[COMMENT1]
A/54/132/Add.1-E/1999/80/Add.1
Distr.:General
18 June 1999
Original: English
General Assembly
Fifty-fourth
session
Item
101 (b) of the preliminary list*
Environment
and sustainable development:
International
Decade for Natural Disaster
Reduction
Economic and Social Council
Substantive
session of 1999
Geneva,
5–30 July 1999
Item
13 (h) of the provisional agenda**
Economic
and environmental questions: International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction
*A/54/50.
** E/1999/100 and Add.1. |
International
Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction
Report of the
Secretary-General
Addendum
Final
report of the Scientific and Technical Committee of the International Decade for Natural
Disaster Reduction
Summary
The
present report conveys the views of the Scientific and Technical Committee of the
International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction to the Secretary-General of the United
Nations. The Committee assesses progress during the Decade, and provides concluding
observations about future needs as well as recommendations for arrangements to ensure
continued international commitment for disaster prevention into the twenty-first century.
The report first provides a summary review of salient developments in primary areas of
disaster reduction. It highlights how scientific knowledge and technical experience can
best be utilized in conjunction with public policies to minimize social disruption and
economic loss from natural and similar disasters which have an adverse effect on the
environment. However, the pace of implementation must be enhanced, as the subject becomes
embedded in more professional disciplines and intersectoral forms of endeavour. The need
is urgent as the costs of disaster consequences to societies around the world continue to rise, and as conditions of natural hazards are likely to
produce more frequent and severe risks for the future. The need for sustained commitment
to disaster prevention is universal and of importance to all societies, but the greatest
impacts of natural hazards continue to fall on developing countries, countries in
transition and the poor, wherever they may live. The report concludes that remarkable
progress has been made in the acceptance of the desirability and feasibility of prevention
policies, and numerous activities promote multidisciplinary commitments to effective
disaster reduction.
Contents
|
|
Paragraphs |
|
Page |
|
|
|
|
|
I. Introduction.........................................................................................................
|
|
1–7 |
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
II. Nature of the
threat: natural hazards and contemporary society..............................
|
|
8–11 |
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
III. Collaborative
endeavour: an emergent community of interests................................
|
|
12–21 |
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
A. Representative
elements of the International Framework..............................
|
|
12–16 |
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
B. IDNDR
organizational structures................................................................
|
|
17–21 |
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
IV. Accomplishments
and overall evaluation of the Decade.........................................
|
|
22–44 |
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
A. Policy
commitment.....................................................................................
|
|
22–23 |
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
B. Hazard
assessment.....................................................................................
|
|
24–25 |
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
C. Vulnerability
and risk assessment................................................................
|
|
26–28 |
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
D. Risk
reduction............................................................................................
|
|
29–32 |
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
E. Communications
and information................................................................
|
|
33–36 |
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
F. Early
warning.............................................................................................
|
|
37–38 |
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
G. Education and
training................................................................................
|
|
39–40 |
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
H. Effectiveness
of national committees............................................................
|
|
41–43 |
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
I. Initiatives
of city officials and at other local levels.........................................
|
|
44 |
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
V. Major challenges
for the twenty-first century.........................................................
|
|
45–62 |
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
A. Integrated
risk management and vulnerability reduction................................
|
|
48–49 |
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
B. Population
concentrations and urban hazards..............................................
|
|
50–53 |
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
C. Environmental
and resource vulnerability.....................................................
|
|
54–57 |
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
D. Disaster
prevention capabilities of developing countries...............................
|
|
58–59 |
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
E. Coordination
and implementation................................................................
|
|
60–62 |
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
VI. Concluding
observations.......................................................................................
|
|
63–68 |
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
Annexes |
|
|
|
|
|
I. List of Scientific
and Technical Committee members......................................................................
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
II. Summary of
Scientific and Technical Committee meetings, 1990–1999.......................................... |
|
|
|
|
|
I. Introduction
1. The Member States of
the United Nations proclaimed the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction
(IDNDR) in General Assembly resolution 44/236 of 22 December 1989, on the basis of the
report of the International Ad Hoc Group of Experts on IDNDR
(A/44/322–E/1989/114/Add.1, annex). It has had the objective of reducing through
concerted international action, especially in developing countries, loss of life, property
damage and social and economic disruption caused by natural hazards, including
earthquakes, tropical cyclones and other storms, tsunamis, floods, landslides, volcanic
activity, wildfires, locust and similar infestations, drought and desertification, and
other calamities of natural origin.
2. In the same
resolution, the General Assembly established the International Framework of Action for
IDNDR (General Assembly resolution 44/236, annex) which called upon all Governments to
assume the primary responsibility to formulate national disaster mitigation programmes and
other policies which would reduce the consequences of natural disasters. In addition,
scientific and technological institutions, financial bodies, insurance enterprises,
non-governmental and other appropriate organizations, as well as all organizations and
bodies of the United Nations system, were urged to accord priority to natural disaster
preparedness, prevention, relief and short-term recovery throughout their operational
activities.
3. The Framework stated
several explicit goals that this broad range of collaborators should strive to accomplish
during the Decade: build national capabilities to mitigate the effects of natural
disasters; develop guidelines and strategies for applying existing knowledge; foster
research to close gaps in knowledge; disseminate information; and develop measures to
apply technical assistance and technology transfer, demonstration projects, and education
and training. Later, programme targets were declared by the IDNDR Scientific and Technical
Committee to encourage all countries to conduct a national hazard risk assessment;
incorporate a sustained disaster mitigation strategy into the national economic
development plan; and ensure improved access to effective early warning practices at all
levels of responsibility.
4. In the broad context
of international development issues, Agenda 211 emphasized that sustainable
economic growth and development cannot be achieved without taking measures to reduce
losses from natural disasters, further considering the close linkages between disaster
losses and environmental degradation. In a similar context, the Rio Declaration on
Environment and Development,2 in particular principle 18, stressed the need for
the international community to assist States afflicted by natural disasters and other
emergencies that are likely to produce sudden harmful effects in the environment of those
States. The outcome of the Global Conference on the Sustainable Development of Small
Island Developing States3 and the Programme of Action for the Least Developed
Countries for the 1990s (A/CONF.147/MISC.9) called for priority attention to be given by
activities of the Decade to small island developing States and least developed countries.
