Preventative Risk Management Community Based Risk Managment Approach

1
Preventative Risk Management Community Based
Risk Managment Approach
Cláudio Jamal Leila Oliveira World Vision
Mozambique

• Humanitarian actions do not address the
  development processes that are shaping disaster
  risk in the first place. The development
  community generally continues to view disasters
  as exceptional natural events that interrupt
  normal development and that can be managed
  through humanitarian actions
• (UNDP Report on Risks 2004)

2
New focus on risk as key to development
Confronting disaster issues in a systematic and
coherent fashion must be an explicit objective of
development strategies(World Bank, 2005).

• The impact of shocks put a high toll on human
  development and seat back future investiments

• The impact of shocks will be directly driven by
  the development characteristics of the affected
  communities

• Poverty Risk trap recurrent shocks minimize
  the long-term development perspective and the
  long-term development increases vulnerability

Disaster seek the poor and they stay poor.
3
Vulnerability key to risk

• Hazards are inevitable butthey can be managed
  and mitigated through appropriate development
  actions

 Risk Hazard Vulnerability
Risk Chance of a loss or loss itself,
characterized by the change in welfare that
results from the realization of the hazard and
from the success or failure of risk management
measures applied.
Hazard/Shock Physical or man-made
event that has potential for causing injuries to
life and damaging property, environment and
livelihoods.
Vulnerability Characteristics of person or group
in terms of their capacity to anticipate, cope
with, resist, and recover from the occurence of a
hazard.  
4
Community as key to vulnerability

• Socio-economic vulnerability, rather than
  physical hazard explains the impact of disasters
• Vulnerability, in turn is driven by community
  capabilities (physical, social, economic, human,
  environmental)
• People in high-risk areas have often developed
  their own coping mechanisms and strategies to
  reduce the impact of disaster
• First response is given by informal loosely-knit
  groups from within communities before formal
  organizations are able to mobilize
• Accumulated losses from small hazards can exceed
  the losses and impacts from big disasters and
  contribute significantly to increased
  vulnerability at the local level
• Small hazards attract little media attention and
  communities are often left on their own to cope
  with the destruction

5
What is GERANDO?

• Gestão de Risco à Nível da Comunidade
• Community Based Risk Managment

• It is an application of CBRM approach, not a set
  of guidelines
• It integrates the various phases and levels of
  risk management and development
• It is truly community based community is
  capacitated to plan, implement, sustain, and own
  it
• It focus on sustainability community ownership,
  equity, long term viability, environmental,
  social and cultural protection

Communities reduce their vulnerabilities
and enhance their capacity
Community and stakeholders act upon risks
Community and stakeholders understand risks

• Mitigation Plans and Implementation

• Hazards identification and Analises

• Preparedness and Response Plan and Implementation

• Vulnerability Analyses

• Early Warning/Surveillance

• Access to sustainable resources

• Monitoring and Evaluation

• Communication system

6
Hazard Analyses

• Objective Community prioritises disaster
  management
• Methods Participatory revision, collection and
  analysis of natural and man made hazards from a
  range of sources
• Tools
• Hazard Identification Tool
• Nature,
• Frequency
• Severity
• Hazard Exposure Tool
• Population
• Location
• Livelihoods/Social Economic Groups
• Social/community services, infrastructures, and
  utilities

7
Vulnerability Analyses

• Requires quantitative and qualitative analysis,
• Seeks peoples participation in the evaluation of
  their vulnerability.
• Its multiple levels and dimensions make it
  difficult to develop common measures or
  indicators of vulnerability.
• Need to be perceived in terms of
• (i) Well being (health and nutrition),
• (ii) physical assets (infrastructure,
  self-protection),
• (iii) Social assets (social protection and
  networks), and
• (iv) Livelihood and resilience (economic assets).

