about

Now a days information about disaster management is very important  for every human being because , we are in industrilised world, where it is the main reason for global warming and we are seeing effect of elnino through out the world, and its drastic consequenses that is the reason we developed this site  about disaster management and mitigation measures for bringimg awareness among people.....prevention is better than cure but for this problem we have to depend more on mitigation rather than prevention because we can not predict natures nature...awareness is more important this site gives you mitigation measures and how to manage disaster................

DISTRIBUTION OF RELIEF MATERIAL

Relief means meeting the immediate needs for food, clothing, shelter and medical aid for
disaster victims. It provides assistance to save lives and alleviate suffering in the hours,
days and weeks following a disaster. For high impact rapid onset disasters like earthquakes,
relief operations have to be launched at very short notice and at very large scale. For
creeping disasters like droughts the relief period may prolong to months or even years.
The two-dominant/critical issues in relief distribution are politicisation of relief and the
problem of ‘scarcity amidst plenty’. In this Unit, there shall be an endeavour to
understand the two problems and explore ways to evolve a better mechanism of relief
distribution/procurement by understanding of constraints in the present arrangements

Planning for Relief Distribution

Keeping in mind the panic that arises during any disaster, it is essential to plan before
hand to ensure that the distribution of relief material in the immediate aftermath of a
disaster is efficient and effective. An effective relief operation is more realistic if correlated
with an efficient disaster preparedness plan. Every major disaster’s impact could becontained effectively to a certain extent and the loss minimised if a good preparedness
plan is in force. Given below are some of the steps that should be taken before the
disaster.
1) Establishment of Early Warning Systems
Science and technology in India have advanced and developed considerably to a state
whereby early warnings in case of disasters like floods and cyclones are a reality. All
agencies involved in disaster relief operations should monitor the information discharged by
the early warning system and should be in touch with the concerned government agencies
at regular intervals for up-to-date information on the setting-in and the progress of
disasters like cyclones and floods. This would facilitate relief agencies to get prepared and
ready for effective disaster relief operations. Agencies working in the areas should monitor
the updates from the forecasting and warning agencies and should pass the information on
to the others.
2) Liaison at the District Administration Level
Liaison with the various concerned departments at the district level in the disaster-prone
areas prior to the manifestation of the disaster would open up better opportunity for the
coordination, preparedness and relief operations. Coordination with the local government
agencies is very essential for an effective operation and for the related formalities. A
healthy relation with the government departments would also ensure the possibility to avail
the infrastructure back up available with them. Entry into a disaster zone, if declared
prohibited due to some reasons, would be easy if a healthy and positive relation is
maintained with the district administration and they are aware of the credentials and
capabilities of the organisation.
3) Planning with the “population-at-risk”
Planning with the ‘population- at- risk’ is very important in disaster preparedness and
relief activities. This would enable the identification of the local resources, capabilities and
existing facilities of the target or hit-areas. An interaction with the ‘population- at- risk’
would also generate a confidence in them to play a positive role in the relief operations
in the aftermath of a disaster. A positive attitude thus generated within the population itself
would contribute towards the disaster preparedness. It would also enable the planning of
an effective relief operation, should the need arise.
4) List of Contact Persons
List of contact persons is an important element of disaster relief preparedness. List of
responsible people from various concerned fields of operation in the probable disaster
zones will help the coordination of the post-disaster activities there. Most of the relief
agencies that rush to the disaster areas find it difficult to establish themselves during the
first few days. Local contacts will enable a smooth entry to the disaster zone. The list
of contact persons may be drawn from local emergency organisations, nodal government
officials, non-governmental and community based organisations, prominent citizens of the
locality who are interested in the issue, or those who are employed or involved with
educational, religious and social service organisations.
5) Pre-Stocking
Pre-stocking of relief materials is always useful in making relief operations effective
immediately. Pre-stocking will avoid the last minute rush to procure the materials, whichinvariably would be in short supply after a disaster and will require time to procure, pack
and transport. Materials for pre-stocking may include food grains, blankets, basic medical
supplies, clothing, utensils, tents and other back-up equipment.
6) Alternate Routes
Alternate routes for the movement of the relief materials form other parts of the district,
state or country into the disaster zone should be well worked out in advance. There is
a chance that the direct route linking the disaster site with the regional centres would be
cut off or else choked with traffic of outbound survivors or inbound relief teams.
Continuous supply chain of the relief materials to the field teams is very critical and must
be ensured through back-up routes.
7) Training And Education
Training and education is a very important component for ensuring sound disaster relief
preparedness that will help make relief operations efficient. Training and education is
essential both for the population ‘at- risk’ and the implementing personnel. The training
and education aspect will have to be of a continuing nature to keep the system operational
at its most efficient level at all times by keeping people reminded of their roles and by
training and educating any new people that join at any time.
8) Mapping
Mapping is useful for coordination as it provides spatial distribution of information items
including hazards, vulnerabilities and capacities. Maps should be prepared and maintained
in an updated state in advance, with the following information marked on them:
 Hazards
 Natural features
 Settlement details with housing and other activity areas
 Vulnerable areas (high density, poor buildings, low-lying, etc.)
 Availability of materials
Communication routes: Road/Rail/Air/Water
 Alternate routes
Areas for evacuation
Locations for potential relief camp sites
  source/alternate source for water/food

 Location for warehousing/facilities
The Maps may be prepared at the following levels:
 Village/neighbourhood level
 Taluk /mandal/ town level
 District level
State level
 Zonal level
 National level
Time Factor
Time factor is an important aspect to be considered in an immediate disaster relief
operation. An effective relief operation should be launched within hours and may need to
continue for up to a few weeks, depending on the intensity of the disaster. A speedy
operation would be more beneficial to the disaster victims since their very life and survival
is at stake after a disaster.