The IDNDR secretariat was designated by the General Assembly in its resolution 51/185 to
serve as the task manager to small island developing States related to disaster prevention
in reporting to the Commission on Sustainable Development.
5. The mid-term
evaluation of the Decade conducted at the World Conference on Natural Disaster Reduction
(Yokohama, 23–27 May 1994) noted that although not a part of the mandate of the
Decade, the concept of disaster reduction should be enlarged to cover natural and other
disaster situations, including environmental and technological disasters, and their
relationship, which can have a significant impact on social, economic, cultural and
environmental systems, in particular in developing countries (see A/CONF.172/9, chap. I,
resolution 1, annex I, sect.I.B).
6. In recognition of the
intersectoral and cross-cutting nature of disaster prevention relating to matters of
national planning and development, the Yokohama Strategy for a Safer World: Guidelines for
Natural Disaster Prevention, Preparedness and Mitigation, containing the Principles, the
Strategy and the Plan of Action (A/CONF.179/2, chap. I, resolution 1, annex I), outlined
principles and specific recommendations for action at the community and national levels,
at the regional and subregional levels, and at the international and bilateral levels of
involvement. The same objectives and primary areas of interest promoted by the Yokohama
Strategy are emphasized in the IDNDR action plan for 1998/99 to develop greater
opportunities for multidisciplinary involvement through inter-agency and organizational
partnerships.
7. By drawing on these
previous observations and the lessons derived from major disaster occurrences in the later
years of the Decade, the Scientific and Technical Committee assesses progress during the
Decade in the present report and looks to the future. The report does not provide a
comprehensive inventory of IDNDR activities but rather comments on and evaluates the more
salient developments during the Decade. These views intend to convey a sense of how best
to proceed by incorporating current scientific and technical knowledge into the public
policy decision-making process for the benefit of reducing disaster risks, ultimately at
the local community levels. Conditions of increasing social and economic vulnerability
will almost certainly lead to unprecedented natural and related hazards in the future, so
specific recommendations are made to ensure continued advocacy, the development of
policies and the coordination of institutionalized abilities into the twenty-first
century. Through continued public awareness and practical application of disaster
mitigation techniques, disaster reduction must be understood and realized as a public
value.
II. Nature of the threat: natural hazards and
contemporary society
8. In almost every
country of the world, the consequences of natural hazards seriously affect the quality of
life, often potentially thwarting efforts by people to better their lives. In some
countries, annual losses associated with natural disasters approach five per cent of gross
domestic product in a year, thereby wiping out or substantially reducing the gains sought
by investments for economic growth and development. The most disastrous events have killed
hundreds of thousands of people and caused over 100 billion dollars in property damage.
Throughout the 1990s, the economic losses attributed to great natural catastrophes have
averaged more than $40 billion a year. In 1998 alone, natural disasters claimed the lives
of more than 50,000 people and caused economic losses exceeding $90 billion. Even more
striking, there has been a significant rising trend in these losses during the 1990s,
which are almost three times greater than those recorded in the 1980s.4 Losses
of this scale can create economic turmoil and lead to social and possible political
instability. As resources become even more tightly managed, all efforts must be employed
to reduce the wastage of resources and to protect existing assets and previous
investments. Moreover, in part because of short-sighted international trade practices and
financial practices and uncontrolled growth, especially in urban areas, a concern has
become evident of growing inequities in vulnerability among countries. As a result, the
impacts of natural disasters and greater losses often fall most heavily on countries with
fragile or transitional economies and people who otherwise lack the resources or technical
capabilities to mitigate the risk of natural disasters. This need not remain the case.
9. It has now become
evident that the worst effects of natural disasters are frequently linked to human
behaviour and settlement patterns, with the result that natural hazards can sometimes
trigger subsequent technological disasters. Deforestation easily contributes to increased
frequency and severity of floods and landslides. Earthquakes can cause chemical spills and
fires, as floods can easily cause contamination by hazardous materials. Recent disasters,
such as those related to the El Niño climatic variation in 1997/98, wildfire and
associated atmospheric hazards on three continents, and the severe devastation of
Hurricane Mitch experienced throughout Central America all further demonstrate the
transboundary effects and larger regional consequences associated with natural hazards.
10. Such far-reaching consequences
emphasize that natural hazards can no longer be considered as individual, isolated
emergency events, to be addressed only in terms of immediate emergency response. Rather, a
multidisciplinary and intersectoral approach is essential to anticipate natural,
environmental, and technological hazards. It is essential that means to prevent natural
disasters draw on scientific and technical knowledge in formulating public policy and
decision-making processes. While natural hazards will continue to pose periodic and
sometimes recurrent threats to most societies, in many countries a recognition has
developed during the course of IDNDR that they need not necessarily become social and
economic disasters.
11. Increasingly, many disaster
mitigation actions will require difficult choices about the allocation of resources, use
of land-use policies, enforcing building practices, and giving priority protection to
different types of infrastructure. These decisions, therefore, need to be informed by
scientific knowledge and technical experience and included as components of an overall
sustainable development decision-making process. Judgements should address equally the
environmental considerations involved, as well as sustained programmes of public
information and education, including efforts to train and involve future generations.
III. Collaborative endeavour: an emergent community of
interests
A. Representative
elements of the International Framework
12. A major success of the Decade has
been a widespread acceptance of the fact that the growing risk of disasters associated
with natural hazards, frequently compounded by uncontrolled or adverse human practices,
must be mitigated. The financial costs involved in not doing so simply cannot continue to
be absorbed by any society. The feasibility of preventing disasters has become more widely
understood and accepted. A recognition has emerged that rather than being a specialist
activity realized only at the time of an immediate threat or a singular event, hazard
awareness and risk management responsibilities must be incorporated within ongoing
professional activities and local community endeavours evident in all societies.
13. This, however, necessitates
including a much wider range of participants than has traditionally been involved in
disaster management responsibilities. Abilities essential to the reduction of natural and
similar disasters are increasingly being drawn from the public sector, professional and
institutional organizations, commercial interests and local forms of community leadership.
This growing body of interests is characteristic of extended and distributed networks
essential to the work, organizational relationships and forms of communication within
modern societies. In physical terms, hazards do not respect political borders, nor in a
global economic environment do they remain strictly national affairs. Disaster prevention
is inherently multidisciplinary and intersectoral; to become sustainable it must also be
transferred to succeeding generations.
