cannot be created overnight. They have to be slowly built up through regular interactions.

Conclusion

Initiatives like this workshop are most useful for building up trust and familiarity between stakeholders. This is an opportunity to get to know one another and discuss a wide range of issues relating to disaster preparedness, response and recovery. We hope that this workshop will provide a platform for a robust exchange of views, the sharing of best practices and for the building and strengthening of partnerships to overcome challenges relating to disaster preparedness, response and recovery.

Singapore is pleased to be able to co-host this workshop with OCHA and Australia. As a small country with limited resources, we seek to contribute in meaningful ways to the efforts of the international community in disaster management.

I wish you a fruitful workshop ahead.

Thank you.

http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/news_and_events/nr/2009/aug/26aug09_nr.html

Civil Defence and Emergency Preparedness

Civil Defence and Emergency Preparedness: Singapore's Experiences Zen KOH, Assistant Chief Executive, Singapore National Co-operative Federation (SNCF); Abstract - This paper provides an overview of the emergency preparedness programme and activities undertaken in Singapore to prevent and manage disasters. A list of Assistive Technology resources relevant to emergency preparedness is also outlined.

The Emergency Preparedness Programmes and Disaster Management activities undertaken by Singapore are based on the following principles: 1) Man-made disasters can be prevented and their consequences minimised through a set of　comprehensive regulation on fire and building safety, coupled with strict enforcement. 2) Emergency and contingency plans should be　developed to deal with disaster should they occur. Such plans should also be tested and hone through regular exercises and drills. 3) The community should be educated on the need for and importance of emergency preparedness. Where possible, they should also be involved in exercises, training and physical preparations. 4) Emergency response and management of disasters should be a co-ordinated multi-agency effort. All available expertise and resources should be co-ordinated and swiftly channelled to the disaster site to maximise the chances of survival of the injured and to minimise damage to infrastructure. 5) Restoration work and the rehabilitation of the injured should be an integral part of the total disaster management programme.

http://www.dinf.ne.jp/doc/english/prompt/cdppd/abstract.html

Index Terms - Assistive Technology, Emergency Preparedness, People with Disabilities

Asia-Pacific Region: Working Better Together on Disaster Preparedness, Response and Recover

Asia-Pacific Region: Working Better Together on Disaster Preparedness, Response and Recovery

Email Article Print Article

Media Contacts

Posted: 26 Aug 2009, 1040 hours (Time is GMT +8 hours)

Minister of State for Defence, Associate Professor Koo Tsai Kee at the Humanitarian Partnership and Disaster Preparedness, Response and Recovery (HP-DPR2) workshop. The Asia-Pacific region is prone to severe natural disasters, as we have witnessed only recently with the devastating Typhoon Morakot killing scores and affecting hundreds of thousands in the region. Population growth, rapid urbanization, conflicts and climate change have also increased people's vulnerability to disasters, and we can expect this trend to continue. Effective, timely and coordinated response is essential to ensure the survival and recovery of communities affected by disasters. While many countries in this region have well-developed national disaster response mechanisms, the role of UN and other international players in augmenting national response is crucial, especially as we see ever increasing demands being placed on the humanitarian response system. The Government of Singapore and the Government of Australia, with the support of the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), have invited policy makers and operational experts directly involved in disaster preparedness, response and recovery to this two-day workshop to gain a better understanding of humanitarian priorities and challenges in this region. The workshop also seeks to faciliate a robust discussion on disaster response and coordination mechanisms at the national, regional and international levels. In his opening statement, Brigadier-General Tung Yui Fai of the Singapore Armed Forces and workshop co-chair welcomed the opportunity to partner with UN OCHA and AusAID to co-host the workshop. He noted that the workshop would contribute to the regional dialogue on disaster preparedness, response and recovery. "The workshop provides a valuable platform for experts and policy-makers from the Asia-Pacific region to exchange ideas and forge partnerships". Australia is committed to strengthening preparedness initiatives across this region, explained Jamie Isbister, Assistant Director General of AusAID, adding that, "in order to be effective we need to ensure our activities are better coordinated, compatible and integrated." United Nations Assistant Secretary-General Catherine Bragg stressed that the primary responsibility for disaster prevention, preparedness and response rests with governments. "The UN and international humanitarian system are here to support national efforts. That is why we want to emphasise the role of national governments, and together build the capacity of local, national and regional authorities to prevent, prepare for and respond to disasters." Minister of State for Defence of Singapore, Associate Professor Koo Tsai Kee, who delivered the keynote address at the workshop, stressed that "a humanitarian culture that emphasises strong multi-stakeholder and multi-level partnerships between the many groups of stakeholders" was essential for overcoming challenges in disaster management. He noted that such partnerships should be based on clear principles and cultivated through the building up of trust and familiarity between the different stakeholders in disaster management. Over the next two days participants representing 25 countries will explore issues with regional resonance such as the multilateral humanitarian system, the role of NGOs, civil-military coordination, disaster risk reduction, and the contributions of Asia-Pacific donors to emergency funding mechanisms.