TYPES OF PROGRAMMES AND DISTRIBUTION
SYSTEMS::
I) Feeding Programmes
Feeding programmes aim to provide individuals with free food to make up the difference
between supplies at hand and basic needs. Where feeding is considered necessary for
particular population groups, it may be provided in the form of cooked meals or dry
rations. In practice, if feeding is necessary at all, an integrated package of measures
should be envisaged, which is appropriate to local socio-economic situation as well as
observed nutritional needs. The very clear separation, which is often made between
general, and supplementary feeding, may not always be appropriate. The feeding
programme, either the distribution of dry ration or arrangements for the distribution of
cooked food, should be limited to the shortest possible duration. The duration may be ten
days to fifteen days after the onset of disasters like floods and cyclones. For drought, a
different strategy may be adopted, whereby a long-term food support programme may be
necessary.
There are three types of feeding:
 General Feeding: Basic food/meals are provided for all members of all households
within particular population groups affected by the disaster. Locally available food
and which is more acceptable is provided. General feeding can be of two types: (1)
Distribution of dry ration, (2) Distribution of cooked food.
 Supplementary Feeding: Additional food is given to select nutritionally vulnerable
individuals to compensate for specific deficiencies. Usually, supplementary feeding is
given to children and expectant/lactating mothers. Supplementary feeding can be in
the nature of distributing high-energy biscuits/cakes or powder mix. However, proper
instructions for the consumption or dosage should be well explained to the beneficiaries
before distributing the same.
 Therapeutic Feeding: This type of feeding is usually undertaken for nutritional
rehabilitation. Special intensive feeding is provided under close medical supervision for
severely mal-nourished persons, usually children and old persons.
II) Distribution of Dry Ration
Distribution of dry ration is suitable where the disaster victims can cook themselves. It is
also good since it involves the beneficiaries and keeps them busy instead of their sitting
Distribution of Relief Material 243
idle and thinking of their trauma. It is better that the distribution is limited to ten to fifteen
days’ ration. Taking the logistic considerations, it is advisable that the ration quantity for
the whole intended period is given to the victims at a time.
The procedure for the distribution may be as follows:
 Survey door-to-door in the target area/village and distribute tokens to each household
against their acknowledgement on the beneficiaries list;
 Seek the help of local level government and local leaders while surveying. This will
help eliminate duplications and identify the genuine beneficiaries;
 Ask the beneficiaries to collect the ration against production of the token handed
over to them, collectively from the distribution point at an appointed time and place;
 Ensure that the distribution is made in the presence of a local government worker
deputed by the District Administration. This is to facilitate transparency with the
community as well as government authorities;
 Enforce strict crowd management while distribution takes place. If necessary seek the
assistance of police;
 Distribution sites may be a public institution in the area, centrally located or the base
camp office.
III) Distribution of Cooked Food
Logistic and management problems are more while attempting the distribution of cooked
food to the disaster victims. It is always a healthy practice if victims themselves can
organise the cooking and distribution process for their community. Distribution of cooked
food should be resorted to only when there is no capacity in the families to cook their
food, and it should be continued for the shortest possible time. The procedure may be
as follows:
A) Where community cooking/feeding is possible:
 Organise the disaster victims to formulate a committee and assess the food/cooking
requirements for the community to be fed;
 Concentrate on simple diet consisting of food items that are easily available in the
market or at least in the district headquarters;
 Assess the number of days for which food aid is necessary and supply the
community with at least 5 to 7 days of food stock and cooking requirements at a
time;
 Cooking vessels may be purchased and provided to the committee. The community
may use these vessels in the future for common purposes;
 Enforce strict supervision in regard to hygiene during cooking of the food and its
distribution. Enforce discipline and crowd management systems;
 Ensure availability of good drinking water and maintain all sanitary/hygiene aspects in
the kitchens;
 Open the kitchen for feeding at pre-determined timings only; and
244 Disaster Management
 Food to be cooked should be on a thorough calculation of the required quantity in
order to avoid wastage.
B) Where community cooking and feeding is not possible:
 Cook the food in a central kitchen and transport the same to the community;
 Food may be transported in bulk in vessels and distributed to the victims in the
vessels they bring;
 Ensure that the vessels used for transportation of the food are properly closed during
the transportation to avoid contamination;
 Also ensure that the vessels the beneficiaries bring to collect the food are clean. If
necessary, arrange a drum with water to wash them before collecting their food;
 The food may be packed into required packets and the packets transported to the
community and distributed to each individual;
 Seek the assistance of the community representatives in the cooking, transportation
and distribution process;
 Cooked food should be distributed at the earliest to the beneficiaries, to avoid
spoilage and bacterial contamination. It should be ensured that the beneficiaries
consume the food soon;
 If packed in individual packets, the packets should be of good quality material and
packing done in very clean environment;
 Every food packet should have a uniform quantity of food, as per planned ration
rate;
 It is always advisable to prepare one type of food, avoiding varieties in order to help
easy management of cooking process. However, it should be a different type of food
at the next distribution round;
 Records have to be maintained as to how many people benefited from the feeding;
a beneficiary list may be developed.
IV) Distribution of Standard Relief Material
Post-disaster material distribution should be very appropriate and need based. Instead of
doing many rounds and giving random items on ad-hoc basis, complete family kits should
be prepared and distributed in one go. One standard relief set usually consists of the
following materials:
 Clothes for adult male and female, appropriate to local climate and culture;
 Clothes for male and female children, appropriate to local climate and culture;
 Mats and blanket/bed-sheets depending on local weather;
 Basic utensils for cooking, storing and eating;
Tent or tarpaulin if needed;
 Dry rations to last for two weeks;
Distribution of Relief Material 245
 Essential commodities like torch, footwear, storage bags;
 Soap, and toiletries based on needs and local practices; locally appropriate materials
for women’s sanitary needs; and
 Special provisions for families with infants.
All the above items are packed into one set and handed over to each household. The
distribution process may be as follows:
 All the affected families in the selected disaster area should be considered for the
relief assistance, irrespective of caste, creed and religion.
 The distribution process should not be influenced by religious or political motivations.
 Staff and volunteers will do door-to-door survey of the area affected by the disaster.
Assistance of the local officer and local leaders/elders should be sought while
undertaking the survey. Identification of the beneficiaries along with the help of local
leaders will eliminate possible duplications and identify the genuine victims. It will also
avoid complaints of biases.
 If there are doubts or complaints, names of the beneficiaries should be verified with
the latest voters-list or with the village/municipal list at the village/municipal/ district
office.
 In cases where the group is very large or confusion is anticipated in the distribution
process, a distribution token system should be used. After verification of the name
of the beneficiary, her/his name should be written in the beneficiaries list with all the
particulars required therein. Her/ his signature should be obtained in the list against
her/ his name and a serially numbered token issued. The token should be countersigned
by the issuing officer.
 The beneficiary should be requested to collect the relief packet from the distribution
point at the pre-determined time against token issued to him/her.
 At the distribution point, the relief packet should be issued or released to the
beneficiary against the token produced. The token may be collected and cancelled
to avoid double distribution against one token.
 As a general policy, either all equally deserving victims at a distribution center should
get relief, or none of them.