14. These necessities for dealing with
risk require additional operational partnerships and innovative forms of organizational
relationships for the future. They are already becoming embodied in both public and
private forms of collaboration, which jointly work through partnership to increase public
knowledge and community involvement in disaster reduction activities.
15. In practical terms, reducing the
impact of natural hazards depends on several crucial functions, each of which is dependent
upon the collaboration of a rapidly expanding range of professional disciplines. Risk
assessment is fundamental to a viable programme of disaster reduction, and comprises both
the anticipation of likely hazards and an estimation of their potential effects in terms
of prevailing vulnerability. The collection and analysis of required information involves
many technical experts, but it also depends on other professional skills so that it may be
disseminated rapidly and in a manner that is readily understood. Only then can it be
utilized effectively by the public and decision makers to inform well considered policies,
or to determine the most beneficial interventions.
16. Banking and financial
institutions, international technical assistance organizations and the specialized
abilities of various United Nations agencies all have a role to play in ensuring that
human, technical and material resources are wisely directed to sustained programmes of
applied disaster mitigation practices. Established and locally relevant early warning
systems are a basic component of any viable disaster reduction strategy, which equally
needs to be linked to an operational contingent capability for possible emergency events.
Carrying out all of these activities requires cooperation from an expanding range of
organizational sectors, currently designated as the IDNDR International Framework. During
the Decade, this has included government authorities, technical agencies, many academic
disciplines, commercial interests and non-governmental or local community organizations.
B. IDNDR
organizational structures
17. In its resolution 44/236, in which
it founded IDNDR, the General Assembly established organizational structures to implement
the objectives of the Decade. To focus public attention on the issues, the second
Wednesday of October was declared to be observed annually by the international community
as International Day for Natural Disaster Reduction. Since 1995, this designation has
provided the impetus to develop specific themes for international events to advance the
objective and goals of the Decade.
18. The IDNDR Scientific and Technical
Committee is comprised of 49 international experts (see annex I below) as an advisory body
to develop and to make recommendations to the Secretary-General on overall programmes. It
has functioned continuously since its formation in 1990 (see annex II below), becoming
more diversified in its composition and focused in its deliberations as the Decade has
progressed. Since 1997, it has issued declarations following each of its meetings to call
international attention to the importance of sustained international and institutional
support for disaster reduction, both within and beyond the United Nations.
19. While a Special High-Level Council
was also initially constituted in 1991, it was not sustained. Similarly, the original
intention outlined for the Department of Public Information of the United Nations
Secretariat to have a featured role in raising awareness of disaster prevention among the
general public was not significantly realized throughout the Decade.
20. The IDNDR secretariat was
established in 1990 to provide support to these organizational bodies, and to undertake
the day-to-day coordination of Decade activities. It developed from a basic staffing
complement that supported the original Ad Hoc Group of Experts, and it has functioned as
effectively as funds permitted during the entire Decade. However, during its earlier years
its effectiveness was sometimes constrained by uncertain staffing considerations, as well
as by later shifts in emphasis within the international development community that tended
to focus predominantly on matters of emergency relief assistance and related operational
aspects of complex disasters, often at the expense of longer-term prevention strategies.
Overall, however, the secretariat performed very well over the course of the Decade,
probably serving as the single most important factor in sustaining the Decade despite the
limited resources available.
21. As an official United Nations
conference, the World Conference on Natural Disaster Reduction (Yokohama, Japan,
23–27 May 1994) became a watershed event of the Decade. In addition to serving as the
occasion of the favourable mid-term review of the Decade, the primary outcome of the
meeting was the Yokohama Strategy and Plan of Action. This operational blueprint continues
to provide guidance to all members of the International Framework, as it calls upon
nations, working individually and together, to implement policies and principles for
disaster reduction that were reaffirmed by the 155 national delegations present.
IV. Accomplishments and overall evaluation of the Decade
A. Policy
commitment
22. Unless the most senior government
officials recognize and endorse the need for a commitment to mitigation practices, as an
investment in protecting assets and conserving resources, disaster reduction will be
assigned a low priority. History shows that without forethought, short-term crises of the
day can easily overshadow the longer-term considerations and absorb resources needed to
implement effective loss reduction measures. Organizations and government authorities
alike must make a clear assignment of responsibilities, with the dedication of necessary
resources, to implement mitigation.
23. Governments cannot sustain
mitigation measures without broad public support. Many measures appear expensive, at least
in the short term, or add costs to construction projects. In other cases, land owners will
not readily accept a decision to develop land in a manner that yields less than the
maximum short-term profit. In the face of these pressures, public understanding of hazards
and an awareness of relative risks are essential to choosing government officials who will
implement sound policies which can protect community assets and resources.
B. Hazard
assessment
24. The causes of natural hazards are
sufficiently well understood to provide a basis for undertaking actions to mitigate their
effects. Nevertheless, research should continue to advance the understanding of natural
hazards, including a measure of their effects on society, in order to improve estimates of
threats and provide a sound basis for utilizing limited resources for mitigation and
preparedness actions. The regions of the world that are prone to natural hazards are
generally well delineated, and this knowledge provides the foundation for identifying the
most threatened areas within countries. In some countries, the threat can be characterized
with sufficient detail to enable the policy understanding and the mitigation of these
hazards into land-use plans.
25. National and local public
authorities, however, need to integrate hazard and vulnerability assessments more fully
into their overall planning efforts. This requires that the risks associated with natural
hazards be evaluated systematically and in concert with other factors influencing
development decisions. Progress has been noted in this respect, as indicated by
significant efforts in some countries and the increasing attention being given in
international developmental discussions, such as those associated with El Niño or
disaster rehabilitation efforts in Central America. Much greater attention to this
fundamental basis for disaster prevention is required for the future, particularly within
the context of countries’ own planning initiatives.
C. Vulnerability
and risk assessment
26. Natural hazards become disasters
when they affect people and their socio-economic infrastructure to such an extent that the
community or country cannot cope with the overall impact. The ability to deal with
disasters varies considerably among different populations, with the poor having the fewest
options and limited resources to cope or recover. They often occupy marginal or unstable
lands or inhabit substandard structures. Despite their fundamental importance to the
well-being of a society, hospitals and schools often suffer disproportionate damage from
natural disasters.
27. The increasing concentration of
population in large cities poses a degree of vulnerability that can threaten the economic
viability of a country or region. These megacities serve as hubs and centres for
transportation, communications, financial and commercial activity, as well as government.