Asia-Pacific Region: Working Better Together on Disaster Preparedness, Response and Recovery

Posted: 26 Aug 2009, 1100 hours (Time is GMT +8 hours)

Minister of State for Defence A/P Koo Tsai Kee Distinguished Co-Chairs, Assistant Secretary-General Catherine Bragg, Assistant Director General Jamie Isbister, BG Tung Yui Fai, Distinguished Participants, Good morning, To all our guests from overseas, a warm welcome to Singapore. Impact of the global financial crisis This workshop is being held at a particularly challenging time for the international community. Many countries have been hit hard by the global financial crisis. In Singapore, for example, our economy contracted by 6.5 percent in the first half of this year. In the US, the unemployment rate hit 9.5% in June, the highest in 26 years. Although the global economic situation appears to have stabilised somewhat in the recent months, the outlook for the next few years remains uncertain. We are not out of the woods yet. For the less-resourced and more vulnerable countries, many of which were already hard pressed to ensure adequate resourcing for disaster management efforts, the global economic crisis has compounded the numerous challenges that they face Increasing Incidence and Severity of Disasters Against this economic backdrop, we have a landscape where the demand for humanitarian assistance as a result of natural disasters is likely to grow quite dramatically. Scientists have warned that climate change will increase the incidence and severity of natural disasters. We can expect to see - in fact, we are already seeing - more severe floods, cyclones, droughts, wildfires, and other disasters each year, affecting and displacing more people than before. This is particularly worrying as rapid urbanisation leads to ever more people being compressed into smaller geographical areas. Densely populated areas that have been haphazardly developed, and lacking adequate infrastructure and essential public services, will be especially hard hit by disasters. Asia, which is home to some of the world's most populous as well as most vulnerable countries, is likely to continue to be the region worst afflicted by natural disasters. The largest number of disasters occurred in Asia last year. So did some of the most severe disasters. Cyclone Nargis, which struck Myanmar last May, was estimated to have claimed some 140,000 lives, while the earthquake that struck Sichuan province in China in the same month was estimated to have killed around 90,000 people. Taking into account the people displaced and the effect on livelihoods, the number of people affected by both these disasters run into the millions. Most recently, we saw how Typhoon Morakot has affected communities across China, Japan, the Philippines and Taiwan, unleashing floods and landslides, leaving scores dead and displacing hundreds of thousands of people. Challenges in Disaster Management What these disasters have demonstrated time and again is that it is often difficult for a country hit by a natural disaster, no matter how large and well-endowed, to muster an independent, effective relief effort to respond speedily and completely to the needs of the victims. In many cases, comprehensive assessment of the scale of the damage and the needs of disaster victims as well as the delivery of much needed aid are hindered by the lack of communications, logistical constraints and damaged infrastructure. Effective coordination between the many diverse parties involved in disaster relief efforts can also be extremely challenging. Civilian and military agencies from many countries, international aid agencies and NGOs, all with different working cultures and practices, are thrown together at short notice following a disaster. It is not always easy to avoid a duplication of efforts, unnecessary competition, gaps in responses, or worse, parties working at cross-purposes. Another challenge is the lack of preparedness. In some cases, comprehensive disaster preparedness plans and SOPs between local, national, and international actors were not drawn up and regularly exercised. Authorities and local communities are then left reeling when a disaster strikes. And as national authorities struggle to coordinate a response, international responders and relief supplies arriving on scene may not be speedily directed to areas where they are needed most. The impact of natural disasters can be significantly mitigated if authorities and communities in disaster-struck areas as well as international responders are well-prepared so that smooth, rapid and integrated relief efforts can be carried out. Even when the immediate relief phase is over, the recovery phase to restore the lives of the affected communities to status quo or better presents its own host of challenges. A clear, overarching recovery and re-construction strategy based on the needs and priorities of the affected communities is sometimes lacking. Close coordination between local and national authorities, donors, international aid agencies and NGOs also remains a challenge. Where such challenges are not overcome, efficient recovery efforts are impeded, resulting in the less than ideal