SEARCH, RESCUE AND EVACUATION

Search, rescue and evacuation processes need to be carried out immediately after a

disaster strikes a certain area or building. These are the most immediate critical operations

that are usually performed by the local volunteers, voluntary organisations and the

emergency agencies. Light Search and Rescue is a procedure carried out at primary

stages, initially to find out persons with injuries in lightly damaged buildings, or even

without any injuries and needing assistance, and to help them exit. If the condition

worsens and the local groups are not able to control the situation, then the specialist

groups within emergency agencies have to be called in for professional help, and at times

even the Defence Forces including the Army, the Navy, the Air Force and the Coast

Guard are called on for help.

Primarily, Search and Rescue Operations are undertaken to save the maximum possible

number of victims who are trapped in an area affected by a disaster. The basic aim of

all such operations is to ensure the survival of the maximum possible number of affected

people. A plan is worked out with the help of local people through surveys and then

appropriate steps are taken by the various teams involved to carry out the operations.

Besides physical rescue, the aim is also a systematic and organised approach in a post

-disaster situation riddled with chaos and confusion.

SIGNIFICANCE OF SEARCH AND RESCUE

Search and rescue, often known by the acronym SAR, is the process of identifying the

location of disaster victims who may be trapped or isolated, and bringing them to safety

and providing them with medical attention after a disaster strikes.

Search and rescue generally involves the local people who are well versed with the local

terrain and can be instrumental in searching and accessing the trapped victims. SAR teams

rely on sniffer dogs that are specially trained to smell out human beings trapped under the

rubble. Heavy machines such as cranes and earthmovers are used to remove heavy

rubble; and special equipment to delicately remove fallen structural elements and reach out

inside heaps of rubble with visual or sound equipment for locating survivors.

In case of floods and cyclones, boats and helicopters are used to carry out the search

and rescue operations by forming teams and carrying out SAR operations in the entire

area systematically, each team covering its assigned sectors.

After the search, rescue and evacuation, some important steps are required to be taken

in order to provide relief to the evacuees.

Prime amongst these are:

 Medical Aid

 Water and food

 Shelter

 Temporary subsistence supplies

 Health and sanitation

 Information, and

 Security.

PHASES OF SAR

SAR is carried out for different categories of affected people depending on the

complexities of the processes involved. This is illustrated as follows:

1) The immediate stage is searching and rescuing people with injuries among people

trapped in the affected area that we see at first sight.

2) The second stage is the rescue of persons whom we are able to contact but are

unable to reach. These are people who may be trapped under heaps of rubble from

a collapsed building, or people stuck on trees or high-rise buildings, or trapped inside

basements.

3) The third stage includes searching those areas where survivors are likely to be

trapped generally. These are called likely survival points.

4) The fourth stage is the last stage in which debris leading to likely survival points is

cleared.