The severe impairment of their functions or a disruption of increasingly complex but vital
public utilities and physical infrastructure can bring a country to its knees. Small
island developing States are threatened to a similar degree, but due to their physical
isolation and limited economic base are often dependent on a single industry, such as
tourism. Natural hazards can also threaten the cultural heritage of countries, and have
destroyed irreplaceable works of art, historical locations and architecture.
28. Technical and procedural methods
for estimating risk have improved substantially in recent years, and are becoming widely
employed in the insurance and financial sectors for loss estimation. Advances should be
pursued in this methodology, and the inventories of vulnerable structures and their
exposure to various risks should be further developed. To address such a need, both
technical experts and public policy authorities are working together to assess seismic
risks and determine suitable mitigation strategies under the IDNDR secretariat-managed
project on risk assessment tools for the diagnosis of urban areas against seismic
disasters. There have also been a number of recently developed opportunities for advanced
El Niño and regional climatic forecasts that can stimulate medium-termed vulnerability
assessments. These are increasingly being accomplished and shared by multiple
collaborating professional interests, especially in Eastern and Southern Africa and the
Americas. As these examples demonstrate, risk assessments can be more widely utilized in
regional and national development planning, drawing upon an increasingly wide range of
professional abilities committed to shared policy objectives.
D. Risk
reduction
29. Since substantial resources in
most countries are linked to economic development, it is important that natural disaster
mitigation become an integral part of the development process. Failure to adopt such a
basic strategy as a foundation for disaster reduction can easily jeopardize economic
development itself. The highest priority should be accorded to making this link, and many
of the most productive measures that can be employed involve land-use planning, investment
incentives and construction practices.
30. Economic development usually
focuses on large projects or national financial policies involving substantial resources.
Macroeconomic analyses can easily obscure the fact that many of the most vulnerable people
have virtually no resources and exist outside the realm of developmental interests. Such
people need low-cost methods to improve their housing, using materials or skills that are
close at hand. Some IDNDR demonstration projects and other activities have proven methods
using adobe or timber construction. Information needs to be distributed and training
provided for people to benefit from these methods.
31. Hazard insurance provides a means
for spreading risks, thereby facilitating investments in hazardous regions. Incentives can
also be provided by insurance policies to reduce risks through applied mitigation
practices, even as insurance payments following a disaster can stimulate recovery. In any
of these cases, insurance premiums should be based on a realistic assessment of the risks,
which must depend on hazard assessments. If premiums are set lower than is appropriate for
a given risk, investment in effect becomes subsidized and a further liability is
encouraged.
32. The direct cost of a natural
disaster, measured only by damage to structures and injuries to people, is often dwarfed
by the indirect and secondary costs. A large part of indirect costs is associated with the
interruption or loss of business. In any natural disaster, many commercial establishments
are forced to close and many never reopen, with attendant loss of employment. Spurred on
by increasing competition and the demands of a global economy, businesses are now
investing in preventive strategies to ensure their business continuity. In economic terms,
the recognition of the value that “Prevention pays” has motivated businesses to
pursue disaster reduction strategies as integral parts of their core business, and has led
to some international cooperation and sharing of ideas in this important field. This is an
initiative that should be encouraged, and through increased examples of public-private
partnerships the benefits of the experience may become more widespread within the
management and provision of more government and public services.
E. Communications
and information
33. In order for any efforts at risk
reduction to be successful, possible threats must be communicated through a chain of
public authorities, as well as with the full comprehension of the public. The information
provided can take a variety of forms, depending on the nature of the hazard and the
time-frame involved. These various situations, ranging from an advanced hazard assessment
of potential risk through an immediate alert of a clearly impending event each present
different information and communication requirements.
34. Over the last decade, the
availability of information about natural hazards and disasters has increased enormously.
This has occurred through new studies of these phenomena, an explosive expansion of global
channels of communication, and perhaps most significantly through the widespread use of
the Internet in most parts of the world. The use of global information systems has
revolutionized opportunities for hazard mapping and risk assessment, even at quite
localized levels. There have also been significant improvements in disseminating real or
nearly real-time hazard information and warnings. More databases that contribute to the
exchange and application of mitigation practices have become widely available and are
globally accessible. New graphic information products and the availability of electronic
information in more languages have also increased the possibilities for wider
dissemination of hazard information. Efforts are needed to increase general and ready
access to all of these modern channels of communication, especially the Internet.
Challenges remain to improve the quality of the data, and to develop tools and operational
standards for facilitating the compilation, synthesis and analysis of data.
35. The ability for individuals and
computer systems to communicate has also been transformed in recent years, and even
greater opportunities appear in the near future. The improvements in telephone, Internet,
data systems and networks, their increasing availability, carrying capacity and speed of
transmission, coupled with satellite-based transmission systems, are systematically
changing and enhancing the way information is exchanged and shared. In addition, it is
already possible to communicate between notebook-sized satellite telephones or computers
anywhere. New orbiting satellite systems will shortly make it feasible to send and receive
voice, data or Internet information with hand-held instruments. Today, and even more in
the future, Governments and all organizations have a remarkable opportunity to enhance
their communications capabilities, including those impervious to natural hazards.
36. The print and electronic media
wield substantial power, and can greatly facilitate the understanding of hazards and the
communication of disaster-related information to the public. Successful and even expanded
use of the media for disaster reduction must, however, overcome several problems. Many
providers of information about hazards and disaster conditions are technical experts,
whereas many of the people involved in communicating the information are not. The
comprehension of many people for whom information is intended frequently is determined by
still other contexts or more localized perceptions. Additional issues concern how to
present the message in an appealing and understandable manner. Presentation of information
through the media deserves special attention by all organizations concerned with natural
disasters, focused especially on the perceived suitability to address the needs of the
intended users.
F. Early
warning
37. As was emphasized at the IDNDR
international conference on early warning systems (Potsdam, Germany, September 1998),
effective early warning is a process that must bring together scientific analysis and
technical forecasting of a hazard, together with the political decision-making process and
the availability of local community capabilities to heed the warning. The declaration of
the Potsdam early warning conference provides a summary of critical functional
responsibilities, and it also serves as a call to action for all parties concerned to
carry improved early warning practices into the twenty-first century.