use of valuable resources. As international attention on a disaster fades, progress in recovery efforts also slows down, with some communities left in limbo years after the disaster struck. Building a Culture of Strong Partnerships These are just some of the many challenges in disaster management. To overcome these and other challenges, a humanitarian culture that emphasises strong multi-stakeholder and multi-level partnerships between the many groups of stakeholders in disaster management is essential. From local authorities and communities to national governments, from regional players like ASEAN to global players like the UN, and from NGOs to the private sector. Only through pooling together the experience, ideas and resources of all these stakeholders can coherent and comprehensive disaster management strategies emerge. While it is widely accepted, this notion of having strong multi-stakeholder partnerships at the local, national, regional and global levels is less easily achieved in practice. There appears to be many obstacles to be overcome before such a culture can become a reality. I cited some of these obstacles earlier. Others include a lack of appreciation for the need to work with local actors and to understand local needs and conditions, competing mandates and constituencies, and a lack of trust between different actors. How can these obstacles be overcome? Clearly, all stakeholders involved in disaster management already share a fundamental interest - in saving lives. The challenge is to build upon this shared interest to strengthen the partnerships between all the stakeholders. One way in which this could be done is through the articulation of clear principles on which partnerships between stakeholders at various levels can be based. UN and non-UN humanitarian organisations participating in the Global Humanitarian Platform or GHP, for instance, have drafted "Principles of Partnerships" for GHP participants. The World Economic Forum and OCHA have also devised "Guiding Principles for Public-Private Collaboration for Humanitarian Action", following a process of consultations between the humanitarian community, the UN and other international organisations, NGOs and the private sector. At last year's Shangri-La Dialogue, an annual gathering of Asia-Pacific as well as some European security ministers, the participating Ministers had a robust discussion on the issues surrounding the offering and receiving of humanitarian assistance. As it just so happened, the Dialogue was held in the aftermath of Cyclone Nargis. The Ministers were able to agree on a set of principles to guide affected countries, and those countries and international organisations offering assistance, on the modalities of the provision of assistance. Over time, as more and more such principles are articulated, with the principles reinforcing each other and forming a tightly interwoven web, a culture of strong multi-stakeholder and multi-level partnerships would be entrenched. Equally important is the building up of trust and familiarity between different stakeholders, so that the principles articulated can be put into effect. We want to ensure that in the event of a disaster the stakeholders are comfortable with one another's working cultures, practices and interests. Robust people-to-people networks based on trust and familiarity have proven valuable in fostering strong partnerships between stakeholders across the spectrum of disaster management. Let me illustrate with the Singapore Armed Forces' experience in Aceh during the Tsunami relief efforts of 2004 and 2005. A critical factor that enabled the SAF to contribute smoothly and meaningfully to the relief effort in Aceh was our ability to work closely with the personnel of the Indonesian Armed Forces, the TNI, who were overseeing relief efforts on the ground. Many of our soldiers spoke Bahasa and had attended training courses in Indonesia. A number of our officers found themselves working closely with former classmates from the TNI. Our people-to-people networks enabled us to establish an instant foundation of trust that helped both sides work effectively together during the relief efforts. Such trust and rapport cannot be created overnight. They have to be slowly built up through regular interactions. Conclusion Initiatives like this workshop are most useful for building up trust and familiarity between stakeholders. This is an opportunity to get to know one another and discuss a wide range of issues relating to disaster preparedness, response and recovery. We hope that this workshop will provide a platform for a robust exchange of views, the sharing of best practices and for the building and strengthening of partnerships to overcome challenges relating to disaster preparedness, response and recovery. Singapore is pleased to be able to co-host this workshop with OCHA and Australia. As a small country with limited resources, we seek to contribute in meaningful ways to the efforts of the international community in disaster management. I wish you a fruitful workshop ahead. Thank you. http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/news_and_events/nr/2009/aug/26aug09_nr.html