LOGISTICS AND METHODS

SAR kits should ideally be kept in central locations in areas of vulnerable buildings. Local

trained personnel can make use of these kits should a disaster strike the area. A typical

SAR kit will comprise the following items:

 Evacuation map of the building or area

Hammer

Screw driver (6" flat)

 Axe

 24" Crow bar

 Spade

 Pickaxe

 50-foot rope

 Torch

 Spare battery cells

 Hard shoes or Gum Boots

 Helmet

 Hand gloves

 Dust Mask

Simple Rescue Methods

Rescue can be carried out ideally by using rescue equipment but also by ordinary

methods when equipment is not available.

For rescuing an affected individual, there are two types of methods: Single Person

Methods and Two Person Methods.

A) Single Person Methods

Firemen’s Lift

This method is used when the affected person is unconscious and only one rescuer is

available for carrying out rescue work. In this method, the rescuer first makes the affected

person lie on his or her the abdomen. Then he uses both his hands to lift the affected

person by his armpits. He holds the right hand of the affected person with his left hand

and with his free hand he holds the affected person’s right leg. Now the rescuer lifts the

affected person with both his hands and positions him or her in such a manner that his

or her waist lies just above the neck of rescuer.

 Human Crutch

This method is used when affected person has an injury in one of his/her leg. In this

method, the rescuer first ties the injured leg of the affected person with his opposite leg

with a handkerchief. If the affected person’s left leg is hurt, the rescuer will tie this leg

with his own right leg. The rescuer holds the affected person’s waist with his hand and

then they both can walk slowly with the rescuer supporting the affected person’s injured

leg with his own leg.

 Pick a back

This method is used when the affected person has an injury in his or her leg and is not

able to walk long distances, but can support himself or herself with his or her hand. In

this method, the rescuer first gets down on one knee and allows the affected person to

saddle on his back. The rescuer then holds the affected person at the thighs and the

affected person encircles the rescuer’s neck for support.

Staircase drag

This method is used when one has to rescue an unconscious person from a floor higher

than the ground floor. In this method, the affected person is laid down on his back and

his hands and feet are tied with a handkerchief. The rescuer holds the casualty’s armpits

and slowly drags him or her down the stairs head, first.

 Firemen’s Crawl

This method is used when the affected person is trapped inside a smoke filled area and

is unconscious. The rescuer first ties the hands of the casualty and then goes astride the

casualty. The rescuer inserts his head in the loop made by the casualty’s hands. Then by

pushing his hand and foot against the ground, he can drag the casualty to a safer place.

 Tow Drag

This method is used when the affected person is lying in such an area where there is very

little space to carry out the rescue. The affected person may or may not be unconscious.

In this rescue method, the rescuer inserts his feet into the casualty’s armpits and then pulls

the casualty out of the confinement area. After taking the casualty out, the rescuer can

lift the casualty with any appropriate method.

B) Two Person Methods

 Fore and Aft

This method is used when the affected person is having an abdominal injury. For carrying

out this method, two rescuers are required. In this method, the affected person is laid

down flat on his/her back. One of the rescuers holds the casualty from the armpits while

the second rescuer holds the legs. Then they both lift the casualty and in this way they

can shift the casualty to a safer place.

 Two Hand Seat

This method is used when the affected person is injured in one leg. For carrying out this

method two rescuers face each other on either side of the affected person. They both

bend and place their inside arms under the casualty’s back just below the shoulders, raise

him and put their outside arms under his thighs, holding each other’s hands with a hook

grip. The affected person can place his/her hands around rescuers’ necks.

Search, Rescue and Evacuation 215

 Three Hand Seat Method

This method is used when the rescuers need one hand free to support the affected

person’s injured leg. In this method, if the affected person’s left leg is injured, the rescuer

on the right grasps his own left wrist with his right hand & the other rescuer’s left wrist

with his left hand. The second rescuer will hold the right wrist of first rescuer keeping his

left hand free to support the casualty’s injured leg or any other medical equipment.

 Four Hand Seat Method

This method is used for an affected person who is heavy and who can support her/ his

self with his/ her hand. In this case, each of the two rescuers grasps his left wrist with

his right hand, grasping the other rescuer’s right wrist with his left hand.

Carry Chair

This method is useful to lift a handicapped or a very old person. The person to be lifted

is placed on a chair, and then, the chair can be carried to a safer area.

 Knots and Lines

A rope is an important part of SAR operations. It can act as a guideline during searching;

it can be used to lift equipment during rescue work or while carrying out fire fighting, and

it can be used for rescuing people. Various knots and lines are used, which are mentioned

below:

– Over hand knot or thumb knot

It is used as a stopper knot. Sometimes it is also known as first aid knot because it is

used to tie the bandage.

– Figure of Eight

It is used to stop a line running through a sheave or a pulley.

– Reep Knot

It is used to join two ropes of the same diameter or thickness.

– Chair Knot

It is used to lower an unconscious casualty.

– Half Hitch

It is used to hoist round object.

– Claw Hitch

It is used to secure a line to a round object.

– Timber Hitch

It is a simple knot with several loops on it, which is used to hoist any odd heavy object.

– Black Wall Hitch

It is used to secure a line to the shank of a hook.

216 Disaster Management

– Draw Hitch

It is used as temporary fastening when we require the knot to be released immediately.

– Single Sheet Bend

It is used to join two ropes of different thickness.

– Double Sheet Bend

It is similar to single sheet bend but with a double hitch round.

– Carrick Bend

It is used to join two lines without the knots forming an obstruction to pass round an

object.

– Sheep Shank

It is used to shorten the length of a line or to avoid any damaged part of the line.