38. The dissemination of information
about early warning among service agencies or to the public must be given careful thought
in each case. Such actions must be based upon well conceived and often technical systems
for observation and analysis. Different forms of dissemination become necessary, involving
different actors and various forms of communication that may be drawn from commercial
interests, public media and governmental authorities. Most importantly, any warning must
include a clear and informed statement of instruction or guidance sufficient to lead to
effective action to avoid or minimize the consequences of the hazard. Governments
themselves need to assess the adequacy of each of these stages of the warning process, and
should give a high priority to establishing comprehensive, reliable and credible warning
systems. These coordinated activities are crucial to reducing losses so that early warning
becomes an essential element of any comprehensive disaster prevention strategy.
G. Education
and training
39. During the Decade, significant
progress has taken place with respect to education and training applicable to natural
disaster reduction. This is reflected by a diversity of initiatives, ranging from
practical community-based training to postgraduate education. In the course of IDNDR,
there has been a significant increase in the community risk reduction and hazard awareness
programmes for such threats as cyclones, hurricanes, tsunamis, earthquakes and wildfires.
The diversity and imagination reflected in such local training initiatives provides
evidence of the enormous creativity within local authorities, national civil protection
and disaster management agencies, as well as that located in youth groups, radio and
television networks, NGOs and community-based organizations. It is also reflected
increasingly by the development of locally or regionally created training and educational
materials and learning packages, which are frequently more directly relevant to regionally
specific risk profiles.
40. Similarly, there has been an
upsurge in educational activities focused on natural risk and disaster reduction. From
primary and secondary education through institutions of higher learning, more attention is
being devoted to information about natural hazards and associated risks, as well as
incorporating prevention and preparedness measures into existing educational programmes.
Within primary schools, IDNDR’s annual Natural Disaster Reduction Day has served as
an important vehicle for making links between more conventional subject matter and
disaster-specific themes. Topics like “Cities at risk” and “Water —
too much — too little” have been well received in primary school curricula.
Accompanying IDNDR information kits have been popular, enabling teachers to incorporate
key disaster reduction concepts into classes and lesson plans.
H. Effectiveness
of national committees
41. In General Assembly resolution
44/236, in which IDNDR was founded, Member States were asked to formulate national
disaster mitigation programmes; establish national committees or focal points; mobilize
support; increase public awareness; pay due attention to health care and related forms of
essential social and economic infrastructure; and improve availability of emergency
supplies. The formation of multisectoral national committees or focal points for disaster
reduction were considered to be the best means for realizing these goals at the local
level. In response to this recommendation, about 130 countries responded by identifying
such an entity.
42. The effectiveness of national
committees or focal points have varied from being highly effective to being parochial or
inactive. Some have become a significant force for concentrating and mobilizing policy
interests and professional applications in carefully conceived programmes in some
countries. In others, more narrowly focused organizations have not adequately involved the
wide range of participation that would have been preferred. The extent to which national
committees or focal points concentrated on largely domestic aspects of disaster reduction,
at the expense of broader regional or international interaction, also varied considerably.
Where there were more limited accomplishments, they frequently resulted from the ways in
which committees were first composed. Limitations included a failure to address
sufficiently the breadth of interests of all potential stakeholders, not providing
adequate resources or authority, or not being fully attentive to the original intentions
of the Decade. In some few cases, the requirements of disaster prevention became too
easily dominated by more traditional and limited concepts of emergency response, or they
were cast in functional terms of planning for emergency disaster assistance frequently
associated with established civil defence measures.
43. By contrast, there were noteworthy
examples in which a contingent of highly motivated individuals drawn from a variety of
professions dedicated much of their professional time and abilities to promoting a
coherent programme of disaster mitigation, regardless of whether there was an officially
constituted national committee or not. The success of this work often stemmed from a
professional relationship or dedicated research interests, rather than from explicit
institutionalized support. An important accomplishment of the Decade has been the
opportunity it has provided for greater recognition of these singular initiatives. It has
also aided institutions in appreciating that issues which contribute to disaster reduction
often relate to their core interests.
I. Initiatives
of city officials and at other local levels
44. Local authorities and
municipalities have shown an increasing willingness to become involved with the Decade.
This is a result of the recognition of disaster reduction as a central aspect to many
local-level policies, including social vulnerability, urban risk management, land use
planning, and in general the assessment of local community exposure to the consequences of
severe natural phenomena. Furthermore, local officials are those most immediately involved
with hazards, and have a direct responsibility in managing the risk of both natural and
technological disasters. It should be noted that besides the involvement of local
authorities through their international institutions and associations, a wide range of
initiatives has been taken by municipalities and provinces in their own capacity, both in
response to IDNDR awareness-raising campaigns and as the result of an increased
understanding of the importance of disaster reduction in urban areas.
V. Major
challenges for the twenty-first century
45. The extent of vulnerability within
a society will determine its exposure to the impact of a hazard, and therefore the scale
or magnitude of a potential disaster. Households and communities in developing countries
are particularly vulnerable to natural hazards because of many interrelated factors,
including large populations living in high-risk areas, frequently in conditions of
poverty; livelihood insecurity; and environmental degradation. In many developing
countries, infrastructure and crucial lifeline systems are particularly exposed to the
effects of natural hazards. In industrialized countries too, with an increasing
interdependency between information, complex technological facilities, human systems and
hazards, there is now the potential for catastrophic failures on a global basis, as the
example of the year 2000 computer problem has demonstrated. Equally, the relationship
between human behaviour and biomedical risks has also become more evident, exacerbated by
the ease of rapid international transmission of public health and environmental health
hazards, including food contamination, as seen for instance in the dramatic spread of
human immunodeficiency virus/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) throughout the
world. Emphasis needs to be given by Governments, international development organizations,
commercial interests and other sources of financial investment to ensure that all crucial
systems which underpin modern societies are regularly assessed and remain
disaster-resistant.
46. Overall vulnerability to disasters
will certainly intensify unless there are significant improvements in access to essential
social services and economic security, and unless sustained efforts are made to protect
the crucial social and economic systems on which all societies depend. The reduction of
vulnerability is an inherent part of sustainable development that must take account of the
role of scientific and technical knowledge, ensure significant levels of popular
participation and promote a full acceptance of careful environmental management.
47. Hence, the underlying challenge
for the future is that the composite subjects of disaster prevention must become accepted
as a public value and be explicitly embodied in official public policy responsibilities.