Natural Hazards

Many of the Asia and Pacific developing countries are situated in the world’s hazard belts and are subject to floods, droughts, cyclones, earthquakes, windstorms, tidal waves and land slides, etc. The major natural disasters that occur periodically in this region are largely due to climatic and seismic factors. The region has suffered 50 per cent of the world’s major natural disasters (ESCAP, 1995a). Since the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction began in 1990, the total number of deaths due to natural disasters in the region has exceeded 200,000 and the estimated damage to property over this period has been estimated at US$ 100 billion (ESCAP, 1995a). Vulnerability to disasters has increased due to the increased aggregation of people in urban centres, environmental degradation, and a lack of planning and preparedness. The estimated number of people affected by disasters in the Asia-Pacific region during 1980–90 is given in Figure 18. Disasters can result from:

• meteorological phenomena such as typhoons and hurricanes, sheet flooding and marine and river-based floods;
• geological processes such as volcanic eruptions, earthquakes and tsunami; and
• climatic phenomenon such as the El Nino Southern Oscillation that results in a lowering of mean sea level in the east of the region, failure of the monsoon rains in India, and drought in Indonesia and Australia.

Vulnerability to natural hazards has increased in many coastal areas due to the loss of coastal habitats such as mangroves and coral reefs that provide natural protection from marine flooding. A summary of disaster statistics for countries in the Asia-Pacific region during 1966–90 is given in Table 8. China, India and Bangladesh are ranked first, second and third, respectively, based on the total number of deaths during that period.

Cyclones. Tropical cyclones, or typhoons, are common in the Asia-Pacific region. They occur most frequently over the north-west Pacific, just east of the Philippines, during June and November with an average of 30 typhoons a year, i.e. about 38 per cent of the world total (ESCAP, 1995a). Tropical cyclones usually form over the southern end of the Bay of Bengal during April–December and then move to the east coast of India and Bangladesh causing severe flooding and often devastating tidal surges. The cyclones generated in the South Pacific Ocean frequently cause devastation in small island countries such as Fiji, Tonga, Vanuatu, Solomon Islands and Samoa. Overall, the Philippines, Bangladesh and Viet Nam suffer most frequently from major events.

Floods. Floods are the most common climate-related disaster in the region and include seasonal floods, flash floods, urban floods due to inadequate drainage facilities and floods associated with tidal events induced by typhoons in coastal areas. In Bangladesh, one of the most flood-prone countries in the region, as many as 80 million people are vulnerable to flooding each year (ESCAP, 1995a). In India, where a total of 40 million hectares is at risk from flooding each year, the average annual direct damage has been estimated at US$ 240 million, although this figure can increase to over US$ 1.5 billion with severe flood events (ESCAP, 1995a).