– Single Bowline

It is used for various miscellaneous purposes.

– Round Turn and Two Half Hitch

It is used to secure a line to round objects.

– Cats Paw

It can be used to hoist a hose or a similar object.

– Running Bowline

It consists of a bowline, with the standing line passing through the bight of the line, to

form a running noose.

– Bowline on Bight

It is used to lower a stretcher or an unconscious person.

 Rescue Using Chair Knot

The following safety precautions need to be taken while lowering a casualty with a line:

 Always use a guideline to prevent the casualty from striking with building wall;

 The line should pass hand to hand, and not through hands;

 The line should run over a wooden block or some sack under the point of contact

of line and building;

 Check the area for required space;

 Insert the shorter loop into casualty’s armpits and longer loop into the casualty’s

knees;

 While lowering the casualty assign someone on watch below the casualty.

DISASTER MITIGATION

Disaster mitigation is defined as “Measures aimed at reducing the impact of natural orman-made disasters in a nation or community”(Carter, 1991).

The United Nations declared the decade of the 1990s as the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction. The aim behind such a move was to mobilise concerted efforts on the part of the international community with active participation from the UNDP and the UNDRO towards substantial reduction in disaster-related losses round the World. These agencies will encourage and assist national governments and non-governmental agencies to tackle disaster related issues, “through projects focused directly on reducing the impacts of hazards and through incorporation of risk awareness as part of the normal operation of development projects”(Sharma, 1998).

Disaster mitigation is an evolving/ developing science. Its rudimentary development could be traced back to the mid 19th century when governments undertook to eradicate the threat of epidemics like tuberculosis, typhoid, cholera, dysentery, small pox and other deadly diseases that were claiming lives in an endemic manner around the world. The subsequent campaigns of governments against diseases followed realisation of the fact that
diseases were controllable and preventable, and ‘sanitation’ was a significant activity therein, in that it was crucial in controlling the spread of any disease or preventing its onslaught. What followed could be termed as a “sanitary revolution” in that considerable
budgetary allocations were committed to specific activities, like cleaning, disposal of waste, public facilities etc., besides impetus to R&D in treatment and vaccination against these ‘hazards.’ It demanded considerable administrative reform along with resource
commitment on the part of governments towards public health measures, in that governance thereafter had to proceed with a fresh perspective, vis a vis diseases and craft adequate policy responses to tackle the threats involved. Evidently, there has been considerable success achieved in that endeavour in that many dreaded diseases like plague, small pox, etc., have been eradicated; though countries still have to carry on with sustained efforts to achieve the same level of success with other diseases.
Notably, the change in approach was brought about by demystification of diseases following understanding of the phenomena underlying epidemics. Similarly, natural hazards
have hitherto been treated with a fatalistic approach. Currently, there is a revision of attitude/approach, as the ‘mystery’ of natural hazards is being increasingly unraveled through exploratory research. Accordingly, governments are increasingly investing in disaster mitigation, preparedness and prevention since there is growing belief that tangible gains can/will result from such investment. Scientific community as also social scientists are
engaged in understanding hazards from both technocratic and social perspectives, which imparts a holistic understanding to the phenomena of disasters; hence the development of capability to tackle them through adequate policy responses (Sharma, 1998).
In India, distinct shift in policy responses towards mitigation and prevention is now evident. As per Dhar (2002), earlier the approach was geared towards crisis management. The famine codes, scarcity relief manuals and calamity action plans, wherever these
existed, enabled administration to fight emergencies and provide relief, post occurrence of a disaster event. Policy shift towards pre-disaster preparedness planning began in the late seventies, and gradually thereafter, deliberate attempts on the part of the government towards an integrated approach towards disaster management has been discernible. It began with drought proofing wherein considerable success was achieved. The Central
Water Commission evolved a model bill for flood plain zoning, though success in this regard was limited. The main reason was that State governments were lackadaisical or constrained in enacting the bill and complying with the requirements. Now with added
emphasis, post-Yokohama, and regrettable experiences with disasters like the Bhuj Earthquake and Orissa Cyclone, renewed impetus has been provided to mitigation planning. The process is expected to proceed further along desirable lines in the future,
which augurs well for disaster preparedness in particular and administrative reform improvement in general which is imperative for disaster management. For instance, granting more say to specialists has been a much discussed reform issue over the years. Disaster management as also rural and urban development demand specialist competence, for which, organisational hierarchy would need to be reconsidered/reviewed.


DISASTER MITIGATION AND PREPAREDNESS::
Disaster mitigation embraces actions taken in advance of a disaster to reduce its effects on a community. When used in this sense, mitigation includes those actions, which are often categorised as being preparedness measures, which means, preparedness is a part
of mitigation. However, a distinction is often made between mitigation and preparedness whereby: Mitigation refers to long-term risk reduction measures, which are intended to minimise
the effects of a hazard; for example, dam construction is considered an activity that mitigates the effects of droughts. Hence, “Mitigation involves not only saving lives and injury and reducing property losses, but also reducing the adverse consequences of natural hazards to economic activities and social institutions.”
Preparedness is concerned with measures taken immediately before and after a hazard event, for example, relating to evacuation plans, health and safety, search and rescue etc. Hence the crucial issue would be logistics for which advanced preparations are necessary.
Preparedness assumes that certain groups of people or property will remain vulnerable and that preparedness would be necessary to address the consequences of a hazardous event’s occurrence.
This distinction between the two terms provides a useful division of actions because it helps to highlight mitigation as a long-term process, aimed at addressing the explanatory factors, which convert hazards to disasters. In comparison, preparedness does not aim to
correct the causes of vulnerability, which place communities at risk in the first place, rather to tackle them through speedy and effective response; hence the emphasis on readiness in this regard.
According to Coburn Sspence, Pomonis (1994 in the DMTP, UNDP), however, not much should be read into the distinction. Mitigation is defined as “a collective term used to encompass all activities undertaken in anticipation of the occurrence of a potentially disastrous event, including long term preparedness and risk reduction measures…. It has occasionally been defined to include post-disaster response, which makes it equivalent
to disaster management.”