Therefore, the major challenges for the twenty-first century described below can only be
met fully with the exercise of authority and the distinct allocation of resources becoming
accepted as integral elements of comprehensive national economic and development planning
processes.
A. Integrated
risk management and vulnerability reduction
48. Communities and development
organizations can reduce potential natural disaster losses through a continuous programme
of applied mitigation measures that are integrated into a comprehensive disaster
prevention programme. Land-use planning and building standards are two of the major
strategies for reducing vulnerability. Preparedness plans and warning systems are also
essential elements. Mitigation can only be effective if it is a priority, integrated into
an overall planning and development process with organizations and Governments, realized
through networking strategies that enable and even encourage information exchange. Both
multidisciplinary professional experience and intersectoral organizational relationships
are essential if the strategy is to be both comprehensive and sustainable. It cannot
succeed if it is regarded only as an additional consideration of disaster management,
limited to singular event-based scenarios, or a derivative of emergency relief assistance
focused only on the acute phase of hazardous events.
49. The reduction of potential losses
depends on the commitment of both public and private leaders and organizations at all
levels. It can only be sustained by an understanding embedded within the community based
upon public awareness. This essential community support to practical activities also needs
to be reinforced by a demonstrated expectation that the threat of natural hazards will be
addressed. Consequently, the highest priority should be accorded to developing public
awareness in order to bolster commitment to natural disaster mitigation at the highest
levels of all organizations. Natural disaster mitigation must become widely accepted as an
important public value within a community, and further recognized as an essential
component of sustained economic growth.
B. Population
concentrations and urban hazards
50. The global population is projected
to rise to about 12 billion people by the middle of the twenty-first century, before
levelling out. This growth will be accompanied by an even greater rate of increase in
material goods and facilities to support this population. Thus, exposure to natural
hazards will steadily rise. Unless sustained actions are taken to reduce vulnerability and
to increase mitigation practices, losses will continue to rise at an accelerating rate, as
has become evident during the past 30 years.
51. Current trends indicate that this
increasing world population is concentrating in urban areas, creating extraordinary
demands on the physical environment and the facilities of modern life. Many of these
resulting megacities have difficulty coping with day-to-day problems, and are poorly
prepared to face the additional disruption and losses that a natural disaster brings.
Concerted efforts are needed to address the vulnerabilities of megacities. Furthermore, as
more population generally moves into coastal areas and other previously unsettled
hazard-prone areas, the exposed risk to natural hazards is compounded in many countries.
Countries — especially cities — need to evaluate the effect of these growth
dynamics and address the trend in overall planning.
52. Megacities, expanding regional
agglomerations and national systems depend on a complex infrastructure for their effective
functioning. Roads, pipelines, power grids, telecommunications networks and similarly
linked infrastructure systems are particularly vulnerable to natural hazards because a
single break in the system can render the entire system useless. Barring specific
capabilities for routing around disruptions, such as can be utilized in electrical grids,
a failed system can also trigger numerous other cascading effects in other linked systems.
Increasingly, communities will repeatedly be faced with massive failure of systems that
they have come to depend on, further compounding their vulnerability. Redundancy or other
provisions for contingent capacity must be addressed to a greater degree than has
historically been associated with disaster management planning.
53. The potential for disasters caused
by natural hazards on a scale not previously seen is a reality that Governments must
confront. The earthquakes at Tangshan, China, in 1976, with 275,000 fatalities, and Kobe,
Japan, in 1995, with losses in excess of $120 billion, are harbingers of the extraordinary
loss and destruction that natural disasters can cause in a modern urban environment. Even
greater losses are a real prospect as a sequence or combination of hazardous events, or
the direct impact of an unusually severe hazard, such as hurricane Mitch demonstrated when
it devastated several Central American countries and economies for years to come.
Governments need to devote serious attention to the risks such events pose, and to begin
to implement long-term sustained mitigation strategies to lessen their impacts.
C. Environmental
and resource vulnerability
54. Much attention in the past has
been focused on the threat that natural and human-induced hazards pose to people and
structures. However, their threat to habitat and various ecosystems demands a similar
priority, especially as ecosystems are often the basis for various forms of economic
livelihood. The maintenance of productive fishing, agriculture, livestock-raising and
forest product utilization is dependent on minimizing all forms of ecosystem degradation.
55. The recent global experience of
the 1997–1999 El Niño/La Niña phenomenon graphically illustrates how natural
hazards and related human behaviour can substantially impact the environment, habitat and
essential resources of land, forest, water and even air quality. The extensive and
persistent effects of floods and drought around the world come immediately to mind, but
landslides, wildfires with the associated smoke and haze, and other hazards, such as
severe and adverse temperature variation, are important in this respect as well.
56. Natural, human-induced and
technological hazards pose a real and growing threat of long-term or permanent damage to
the environment, ecosystems and biodiversity, on which all societies depend. With
widespread global economic practices, vulnerability can easily increase because of
linkages between human-induced and natural hazards that can multiply and magnify each
other’s consequences. Deforestation and improper land use practices can lead to
increased run-off during rains. This may in turn lead to floods of greater severity,
creating additional risks to industrial sites, further threatening chemical pollution of a
habitat.
57. Realistic risk assessments in the
future must take account of the growing potential for the combined effects of hazards,
derived from both natural and human-induced circumstances, and their respective cascading
effects. More attention must be given to their combined social and economic consequences
inherent in increasingly complex societies, as well as to the more fundamental and
long-term perspective of environmental and resource vulnerability.
D. Disaster
prevention capabilities of developing countries
58. Advancing the practice of disaster
prevention depends on recognizing the threat posed by natural hazards, evaluating options
for addressing the threat, and assigning a priority for implementing appropriate measures.
Experience shows that progress in this endeavour depends on a continuing dialogue between
authoritative decision makers in each risk-prone country or region and experts on the
various aspects of hazard assessment and risk management. Therefore, every vulnerable
country needs a national or regional capability for disaster prevention and mitigation,
necessarily linked to contingent preparedness, response and recovery systems for use when
the hazard exceeds prevention capabilities.
59. It is equally important to
recognize that foreign consultants cannot usually meet this need on a continuous basis
because they are not able to articulate the issues and advocate appropriate actions as
part of the national decision-making process. Therefore, a priority should be accorded to
assisting developing countries in establishing these capabilities.
