GAR 2015 Main Report

172

Part II - Chapter 8

centralize responsibility for recovery and reconstruction in an ad-hoc agency. While this may speed up recovery and ensure that improved standards are observed, it may actually weaken the role of the administrative structures responsible for ongoing efforts in development and disaster risk reduction. Often, once recovery is judged complete and the ad-hoc agency is dismantled, the country does not necessarily continue to build back better, but rather reverts to business as usual.

For example, the Earthquake Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Authority (ERRA) in Pakistan was able to substantially incorporate disaster risk reduction into recovery after the 2005 earthquake: over 85 per cent of the reconstructed houses were compliant with new seismic standards. However, this approach was not carried over into the National Disaster Management Agency (NDMA) created in 2007, which made it difficult to address disaster risk reduction in recovery following the 2010 floods ( GAR 13 paper

GFDRR, 2014c

GFDRR (Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery). 2014c,Resilient Recovery: An Imperative for Resilient Development, Background Paper prepared for the 2015 Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction. Geneva, Switzerland: UNISDR..
Click here to view this GAR paper.

In contrast, the recovery in Indonesia following the 2004 tsunamis did lead to a broader inclusion of disaster risk reduction in recovery, and this approach was subsequently applied following the 2006 Yogyakarta and Central Java earthquake, the 2009 West Sumatra earthquake, and the 2010 Merapi volcanic eruption. Similarly, Mozambique’s efforts to institutionalize disaster risk reduction and to ensure that it is factored into recovery have been mutually supportive ( GAR 13 paper

GFDRR, 2014c

Even when implemented, the build back better concept may be limited to structural improvements in buildings or to specific elements of infrastructure, while no real attention is given to addressing the underlying drivers that constructed the risk in the first place. In the aftermath of the Kashmir earthquake in 2005, hopes that the commonly felt impact would bridge the political divide between Pakistan and India remained unfulfilled (ODI, 2013

ODI (Overseas Development Institute). 2013,Disaster as opportunity? Building back better in Aceh, Myanmar and Haiti, Lilianne Fan, ed. HPG (Humanitarian Policy Group) Working Paper. November 2013.. .

). In contrast, the Aceh region managed to capitalize on the opportunity

Following the impetus and momentum provided by the recovery after the massive floods of 2007 in Mozambique, the Government incorporated community resilience and vulnerability reduction as key components in its Master Plan for Disaster Prevention and Mitigation. Recovery, resilience and development also came together in introducing farmers to droughtresistant crops, the construction of small-scale rainwater catchment systems using local materials, and reforestation along riverbanks. Despite heavy rains, the number of people who were negatively affected diminished considerably until the major floods of 2012/13 showed that still more effort was needed to reduce vulnerabilities.

Subsequently, the National Institute for Disaster Management (INGC) was assigned to coordinate the resettlement of displaced people from the banks of the Zambezi River in the absence of a housing ministry. An estimated 8,000 families benefited from government and international support in the construction of houses, schools and clinics on higher ground using more resilient materials, although the government had to recognize the continued importance of structures closer to the river for the continuation of existing livelihoods. Furthermore, 776 community-level committees have since been trained and equipped to use the flood alert system for evacuating vulnerable populations.

Institutionally, disaster risk management practices have become well established under the leadership of INGC, and responsibility for disaster recovery increasingly blends into development plans under other government institutions ( GAR 13 paper

GFDRR, 2014c

Box 8.11 Recovery-led disaster risk reduction and institutionalization in Mozambique