Significance of Mitigation::

Effective measures for mitigation involve understanding of hazards and the likely damages in the event of a disaster. For example, in earthquakes most fatalities (almost 75 per cent) are caused due to building collapses, hence prevention would demand earthquake proofing of structures and retrofitting (engineering modifications) of existing ones. In floods, most deaths reportedly occur due to drowning in turbulent currents; hence, prevention strategy
would require keeping people out of the track of potential water flows or by preventing the flows from occurring. Mitigation saves the economy from losses. Industry and agriculture suffer heavily from earthquakes (damaged infrastructure) and droughts,
respectively. Besides, these are interdependent sectors, which means agro-based industries suffer if agricultural produce goes down and industries in general, if communications,
power, labour supply et al get affected (Sharma, 1998).
Mitigation is usually not given the same level of priority as preparedness or recovery. This is because there is a tendency on the part of both economists and politicians to view Disaster Mitigation 173 disasters and development in terms of “trade-offs,” with needed resources being diverted from development towards disaster mitigation. The attitude can be expressed as, “we are too concerned with day to day activities to worry about disaster problems that may not occur during our lifetime.” This is reinforced when the problems with mitigation elements are examined; when will the disaster occur? Do we know where it will be? What percentage of resources shall we spend? Therefore mitigation of disasters is often not perceived as important to the public or individual domain as other issues such as economic development, social advancement, health care systems, etc., are. Yet, disasters undermine development efforts and waste resources, which have been allocated to different sectors. They interrupt ongoing programmes and divert resources
from their intended use and beneficiaries. Hence, “When disaster-proneness is well known, failure to factor it into planning represents a serious mismanagement of resources” (Alceira Kremer, Managing Natural Disasters and the Environment, World
Bank, 1991). Hence dovetailing of disaster mitigation into development planning saves adhoc measures, which only results in less gain and much waste. Not only can mitigation
protect these other important sectors, but also, if correctly carried out, can often be justified as being cost-effective in protecting other development gains. Mitigation is therefore, a process justified and necessary for the protection it offers to a society’s development as a result of avoidance of damage and losses. It requires systematic and logical planning processes to ensure that resources allocated adequately reduce risk, and protect development. To do so, an understanding has to be reached with regard to what the effects of a disaster are likely to be and what level of protection is
required. From an economic standpoint it appears logical that the amount of mitigation, which is warranted, is that amount that can be bought for less than the expected costs of the losses.
However, it is important to note that acceptance of this principle depends on properly identifying all the costs, direct (death, injuries, capital stock and inventories), indirect (lost income, employment and services from lost production) and secondary (decreases in
economic growth, balance of trade deficits, etc.) and those associated with preparedness and emergency relief. Equally important but harder to assess are the immeasurable costs
associated with the political, social and psychological effects of traumatic events and their conversion into real losses.
Although the initiation of mitigation should be before a disaster occurs, the major opportunity to develop and implement mitigation measures occurs as the “window of opportunity” after a major disaster has taken place as politicians and public officials, in
light of public displeasure and the exigency of the situation are ready to allocate resources for the task. This is usually a short-lived period before interest and attention lessen. Therefore the opportunity should be rapidly taken up and optimised. For that, dovetailing of disaster planning with mainstream development planning is imperative.

RESOURCE ANALYSIS AND MOBILISATION

Resources are a basic requirement for any organisation. However, some organisations donot have systematic processes for analysing resource requirements, flows and mobilisation options. Such exercises are useful for making clear and sustainable work plans, which have to be based on planned and sustained resource flows. There are different kinds ofresources, and various options for sourcing them. Traditionally, disaster management work has been based on government or donor funds. Currently, such resources are drying up and new avenues have to be explored. These include, local resource mobilisation and corporate social responsibility.

There are various types of resources required for disaster management. Financial and Human resources are the primary ones. Financial resources, in fact, form the single largest concern of organisations as they in turn enable acquisition of other secondary
resources required for operational purposes. Financial resources come from various sources, including, government grants, loans, institutional grants, and private donations, product and service charges and mobilisation on the part of communities. Government
grants are based on thematic areas of work, for which different government departments have schemes for grant making. These include funding of NGOs and community based organisations through the rural development department, health department etc.. Loans come in the form of soft loans with low interest rates for purposes such as livelihood support to vulnerable and disaster affected communities