Droughts. It has been observed that the impact of droughts differs widely between developed and developing countries because of the influence of such factors as water supply and water-use efficiency. The majority of the estimated 500 million rural poor in the Asia-Pacific region are subsistence farmers occupying mainly rain-fed land (ESCAP, 1995a). The drought-prone countries in this region are Afghanistan, Iran, Myanmar, Pakistan, Nepal, India, Sri Lanka and parts of Bangladesh. In India, about 33 per cent of the arable land is considered to be drought-prone (i.e. about 14 per cent of the total land area of the country) and a further 35 per cent can also be affected if rainfall is exceptionally low for extended periods (ESCAP, 1995a). Nepal has been subjected to severe droughts in the past. The Philippines, Thailand, Australia and the Pacific islands of Fiji, Vanuatu and Samoa also contain drought-prone areas.

Landslides. Landslides, which are very common in the hills and mountainous parts of the Asia-Pacific region, occur frequently in India, China, Nepal, Thailand and the Philippines. In addition to the influence of topography, landslides are aggravated by human activities, such as deforestation, cultivation and construction, which destabilize the already fragile slopes. As a result of the combined actions of natural (mostly heavy rainfall) and human-induced factors, as many as 12,000 landslides occur in Nepal each year (ESCAP, 1995a).

Earthquakes. The Asia-Pacific region alone has recorded 70 per cent of the world’s earthquakes measuring 7 or more on the Richter scale, at an average rate of 15 events per year (ESCAP, 1995a). The countries of the region which are badly affected by earthquakes include Japan, the Philippines, India, Nepal, Afghanistan, the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Pacific Islands. Many of the countries in the region are located along, or adjacent to, the Pacific Ocean Seismic Zone or the Indian Ocean Seismic Zone. For example, 50–60 per cent of India is vulnerable to seismic activities of varying intensity (ESCAP, 1995a), particularly the areas in the Himalayan region and the Union Territory of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. The earthquake in Maharashtra State in Western India in September 1993 claimed over 12,000 lives (ESCAP, 1995a).

About 80 per cent of China’s territorial area, 60 per cent of its large cities and 70 per cent of its urban areas with populations over 1 million, are located in seismic zones (ESCAP, 1995a). The most devastating earthquake in the world in recent history was the Tangshan earthquake in China on 28 July 1976 which claimed over 240,000 lives (ESCAP, 1995a). Japan is located in the Pacific-Rim Seismic Zone and suffers, on average, a massive earthquake (Richter scale 8 or more) once every 10 years and a large scale earthquake (magnitude 7) once a year (ESCAP, 1995a). In January 1995, Japan suffered one of the worst earthquakes in recent years at Kobe, which claimed 5,000 lives (ESCAP, 1995a). The Philippines, which lies between two of the world’s most active tectonic plates, experiences an average of five earthquakes per day, most of which are imperceptible (ESCAP, 1995a). In New Zealand, an average of 200 perceptible earthquakes occur each year, of which at least one exceeds 6 on the Richter scale (ESCAP, 1995a).

Tsunamis. Tsunamis, tidal waves generated by earthquakes, affect many of the coastal areas of the region, including those of Japan, Indonesia and the Philippines. The infamous Krakatau volcanic eruption during 1883 in Sunda Straits, Indonesia, generated a 35 metre high tsunami which caused 36,000 deaths and the tsunami of 17 August 1976 in the Moro Gulf area of the Philippines claimed another 8,000 lives (ESCAP, 1995a).

