Return
to Hazards Center Home Page
The nature of natural disasters has changed. They are now often viewed as the integration of various factors such as violence, politics, etc. -that is, they are seen as part of the complex dynamics in a chain of events. For example, a natural disaster may engender a political crisis as in Indonesia this year.
Because of both increased transnationalisation and increased media coverage, natural disasters are no longer issues for one single country. Indeed, the media now seem to have the power to "create" disasters for a world audience. Given their high visibility and transnational effects, the disasters of the future will be highly politicized.
The cost-benefit analyses of prevention and mitigation measures in developing versus developed countries should be questioned because investments in mitigation might "appear" to be more profitable for developed countries. At the same time, disasters need to be looked at as catalysts for change. They have negative impacts but may also bring the opportunity for policy change.
Burden sharing in natural disaster management is not yet the norm; there is still a lot of burden shifting as far as disasters with an international impact are concerned. There is a need for political commitment and public awareness regarding natural disasters, a need for technical and material resources, as well as a need for training for effective mitigation. The latter can be achieved by demonstrating and integrating the usefulness of disaster prevention measures into everyday life. An example can be found in cyclone prevention measures in Bangladesh, where protection shelters are used as schools.
Again, if natural disaster prevention is to occur, the socioeconomic dimension must not be ignored. In particular, natural disaster prevention must be seen as "worth it" by decision makers before money will be allocated to the issue; a shift needs to take place. One discussant, for example, cited the large sums spent in Bangladesh on defense; there have been no deaths from civil conflict in the country for 26 years.
Latin America was cited regarding several issues concerning disaster impacts. Most deadly disasters take place in peripheral or rural areas and are generally the result of unresolved problems of development. Urban growth is very rapid in both capital and secondary cities, outstripping capacities to absorb and serve increasing populations. Therefore, urban areas are also increasingly vulnerable. The risks in both areas remain significant and continue to grow. Because of the increasing risk, there is a need for sound infrastructure to cope with future disasters, and thus a need for disaster mitigation to be integrated into daily development planning. Development priorities and the needs of everyday life need to be combined. It was suggested that the expertise to mobilize local capacities along these lines is available, but it needs to be activated.
As already mentioned, however, natural disasters and their impacts can have a global aspect, and increasing numbers of international institutions are emerging that deal with natural disasters and risk reduction. This globalization has occurred in part because of and has benefitted from the increase in global communication, which has become both more frequent and faster, with the Internet playing a big role in this increase. All types of disasters - from epidemics to earthquakes to forest fires - have an increasingly international character. Yet, the concept of shared risk is often not applied to poor areas such parts of Latin America that the rest of the world might see as unbankable (even though these areas may be subject to rapid growth and linked to the rest of the world due to the out-sourcing of labor and other investments). Whereas the concept of shared risk may be seen as irrelevant for these areas, predisaster preparedness and mitigation efforts will be undertaken in rich areas such as Tokyo, where a worldwide financial crisis could follow a major earthquake.
Following the presentations, several questions regarding the international aspect and impacts of disasters were raised. It was concluded that a laissez-faire attitude toward disasters, especially in developing countries, was not the answer, because the developed world will suffer consequences of disasters that happen in the developing world and vice versa. There is simply no room for an elitist perception of the matter. It was also stated that lateral thinking and issue linking need to occur throughout the profession of disaster management, which is one of the objectives of the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR), especially since the 1994 world conference on natural disaster prevention. More intense collaboration among sectors is needed if global mitigation is to occur.
Issues regarding the politicization of disasters were also raised, as was the concept of disasters being catalysts for change. It was suggested that "risk sharing" was an established fact, while "burden sharing" is not yet an accepted concept in disaster management - at least not internationally.
Return
to Hazards Center Home Page
Return to
Index of 1998 Session Summaries