E. Coordination
and implementation
60. By undertaking the International
Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction, the Member States of the United Nations cast a
spotlight on the increasing threat to modern societies of natural hazards. The Decade has
provided a global opportunity to increase public awareness, motivate official and
professional bodies, engage scientists and technical interests, and stimulate commercial
endeavours in the promotion of new programmes. This focus provided by the United Nations
has, together with a series of some of the most costly and devastating natural disasters
during the decade, succeeded in raising the recognition and the feasibility of natural
disaster reduction. Steadily increasing attention is being given to the matter by many
international, regional and national organizations. As the end of the Decade approaches,
the need for future responsibility and leadership in this area must be addressed.
61. As noted before, it is absolutely
essential that all Governments and organizations concerned with economic development adopt
natural disaster mitigation as an inherent value in their operations. Beyond this basic
approach, there will be a continuing need for coordination among practitioners of
mitigation at the regional and international levels. Furthermore, NGOs play an essential
and highly effective role in regional and international coordination. The efforts of NGOs
should be effectively linked with corresponding efforts by government entities and the
private sector. The critical question is how such coordination can best be provided.
62. The United Nations took an
important initiative in launching IDNDR, and some organizations within the United Nations
system devoted substantial effort to furthering the goals of the Decade. Although such
attention was at times overshadowed by other crises, such as large migrations of
populations during complex emergencies, the United Nations maintained a sustaining
vigilance on IDNDR. The programme areas of greatest priority and for which lead
organizations in the United Nations system should be designated are (a) advancing the
frontiers of science and education; (b) implementing scientific and technical programmes
to monitor hazards phenomena; (c) promoting and implementing mitigation as an integral
part of any economic development; and (d) implementing preventive measures to promote
public health.
VI. Concluding observations
63. In launching IDNDR, the United
Nations focused attention on the importance of mitigation in reducing losses from natural
hazards and disaster prevention, and most importantly on how to ensure increased access to
these abilities and resources throughout the world. Modern means of telecommunications and
technological advances in global information exchange, networks and linking organizations
provide resources unimaginable even 10 years ago. Numerous organizations have seized these
opportunities, bolstered by a series of disasters during the decade that have vividly
demonstrated the unacceptable costs of growing threats faced by modern societies.
64. Mitigation and prevention
practices are now achieving a priority approaching that previously reserved for contingent
emergency management activities associated with relief and recovery during the acute phase
of individual disasters. Astonishing advances in communications, a greater utility in
earth observation, the scientific understanding of hazards, and a much greater public
awareness and acceptance of the feasibility of disaster reduction activities have all
combined to demonstrate the effectiveness of timely early warning capabilities. Early
warning is now recognized as an essential element of any comprehensive disaster prevention
strategy. These concepts are now effectively being applied, aided by a much increased
exchange of global experience spanning many different areas of professional endeavour.
65. The stage is now set, as all
countries of the world move beyond IDNDR, for increased implementation of loss reduction
methodologies and for achieving the goal of disaster-resistant communities. There is an
unavoidable responsibility to carry on the momentum to promote hazard awareness and the
application of risk management practices for disaster reduction that national committees
and other bodies of the International Framework have initiated. The need is a universal
one that is relevant for all countries, but the components of sustained and successful
disaster prevention are multiple. To accomplish them, policy and institutional
perspectives are required among Member States and within individual countries that can
demonstrate and even encourage or mandate multidisciplinary and intersectoral
collaboration.
66. As the Decade comes to a close,
there is also a crucial need within the United Nations system to place a distinct
coordination function at a sufficiently authoritative level to assure inter-agency
oversight of the planning, implementation and institutional synergies in natural disaster
reduction. Various options have been suggested, including the establishment of an
intergovernmental panel or a commission. Whichever form is chosen, in recognition of the
inherent cross-cutting nature of the subject of disaster prevention, the decision must
bring together all of the relevant parties. While individual implementation
responsibilities should properly be exercised among designated agencies, matters of
advocacy, coherent policy development and organizational coordination must rest in a
collective inter-agency authority.
67. Disaster prevention for the
future, with a full appreciation of the economic and social consequences of risks and
society in the future, must involve issues and abilities of sustainable development,
environmental management, science and technology, commerce and industry, and the
encouragement of participatory forms of governance that contribute to social well-being
and security. It can reflect no single professional culture because the natural hazards
and risks to societies in the coming age will challenge and call upon collective
abilities. This matter becomes even more pressing when it is recognized that more hazards
of the future will be international in nature, with transnational demands on various forms
of government polity.
68. As an ongoing matter of global
concern that deals with major cross-cutting aspects of development, disaster prevention
needs to be linked to all the relevant conclusions of the key United Nations conferences
of the 1990s in order to implement strategies for reducing disaster losses in a
coordinated, sustained approach for a safer twenty-first century. Ultimately, this cannot
succeed unless and until there is a demonstrated political willingness to transform the
available and emerging wisdom and demonstrated practical experience into accepted policy
and resource commitments.
Notes
1 Report of the United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development, Rio de Janeiro, 3–14 June 1992, vol. I, Resolutions
Adopted by the Conference, resolution 1, annex II.
2 Ibid., annex I.
3 Report of the Global Conference on the
Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States, Bridgetown, Barbados, 25
April–6 May 1994 (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.94.I.18 and
corrigendum).
4 See “Topics”, in Munich Reinsurance annual
report for 1998; and Munich Reinsurance press announcement of 28 December 1998.