Volcanoes. Volcanoes, like earthquakes, are located mainly along the Pacific Rim. The countries in the region which are at risk from volcanic eruptions include the Philippines, Indonesia, Japan, Papua New Guinea, New Zealand, Solomon Islands, Tonga and Vanuatu. Those most frequently affected are Indonesia (129 active volcanoes), Japan (77 active volcanoes) and the Philippines (21 active volcanoes) (ESCAP, 1995a; Government of Japan, 1987). The eruptions of Mount Pinatubo in Central Luzon during the period 12–15 June 1991 affected about 1–2 million people (Lewinson, 1993), demolished the surrounding forests, caused massive siltation of rivers and coastal areas and deposited volcanic ash in surrounding areas and even across continents. In New Zealand, Mount Tarawera had a severe eruption in 1886, and the Ngauruhoe, which erupted in 1974, emits steam and vapour constantly (ESCAP, 1995a). In Papua New Guinea, the volcanic eruption in 1994 near the city of Rabaul damaged about 40 per cent of the houses in the area (ESCAP, 1995a).

Environmental degradation and disasters are very closely linked in the Asia-Pacific region. The countries which suffer most from disasters are the same countries in which environmental degradation is proceeding most rapidly. Poverty and vulnerability to disasters are also closely linked. There are approximately over 3,000 deaths per natural disaster in low-income countries, and less than 400 per event in middle- and high-income countries (ESCAP, 1992). This reflects the absence of an adequate infrastructure in low-income countries to mitigate the impact of natural disasters. Although both Japan and Pakistan are prone to earthquakes, the people of Japan are far less vulnerable because Japan has strictly-enforced building codes, zoning regulations and earthquake emergency training and communication systems. By contrast, in Pakistan most people are still living in top-heavy mud and stone houses built on hillsides, increasing their vulnerability.

Rapid population growth is accelerating vulnerability to disasters as settlements encroach into disaster-prone lands. This will ultimately cause more risk to human life in the years to come. It has been estimated that annual flood losses in some countries are 40 times more today than they were in the 1950s (ESCAP, 1992). According to the Indian Government, one out of every 20 people in the nation is vulnerable to flooding and in China over 85 per cent of the population is concentrated on alluvial plains or basins along river courses which comprise one third of the total land area (ESCAP, 1992).

There has been growing recognition of the significance of disaster prevention and mitigation in the region. Initiatives have already been taken in many countries to address the issue through a comprehensive framework of institutions, plans, programmes and legislation (ESCAP, 1995a). Japan, for example, has constituted a high level committee under the chairmanship of the prime minister to oversee activities related to natural disasters. Over the years, the Government has developed a very efficient framework of organization to reduce the effects of natural disasters. Other examples of initiatives include:

• the Cabinet Committee on Natural Calamities (CCNC) in India;
• the Natural Disaster Prevention Council in Bangladesh, chaired by the President, to co-ordinate Government functions, plans and actions in the field of natural disaster forecasts, management and post-disaster relief and rehabilitation work;
• a Cabinet Sub-Committee in Sri Lanka to examine floods, cyclones, landslides and soil erosion;
• the Relief and Resettlement Department in Myanmar under the Ministry of Social Welfare to co-ordinate the work of other government departments on natural disaster prevention and preparedness;
• a National Coordination Board for Natural Disaster Preparedness and Relief in Indonesia to deal with natural disasters;
• an inter-ministerial co-ordination committee in the People’s Republic of China to take charge of disaster management;
• the National Disaster and Emergency Services Department in Papua New Guinea to direct and co-ordinate disaster related activities; and
• the National Disaster Coordination Council (NDCC) in the Philippines comprising several ministries, governments and NGOs to establish policy guidelines on emergency preparedness and disaster operations, relief and rehabilitation measures.