	172 Part II - Chapter 8 centralize responsibility for recovery and reconstruction in an ad-hoc agency. While this may speed up recovery and ensure that improved standards are observed, it may actually weaken the role of the administrative structures responsible for ongoing efforts in development and disaster risk reduction. Often, once recovery is judged complete and the ad-hoc agency is dismantled, the country does not necessarily continue to build back better, but rather reverts to business as usual. For example, the Earthquake Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Authority (ERRA) in Pakistan was able to substantially incorporate disaster risk reduction into recovery after the 2005 earthquake: over 85 per cent of the reconstructed houses were compliant with new seismic standards. However, this approach was not carried over into the National Disaster Management Agency (NDMA) created in 2007, which made it difficult to address disaster risk reduction in recovery following the 2010 floods (GFDRR, 2014c x GFDRR (Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery). 2014c,Resilient Recovery: An Imperative for Resilient Development, Background Paper prepared for the 2015 Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction. Geneva, Switzerland: UNISDR.. Click here to view this GAR paper. ). In contrast, the recovery in Indonesia following the 2004 tsunamis did lead to a broader inclusion of disaster risk reduction in recovery, and this approach was subsequently applied following the 2006 Yogyakarta and Central Java earthquake, the 2009 West Sumatra earthquake, and the 2010 Merapi volcanic eruption. Similarly, Mozambique’s efforts to institutionalize disaster risk reduction and to ensure that it is factored into recovery have been mutually supportive (GFDRR, 2014c x GFDRR (Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery). 2014c,Resilient Recovery: An Imperative for Resilient Development, Background Paper prepared for the 2015 Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction. Geneva, Switzerland: UNISDR.. Click here to view this GAR paper. ). Even when implemented, the build back better concept may be limited to structural improvements in buildings or to specific elements of infrastructure, while no real attention is given to addressing the underlying drivers that constructed the risk in the first place. In the aftermath of the Kashmir earthquake in 2005, hopes that the commonly felt impact would bridge the political divide between Pakistan and India remained unfulfilled (ODI, 2013 x ODI (Overseas Development Institute). 2013,Disaster as opportunity? Building back better in Aceh, Myanmar and Haiti, Lilianne Fan, ed. HPG (Humanitarian Policy Group) Working Paper. November 2013.. . ). In contrast, the Aceh region managed to capitalize on the opportunity Following the impetus and momentum provided by the recovery after the massive floods of 2007 in Mozambique, the Government incorporated community resilience and vulnerability reduction as key components in its Master Plan for Disaster Prevention and Mitigation. Recovery, resilience and development also came together in introducing farmers to droughtresistant crops, the construction of small-scale rainwater catchment systems using local materials, and reforestation along riverbanks. Despite heavy rains, the number of people who were negatively affected diminished considerably until the major floods of 2012/13 showed that still more effort was needed to reduce vulnerabilities. Subsequently, the National Institute for Disaster Management (INGC) was assigned to coordinate the resettlement of displaced people from the banks of the Zambezi River in the absence of a housing ministry. An estimated 8,000 families benefited from government and international support in the construction of houses, schools and clinics on higher ground using more resilient materials, although the government had to recognize the continued importance of structures closer to the river for the continuation of existing livelihoods. Furthermore, 776 community-level committees have since been trained and equipped to use the flood alert system for evacuating vulnerable populations. Institutionally, disaster risk management practices have become well established under the leadership of INGC, and responsibility for disaster recovery increasingly blends into development plans under other government institutions (GFDRR, 2014c x GFDRR (Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery). 2014c,Resilient Recovery: An Imperative for Resilient Development, Background Paper prepared for the 2015 Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction. Geneva, Switzerland: UNISDR.. Click here to view this GAR paper. ). Box 8.11 Recovery-led disaster risk reduction and institutionalization in Mozambique	Page 1 Page 10 Page 20 Page 30 Page 40 Page 50 Page 60 Page 70 Page 80 Page 90 Page 100 Page 110 Page 120 Page 130 Page 140 Page 150 Page 160 Page 162 Page 163 Page 164 Page 165 Page 166 Page 167 Page 168 Page 169 Page 170 Page 171 Page 172 Page 173 ->Page 174 Page 175 Page 176 Page 177 Page 178 Page 179 Page 180 Page 181 Page 182 Page 183 Page 184 Page 185 Page 186 Page 190 Page 200 Page 210 Page 220 Page 230 Page 240 Page 250 Page 260 Page 270 Page 280 Page 290 Page 300 Page 310