Annex I
List of
Scientific and Technical Committee members
William John
Richard Alexander, South Africa
(1996–1999)
Alexandra Amoaka-Mensah,
Ghana
(1990–1997)
Peter S. Anderson,
Canada (1996–1999)
Anand S. Arya,
India (1990–1997)
Franco Barberi,
Italy (1990–1993)
Mohamed Belazougui,
Algeria (1996–1999)
Mohammed Benblidia,
Algeria (1990–1996)
Driss Ben
Sari, Morocco (1990–1996)
G. Arthur Brown,
Jamaica (1990–1993)
James P. Bruce,
Canada (1990–1996)
Claudia Candanedo,
Panama (1990–1996)
Barbara E. Carby,
Jamaica (1993–1999)
Umberto Cordani,
Brazil (1990–1996)
Mustafa Erdik,
Turkey (1996–1999)
Alberto Giesecke,
Peru (1990–1998)
Robert M. Hamilton,
United States (1996–1999)
Youri A. Izrael,
Russian Federation (1990–1993)
Ailsa, Holloway,
Zimbabwe and South Africa
(1993–1999)
R. P. Karimanzira,
Zimbabwe (1996–1999)
Vit Karnik,
Czechoslovakia (1990–1993)
Elizabeth Kassaye,
Ethiopia (1990–1993)
Tsuneo Katayama,
Japan (1996–1999)
Senipsi Langi Kavaliku,
Tonga (1996–1999)
Vaino Kelha,
Finland (1990–1996)
Takeo Kinosita,
Japan (1990–1993)
Roman L. Kintanar,
Philippines (1990–1996)
Michel Lechat,
Belgium (1990–1996)
C. J. Littleton,
Australia (1993–1999)
Liu
Yanhua, China (1996–1999)
Giuseppe Luongo,
Italy (1993–1999)
A. Ch. Maskrey,
Peru (1996–1999)
Philippe Masure,
France (1990–1996)
Alberto Maturana
Palacios, Chile (1996–1999)
Ahmed Ibrahim Naguib,
Egypt (1996–1999)
Bhuvarahan Narasimhan,
India (1996–1999)
Isaac Nyambok,
Kenya (1996–1999)
Thomas Odhiambo,
Kenya (1990–1993)
Dallas Peck,
United States (1990–1996)
Manuel Perlo
Cohen, Mexico (1996–1999)
Erich Plate,
Germany (1990–1996)
Aura Elena Rodriquez
Marrero, Colombia
(1990–1993)
Marilo Ruiz de
Elvira, Spain (1990–1993)
Hermann Schmitz-Wenzel,
Germany
(1996–1999)
Eugene Staffa,
Canada (1996–1999)
Atsushi Takeda,
Japan (1993–1996)
Albert Tevoedjre,
Benin (1993–1999)
Yuri Vorobiev,
Russian Federation (1993–1999)
J. J. Wagner,
Switzerland (1993–1999)
Xie
Li-Li, China (1993–1996)
Annex II
Summary of
Scientific and Technical Committee meetings 1990–1999
First
meeting (Bonn, 4–8 March 1991)
Established
targets for the Decade to complete national risk assessments and preparedness plans, and
establish access to warning systems by the year 2000; adopted criteria for approval of
demonstration projects; reviewed links to other related United Nations programmes on
climate change, environment and development, and response to emergencies.
Second
meeting (Guatemala City, 16–20 September 1991)
Reviewed
disasters at Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines, Mount Unzen in Japan, and floods in China;
adopted demonstration projects related to tropical cyclones, volcano hazards, earthquake
hazards, information systems, education/research/training, risk assessment/preventive
actions, public health, international centres, and megacities; and reviewed and endorsed
plans for the World Conference on Natural Disaster Reduction.
Third
meeting (Geneva, 16–20 March 1992)
Identified
actions to be taken at the national level and established guidelines; adopted
international demonstration projects proposed by the Department of Humanitarian
Affairs/UNDRO, Habitat, UNDP, UNDP/UNV, WHO/ PAHO, UNESCO, WMO, ICSU, WFEO/UATI, and
IASPEI; analysed proposed studies on the economic benefits of disaster mitigation actions;
adopted an information strategy; reviewed plans for the World Conference on Natural
Disaster Reduction.
Fourth
meeting (New Delhi, 1–5 February 1993)
Assessed
progress with national committees and focal points; reviewed national programmes of
Bangladesh, India, the Philippines and Vanuatu; heard a report on management of drought in
India and earthquake in Jamaica; reviewed progress in demonstration projects and plans for
an information strategy and the World Conference.
Fifth
meeting (Geneva, 22–24 November 1993)
Completed
plans for the World Conference, including guidelines for regional reports and
public/private sector interface, and recommendations for the technical committee, poster
and exhibit sessions; continued review of demonstration projects; prepared for mid-term
review of the Decade by the General Assembly.
Sixth
meeting (Washington, D.C., 27 February–3 March 1995)
Reviewed
national, regional, and global disaster reduction strategies; analysed early warning and
information systems; heard report on Kobe, Japan, earthquake; discussed the outcome of the
World Conference and plans for the second half of the Decade.
Seventh
meeting (Moscow, 11–14 March 1996)
Heard
reports on a typhoon in the Philippines, lahars at Mount Pinatubo and reconstruction at
Kobe, Japan; prepared recommendations on training for disaster reduction; reviewed and
evaluated demonstration projects; issued the Moscow statement, which called on the United
Nations Secretary-General and the executive heads of the specialized agencies to
strengthen capacity-building of countries and communities at risk for vulnerability
reduction and emergency preparedness as an activity distinct from humanitarian assistance,
and include these functions within the development-oriented components of the United
Nations and its specialized agencies.
Eighth
meeting (Paris, 20–23 January 1997)
Reviewed
plans for final evaluation process of the Decade; discussed transition process beyond the
year 2000; conferred with United Nations agencies’ representatives on plans beyond
the Decade; reviewed activities of the French national committee of the IDNDR.
Ninth
meeting (Geneva, 13–17 October 1997)
Reviewed
the impact of disasters: volcanic eruption at Montserrat, earthquake in Italy, hurricane
in Mexico, El Niño in Peru and South Africa, and earthquake in India; heard plans for new
projects on early warning, earthquake risk assessment and flood investigation in northern
Europe; developed plans for the closing process of the Decade, including recommendations
for a high-level segment on the Decade at the substantive meeting of 1999 of the Council
associated with a programme forum.
Tenth
meeting (Washington, D.C., 8–12 June 1998)
Prepared
an outline and plans for the final report on the Decade by the Scientific and Technical
Committee; reviewed efforts to integrate natural disaster mitigation into sustainable
development; reviewed the effects of El Niño in Ecuador and other countries.
Eleventh
meeting (Canberra, 15–19 February 1999)
Reviewed
the draft final report of the Committee on IDNDR; prepared the report for the substantive
session of 1999 of the Council; reviewed plans for the programme forum; received a
briefing on activities of the Australian national committee.
[COMMENT1]<<ODS JOB
NO>>N9918293E<<ODS JOB NO>>
<<ODS DOC
SYMBOL1>>A/54/132/Add.1<<ODS DOC SYMBOL1>>
<<ODS DOC
SYMBOL2>>E/1999/80/Add.1<<ODS DOC SYMBOL2>>