Substantial progress has been made in this region towards forecasting, early warning, and risk assessment and mapping of climatic and water-related hazards (ESCAP, 1995a). In recent years, the People’s Republic of China has made remarkable achievements in monitoring a wide range of natural disasters through the application of aviation and satellite remote sensing and terrestrial-based sensing technologies. The forecasting and early warning systems in China are noteworthy examples in the region. In India, ten high power cyclone detection radar stations have been installed along the east and west coasts of the country, and there are plans to extend cyclone warning systems to all vulnerable areas. Forecasting and early warning in disaster prone areas has also been emphasized in the country’s current five-year plan. In Australia, a comprehensive personal computer-based cyclone warning system was introduced in three cities, Perth, Darwin, and Brisbane, in November 1990. Japan is constantly carrying out observations, predictions and warnings of potential earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, storm events, tsunamis, typhoons and flood-related disasters. Earthquake prediction has been systematically carried out since 1964, and currently the country is implementing its 7th Earthquake Prediction Plan (1994–1998). As a result, it has designated certain areas for intensified observation. The Republic of Korea also has a well-established disaster-related forecasting and warning network.

The People’s Republic of China and India have developed considerable experience in reducing the adverse impacts of large-scale droughts. In Thailand, flood and landslide risk maps are being prepared for the vulnerable southern part of the country, and a flood modelling programme is being implemented for southern and north-eastern areas. Malaysia has initiated programmes on flood forecasting, warning, preparedness and relief. It has also developed flood-proof structures as well as catchment development and floodplain management strategies. A project has recently been completed in which 20 river basins in the country have been equipped with telemetric systems for flood monitoring and warning.

In order to cope up with the exceptional droughts in Australia, the National Drought Policy (NDP) was formulated in 1992. Since the signing of the NDP Statement in 1992, the states and territories have begun implementing the policy measures, such as sustainable agriculture, drought preparedness, providing financial assistance to farmers exposed to exceptional drought circumstances, carrying out drought-related research and development with emphasis on drought prediction, monitoring and management, etc (IDIC, 1995).

http://www.rrcap.unep.org/apeo/Chp1h-nathazards.html

China Disaster Preparedness and Reduction

Mr. Zou Ming, Director of Disaster Relief Department of Ministry of Civil Affairs, Mr. Cheng Dianlong, Deputy Director of Office of State Flood Control and Drought Relief Headquarters, Mr. Du Wei, Deputy Director of Earthquake Defence Department of China Earthquake Administration and Mr. Chen Zhenlin, Deputy Director of Disaster Relief and Public Service Department of China Meteorological Administration briefs the media on the situation about China's disaster preparedness and reduction at 10 am on Monday, May 11, 2009.

http://english.cri.cn/7146/2009/05/09/2041s483225.htm

Aid Groups Reaching Quake-Ravaged Indonesia

PADANG PARIAMAN, Indonesia — The man had driven 12 hours to his hometown in this central Sumatran district, the area closest to the powerful earthquake that struck off Indonesia’s western coast on Wednesday, because he heard his village had ceased to exist.

Multimedia

Photographs

Rescue Efforts Continue in Quake-Ravaged Indonesia

Map

Deadly Earthquakes

Related

Living on the Edge, Geologically Speaking (October 2, 2009)

The Lede: Earthquake Updates(September 30, 2009)

List of Countries That Have Sent Aid to Indonesia (October 2, 2009)

Enlarge This Image

Muhammad Fitrah/Singgalang Newspaper, via Reuters

A collapsed building in Padang, on Indonesia's Sumatra island. More Photos »

The New York Times

A large quake and aftershock this week devastated Sumatra. More Photos >

“I heard people say Padang Pariaman was destroyed,” the man, Sutan Maskuri, 55, a beef satay seller, said Friday afternoon as eight villagers raised a makeshift stretcher over their shoulders to hoist Mr. Maskuri’s injured sister around a road wiped out by a landslide.

In the end, Mr. Maskuri found that five of his siblings had died in a landslide set off by the earthquake. He sent the injured sister to a regional hospital in his own Toyota because, he said, he could not rely on the government. “No one’s been here, no soldiers, no police,” he said some 44 hours after the disaster began.

Padang Pariaman, with 375,000 inhabitants scattered throughout the district, had survived, though almost all of its houses had suffered some damage, their wooden frames and corrugated roofs twisted in fantastic shapes.

