A Matter of Development: How to Reduce Vulnerability in the Face of Natural Disasters
By CEPAL, BID (03/00, En, Es) See also Environment and Natural Resources
The scale of human and economic damages caused by natural disasters in Latin America and the Caribbean is staggering by any set of measurements. Some estimates put the affected (directly and indirectly) population at 150 million. And according to the figures compiled by the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), between 1972 and 1999 alone the number of dead reached 108,000 and the total of those directly affected exceeded 12 million.
The total damages covered by the assessments made by ECLAC between 1972 and 1999 amounts to more than 50 billion dollars. The true figure for human and material damages is much greater because ECLAC has only assessed damages when governments have asked it to, and because such assessments only cover a fraction of the disasters faced by the region.
In addition, assessments of damages caused by natural disasters should include their highly disturbing effects on the emotional stability of affected populations and the dislocation of large population groups, with important impacts on social and political stability. Major political and social crises have arisen from these catastrophes and as a result of the quality of the governmental response, highlighting the importance of political and institutional factors when considering this subject, both from the perspective of vulnerability prevention and reduction and that of the effects of the natural phenomena themselves.
All things considered, the long-term effects of disasters seriously affect countries? prospects for development. This calls into question at least two aspects related to a country?s development strategy: first, understanding that resources earmarked for preventing and mitigating the impact of natural phenomena are a very high-yield investment, both in economic and social and political terms, in line with long-term growth. Second, the spending actions and decisions that are taken once a phenomenon has arisen, must be seen from the perspective of reducing vulnerability, in other words, in a combined reconstruction and transformation approach aimed at positively and progressively modifying the degree of vulnerability and, therefore, the prospects for future development.
An appropriate vision of a comprehensive development strategy must be based on four pillars: competitiveness, equity, governability and vulnerability reduction. The first two, competitiveness and equity, are beyond the scope of this document, and it will deal with vulnerability reduction and the related aspects of democratic governability.
Making a link between vulnerability reduction and governability is justified not only because ?there is a direct relationship between economic development and the quality of the process of government?, but also because in the past too little attention has been paid to political and institutional vulnerability, except when those agencies specifically responsible for catastrophe management are under examination (civil defence, emergency commissions, etc.). However, political and institutional vulnerability, understood as institutional weakness as a whole, and more specifically the weakness of the democratic system, has often been seen as one of the major causes of vulnerability where natural phenomena are concerned and, in turn, even as a cause underlying other forms of vulnerability. Indeed, the weakness of the democratic system has negative consequences for the efficiency of public policies, the legitimacy of government action, participation by citizens and the private sector in national efforts, linkage with local governments and civil organizations, the handling and management of emergencies, the processing of citizens? demands and needs, and the ability to meet them.
There is a close relationship between the need to reduce vulnerability and the increase in the organizational and participatory capacity of communities, the private sector and government. It is equally necessary that the international community bring its policies into line with this vision of vulnerability reduction as a basis for sustainable development. The limited vision of institutional capacity that has prevailed until now, has often led to the creation of institutions guided and managed with criteria that are not participatory, with centralized procedures, limited to emergency response with neither prevention nor foresight, with vertical structures and very low budgets. Moreover, in some cases legislations do not even explicitly define the concepts of prevention and mitigation. However, the process of democratization, including greater mass media penetration and the resulting sensitivity to these problems, is giving rise to more comprehensive risk management efforts, that increasingly include the necessary linkage among central governments, local governments and civil organizations, together with a more coordinated and effective international aid effort.
A vulnerability reduction strategy as a basis for sustainable development must follow several basic action lines the most important of which are comprehensive risk management, the strengthening of macroeconomic capacity, active policies to reduce the most acute distortions, the coordination of regional and subregional policies, the strengthening of the democratic system and the increase, reorientation and coordination of international aid.
Last updated: 05/08/07