8
Surveillance Early Warning
Many times, community based surveillance is
covertly viewed as a way of appoint local people
to undertake certain tasks cheaply, so as to
further goals set by external programmers. In
such approaches, community participation in
implementation is not matched with power over
decision-making or control over the use of
resources. (Tonisirin and Gillespie 1999)

• Community based surveillance has two main
  objectives
• Strengthen Communities It is the process of
  awareness and actions following the collection of
  indicators that makes community surveillance
  important for rural development.
• Produce Actionable Data Community information
  should guide external assistance.
• Community based surveillance has dual roles
• Hazards
• Vulnerability
• Outcomes

9
Mitigation Plans and Implementation

• Identify and implement development plans that
• Incentivate DRM as a whole
• Build capacities to mitigate the impacts of
  shocks
• Community takes an active role.
• Sustainability
• Long-term viability of the projects,
• The suitability of projects to local capacities,
  vulnerabilities and inclusion of local knowledge,
  
• The ownership of the project,
• Empowerment of the community,
• Equal distribution of benefits
• Benefit community as a whole
• Benefit the community as a whole towards
  increasing resilience to worse shocks.
• Eg. HIV/AIDS movie house, community based
  health care and emergency evacuation, fishing
  tanks, and chicken/goat credit union.  

10
Mitigation Plans and Implementation

• Economic Viability
• Monetarily sustainable
• On-going costs lt profits
• No focus on profits guarantee that payments (
  or kind) are affordable to the poorest households
• Kick Start
• Break the poverty chain allow invest in
  sustainable business.
• Micro-credit vs. non-profitable nature
• Assists with an unique sum (usually in-kind
  adding to about USD 100,00).
•  
• Peer Pressure
• Community manages the project and funds, which
  control and report any irregularities.
• If any irregularities are found by surprise
  visits the community as a whole looses the right
  to engage in any further

11
Preparedness and Response Plans and
Implementation

• Developed and be ready for implementation.
• Plans for worst hazards
• Preparedness Response
• Emergency Response
• Relief
• Reconstruction
• Key issues to be included
• Triggering indicators level (categorization)
• Communication system
• Type of actions to be done by community (e.g.
  take animals to certain point, make a cleaning
  group)
• Type of actions to be done by external assistance
• Organization system (including assistance to less
  able and committees)

12
Access to Sustainable Resources

• Community capacitated and empowered to design and
  implement their own Risk Managment, including
• Need Assessment (hazard, vulnerability, and
  monitoring analyses)
• Response Plan (mitigation/development plan,
  emergency preparedness plan)
• Proposals can be submitted to various partners,
  including
• NGOs
• Government Bodies
• Social Society
• At private level, lessons can be used for
  profitable investiment
• Individual utilization of micro-credit
• Cooperations

13
Key Successes First External Evaluation

• Community demand has been growing
• Usually more than 100 community members
  participate in community monthly meetings
• Trainings include at least 40-50 people each time
• Every community has developed a
  mitigation/development plan and have got more
  than 50 sigatures
• ADP demand has also grown
• At least 10 ADPs (out of 30) have expressed
  interrest for GERANDO
• ADPs that have GERANDO are very sympathetic and
  helpful to the exercise (free of charge!!)
• Community has a strong feeling of the importance
  and benefits of GERANDO
• Partners have endorsed the idea and MoUs have
  been signed
• Manuals and concept frameworks have included
  experiences from the whole world best lesson
  learnt, simple and well elaborated

14
Key Chalenges

• GERANDO is currently located in the Emergency
  Unit. Efforts are being made to make GERANDO a
  cross cutting project.
• Integration with Programs and SPON has shown
  to be challenging
• Human and financial inputs are limited in number
• Iliteracy level has slow down the process and
  tools had to be simplified

15
Key Questions

• Objective
• Is GERANDO Approach a good tool to assist risk
  managment and devlopment?
• Method
• Share experiences and perceptions from the group
  by general topic
• Is GERANDO really sustainable?
• Is the information generated by GERANDO usefull
  for World Vision, communities and partners?
• Can GERANDO fulfill the requirements for an
  approach to facilitate successfull WV projects in
  the field?