About 50 miles to the south, in Padang, the closest large city, rescue workers raked through rubble beneath a scorching sun, but admitted they were finding few survivors. By some estimates, more than half of the city’s buildings had collapsed in the quake, which had a magnitude of 7.6, and the Indonesian Health Ministry announced that nearly 3,000 people might still be trapped in the rubble.

Many of Padang’s 900,000 residents left the city; others stocked up on emergency supplies and fuel, convinced that another, larger earthquake was imminent, even as electricity slowly began to be restored.

On Thursday morning, about 16 hours after the first temblor, a 6.6-magnitude aftershock did hit, about 140 miles southeast of Padang. It appeared to cause few casualties and little damage.

But on Friday, the authorities still knew little about the situation in hundreds of villages across Padang Pariaman, the most severely affected area on the island of Sumatra. That is one reason government officials predicted that the death toll would rise considerably beyond Friday’s official figure, 715. United Nations officials estimated 1,100 people had died.

A number of countries have pledged financial aid. The United States Embassy in Jakarta said it had already provided $300,000 and had set aside $3 million more. But many aid groups faced delays in reaching the disaster zone because flights were full. Garuda Indonesia, the national carrier, said it planned to add flights to get emergency personnel to the area more quickly.

No military or relief vehicles could be seen Friday on the road from Padang. Long lines at gas stations created massive traffic jams even as black marketeers sold gas at more than four times the normal price.

In the town of Padang Pariaman, the administrative center of the district that shares its name, the district leader, Muslim Kasim, said that up to 80 percent of all buildings in the countryside had been damaged. Officials had already counted 13,750 homes, 30 office buildings, 69 schools and 128 mosques as damaged, he said, and confirmed 207 deaths. He said the authorities believed that at least 282 more people still lay buried in landslides.

Herry Ardyanto, the police chief, said the difficulty in getting information about remote regions was compounded by the residents’ reluctance to leave their villages “even if there is no electricity or water.”

A narrow road breaks off from the center of the town of Padang Pariaman and ascends gently toward Koto Timur, the subdistrict that includes Mr. Maskuri’s village. On the way, most houses lay damaged or destroyed. In Koto Timur, the road came to a stop at a two-story house, now partly flattened by a landslide.

When the quake struck, the wife and four children of a man named Aguslier leapt outside just as the family’s house was about to fall. On Friday, Mr. Aguslier’s children were carrying cooking utensils out of the ruins to a neighboring house.

“I’m collecting the wood to build a temporary shelter,” said Mr. Aguslier, 36, who like many here uses only one name.

All the villagers were fending for themselves. Syafrie, 40, whose mother and younger sister had died in the quake, was walking around the landslide with a box of instant noodles under his arm.

“Our families living outside here brought us water and noodles,” Mr. Syafrie said. “We haven’t seen a single rescue worker yet.”

As he walked toward his house, the eight village men carrying Mr. Maskuri’s sister, Rosmanidar, 57, approached from the opposite direction. They climbed up a muddy hill left by the landslide and cut through a rice paddy to get around another landslide. They eventually let her down in front of the village convenience store where a crowd gathered, children looking on curiously, one woman with tearful eyes talking to the injured.

After a few minutes, they placed Rosmanidar inside Mr. Maskuri’s black Toyota minivan. He watched as his driver steered the car out of the village, and then Mr. Maskuri returned to his ancestral home, where two of his siblings still lay buried by a landslide.

As if on cue, police trucks arrived, for the first time, less than half an hour later. A small, white police helicopter appeared in the sky, hovering above the tall palm trees, lowering itself twice just above two fields.

The villagers waved and yelled. But the helicopter flew away. It was only doing a survey, a police officer said. Aid would come the next day, he said, at the latest.

Norimitsu Onishi reported from Padang Pariaman, and Peter Gelling from Padang, Indonesia.