Disaster risk reduction: Where does responsibility lie?

Disaster Risk Reduction: Is it a humanitarian or development responsibility?

Only 4% of global humanitarian aid goes towards preventing and preparing for disasters like floods, earthquakes and tsunamis. But with the number of disasters increasing and intensifying, the relief and development sector is increasingly looking towards Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) to reduce the impact of major disasters on lives and livelihoods. Yet, there's still no clear delineation of where the responsibility lies for implementing DRR programmes. Does responsibility lie with humanitarian or development actors and organisations?

This is the question we put to our panel of guest speakers at a discussion last night as part of our AGM, held at the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. The panel included Marc DuBois, Executive Director of MSF UK; Dr Randolph Kent, Director of the Humanitarian Futures Programme at King's College, London; and David Sanderson, Director of the Centre of Development and Emergency Practice (CENDEP) at Oxford Brookes University.

Below is an overview of the discussion. You can also join in the debate on Twitter #DRRresp and Facebook.

Funding & Identity

Marc DuBois suggested that responsibility lies predominantly with development agencies. But acknowledged that there is no clear continuum from disaster relief to development -in practice they overlap. However, the question about responsibility is an important one. Firstly because within agencies there is a split between relief and development teams - a division of roles, of responsibilities and of departments. And also a division of funds, restricting what income and resources can be used for what activities on the ground.

Secondly there's the issue identity. DRR involves partnerships with governments for the long-term. And government partnerships affect an organisation's identity - how it's perceived and whether it is considered neutral, particularly by recipients of aid. This comes into play particularly in fragile states where partnerships with government may prevent access or acceptance to parts of a country where the government has less control, influence or favour. It's for these reasons that a separation of responsibilities is necessary and therefore DRR should probably be the responsibility of development.

Socio-economic sustainability

Randolph Kent suggested that in order to discuss responsibility for Disaster Risk Reduction, we first need to understand the boundaries of these terms. What are the dimensions of 'natural hazards'? Drought in one country can cause dramatic increases in food prices in other countries, but is this impact what we would call a 'natural hazard'?

In order to understand responsibility, we need to anticipate the humanitarian actors of the future.
Increasingly this will be the private sector. But not because it's part of a company's corporate social responsibility but because it will be directly linked to its own sustainability. The military will also play an increasing role, because of its ability to innovate and quickly prepare personnel to make use of innovations.

Although these future humanitarian actors will have different motivations for their involvement, they will come together because of socio-economic sustainability. The proposition of whether responsibility lies in relief or development is therefore outdated. The real language is that of socio-economic sustainability and that is where DRR belongs.


Urban disasters

David Sanderson focussed his discussion on urban disasters and how these represent a 'game changer' in how we understand natural disasters. Whereas before we might have talked about aid workers working 'in the field', less and less will this be the case. With the global trend towards urbanisation, aid workers will increasingly be working 'in the neighbourhoods' of urban centres.

Comparing recent disasters in Japan and Haiti, the speed and ability to respond and recover has been directly related to the wealth of the country. Japan - arguably the world's most well prepared country - has been able to recover and rebuild relatively quickly. Certainly relative to Haiti, which has still not been able to rebuild homes for the thousands of residents which still live in temporary shelters.

So when we talk about reducing risk, we're talking about reducing poverty. The relative poverty of a country will determine the impact of a natural hazard on lives and livelihoods.


Join in the discussion on Facebook and Twitter (#RespDRR)
Want to get trained in DRR? View our courses.