Disaster relief programmes are run jointly by the State and Central governments. Disaster Management is primarily the responsibility of the States. Funds are available to the States from the Calamity Relief Fund (CRF) and the National Calamity Contingency Fund
(NCCF). The Calamity Relief Fund was set up on the recommendations of the Ninth Finance Commission though subsequent Commissions have determined the funding pattern
that establishes the relative share of the Centre and the State towards calamity relief. The break up presently is 75:25per cent between Centre and States, respectively. The Eleventh Finance Commission recommended setting up the National Calamity Contingency Fund (NCCF) replacing the earlier National Fund for Calamity Relief (NFCR). There have been several improvements in the new scheme. In comparison with the earlier existing Margin Money Scheme, the States now get a higher assistance from the Central Government for relief expenditure and the response of the State governments to natural calamities can potentially be quicker than before. The CRF scheme gives more autonomy, more responsibility and also assigns greater accountability for disaster response activities (Das and Jha, 2004). The Twelfth Finance Commission has recommended continuing the scheme of Calamity
Relief Fund (CRF) in its present form with contributions from the Centre and States in the ratio of 75:25. The size of the fund worked out at Rs. 21, 333 crore for the period 2005-10. The outgo from the fund is to be replenished by way of collection of National
Calamity Contingent Duty and levy of surcharges. The definition of natural calamity is to include landslides, avalanches, cloudbursts and pest attacks also. Hence, now the CRF shall be used only for meeting the expenditure for providing immediate relief to the
victims of cyclone, drought, earthquake, fire, flood, tsunami, hailstorm, landslide, avalanche, cloud burst and pest attack. Provision of disaster preparedness and mitigation is to be
classified plan expenditure and not calamity relief.As spelt out in the scheme for the constitution and administration of the Calamity Relief Fund, operative from the financial year 2005-06, the Calamity Relief Fund is constituted in the Public Account and classified under the head “8235-General and Other Reserve
Funds-111 Calamity Relief Fund” in the accounts of the State Government concerned and is to be invested as per provisions laid down in this regard. The accretions to the Fund together with the income earned on the investment of the Fund shall, till contrary
instructions are issued by Government of India, be invested in one or more of the Resource Analysis and Mobilisation 151
152 Disaster Management following instruments:
a) Central Government dated Securities
b) Auctioned Treasury Bills
c) Interest earning deposits and certificates of deposits with Scheduled Commercial
Banks;
d) Interest earning deposits in Co-operative Banks;
The investment of the funds is carried out by the branch of the Reserve Bank of India (having Banking Department) at the headquarters of the State, or a Bank designated by
the RBI. In the case of Jammu & Kashmir and Sikkim, their bankers shall carry out these functions. The Accountants General of India and the Comptroller and Auditor general of India do the accounting and auditing respectively (Ministry of Finance, 2005-06). A State-level Committee (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Committee’) is constituted by the
State Government to administer the CRF, by issue of a suitable notification in this behalf. A copy of the notification is furnished to the Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Home
Affairs. Composition of State Level Committees
The Chief Secretary to the State Government is the ex-officio  Chairperson of the Committee. The Committee consists of officials who are normally connected with relief work and experts in various fields in the State affected by natural calamities. Sub-Committee
The State Governments and/or the State level Committees may constitute sub-committees as may be considered necessary by them in connection with the work of the Committee. Functions of the State Level Committee The Committee is to decide on all matters connected with the financing of the relief expenditure from CRF.
The Committee will arrange to obtain the contributions from the concerned Governments, administer the CRF and invest the accretions to the CRF in accordance with the norms
approved by the Government of India from time to time. The Committee is responsible to ensure that the money drawn from the Calamity Relief Fund is actually utilised for the
purposes for which the CRF has been set up, and only on items of expenditure and as per norms contained in the guidelines issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs. The accretions to the CRF, together with the income earned on the investments of the Fund,
are used by the Committee to meet items of expenditure covered by the norms contained in the guidelines. No further financial assistance (beyond the Central Government’s yearly contribution to the CRF) is ordinarily available for the purpose.
All administrative and miscellaneous expenses of the Committee shall be borne by the State Government under its normal budgetary provisions and not from the CRF (Ministry
of Finance, 2005-06: Scheme for Constitution and Administration of the Calamity Relief Fund).
It is being realised, however, that investments are required on a more sustained basis in infrastructure development to reduce expenditure on calamity relief. In other words, there
Resource Analysis and Mobilisation 153 has to be a dovetailing of disaster mitigation with development planning. It is also true that
the amount of resource available for disaster mitigation and preparedness work is far less than the amount available for relief and recovery. Since mitigation and preparedness are non-events, which means that if mitigation and preparedness are successful then there will be no visible disaster; there is less interest in these areas. It is widely recognised that a “stitch in time saves nine”, and that every rupee invested in disaster mitigation and preparedness saves many rupees in relief and rehabilitation. Still, there is very little media interest, public involvement, and political will towards disaster mitigation and preparedness. It is therefore difficult to mobilise resources for these activities. To counter this limitation,
disaster mitigation and preparedness organisations are making increasing efforts to tap developmental resources on the plea of ‘safe development’ or ‘risk reduction’. However, it is still a difficult task and requires much effort.
The World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) have developed a proactive policy in this regard. The World Bank seeks to attain the objective through the
following measures:
 Promote sustainable development policies to reduce losses from natural disasters;
 Encourage risk management in member countries as integral aspects of planning and budgeting;
 Encourage research in long-term consequences of disasters and how cost sharing and cost recovery affect mitigation;
 Raise awareness of the benefits of disaster mitigation and how constraints could be removed in its application; and
 Promote mitigation as a standard part of quality auditing process with the project cycle in each case. For this purpose the Prevention Unit has produced an information toolkit for World Bank personnel.
Out of efforts of the World Bank, a coalition of governments, international organisations, academic institutions, civil society and private sector has emerged. The Provention Consortium has taken upon itself the task/responsibility of promoting the aforesaid
objectives. The mission is, supporting developing countries in understanding risks and instituting mitigation programmes, especially targeting vulnerabilities of poorest segments in
these societies.
The Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) has also taken a proactive stance in this regard. As per the new policy announced/crafted in 1999, member states would be
encouraged to provide for vulnerability reduction programmes as an essential requirement
by the following means:
 Establish new financial mechanisms (loans or refundable or non-refundable technical cooperation services) to help countries undertake and strengthen disaster prevention
and risk management actions;
 Engage in a dialogue with member countries on issues such as risk assessment, risk management strategies and the use of available IDB instruments for financing investments related to natural disasters;
 Incorporate risk reduction in the project cycle, including risk analysis and reduction in programming and in project identification, design, implementation and evaluation.
154 Disaster Management As part of this project, a series of sectoral checklists for disaster risk management
are being developed to support the drafting of projects in various sectors;  Identify focal points for disaster management at the institutional level in order
to support countries in preparing risk reduction programmes and coordinating prevention and response activities; and Build partnerships for the establishment of an integrated information and
response network that can assist in coordinating the preparation of pre-investment studies, as well as investing in prevention and reconstruction and establishing interagency
response protocols.
Accordingly, the salient features of the disaster management policy adopted in India in the context of the ADB (2005) project report are:
 Recognition of linkages between disaster management and development; Connecting of specific programmes like the Drought Prone Area Programme (DPAP), the Desert Development Programme (DDP), and the Wasteland Development
Programme for managing natural disasters;
 Emphasis on forecasting and warning using advanced technology;
 Contingency agricultural planning;
 Ensuring accessibility to food grains;
 Preparedness and Mitigation through specific plan programmes;
Disaster Management as a continuous and integrated process;
 Setting up of National Centre for Disaster Management (NCDM);
Setting up of disaster management faculties in states;
 Programmes for community participation and public awareness; and Observing natural disaster reduction day.
The Building Material and Technology Promotion Council (BMTPC) in India has come up
with the following recommendations in this regard:
 The extra cost involved in disaster resistant measures provided in new constructionswill automatically form part of the estimated costs, hence form part of development
cost.
 The funding norms of financing institutions should recognise the need of disaster resistance and should cover the same in their funding packages with mandatory requirement of safety from  disasters, as per the stipulation of standards.
 Upgrading the disaster resistance of buildings may actually require extra budgeting and will have to be recognised and included as a separate budget item under plan
head of the Central and State governments.
 Since systematic efforts towards disaster preparedness and mitigation will reduce the need under the category of ‘Relief’ some percentage out of the crisis relief fund may be earmarked for creating awareness, conducting studies in building typologies,

VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS AND RISK ASSESSMENT

Vulnerability is the extent to which people or buildings are likely to suffer harm from a disaster, while risk is the likely quantified losses that would result considering the probability and intensity of a hazard. As such, risk also includes an element of hazard, the natural or man-made event that can lead to a disaster if there is high vulnerability. In order to initiate programmes for reducing risk in any community, it is necessary to understand specificvulnerabilities and to weigh the resilience against the threats present in the area. This involves a series of steps, the major ones being the assessment and analysis of vulnerability and risk. This should influence public policy for immediate and long-term preparedness, mitigation and vulnerability reduction. Vulnerability and risk assessments are both science and art since quantitative assessments of probability of risks and likely damage are attempted usingmathematical techniques. Socio-economic study with a view to studying communities and specific factors that make them vulnerable, is attempted using the insights provided by such assessments and effective transformation attempted through policy. It is especially important to recognise that this social vulnerability is much more than the likelihood of buildings collapsing or infrastructure getting damaged. It is about the characteristics of people, and the differential impacts of a disaster on people.

UNDERSTANDING VULNERABILITY

To conduct vulnerability analysis, we need a clear idea about what Vulnerability is. Vulnerability is defined in the United Nations Disaster Management Training Programme (1994) as the “degree of loss to a given element at risk (or set of elements) resulting from a given hazard and a given severity level.” The concept of vulnerability can be assessed at various levels and from diverse perspectives. Both physical scientists and social scientists are involved in conceptualising vulnerability. There has also been growing specialisation in the respective fields of hazard and vulnerability assessment. While specialisation is welcome, there is an inherent danger of increased isolation among respective specialists in physical science and social science streams and even across the two broad categorizations in that even within the broad specialisation of physical sciences and social sciences, perspectives are likely to differ with respect to emphasis areas as per super/sub specialisations. Hence an engineer or a scientist/researcher in related fields is likely to perceive vulnerability more in terms of Risk, while a climate scientist, in terms of the likelihood of occurrence and impacts of weather and climate related events. The biophysical concept of vulnerability is akin to the concept of ‘Risk’ while the social science perspective defines it more in terms of socio economic parameters. Experts from the following fields are involved in study and analyses of vulnerability; climate science, policy development studies, economics, disaster management, health, and social sciences along with others. According to Nick Brooks (2003), each of these relates only themselves to a partial understanding of vulnerability. There is a need to rise above specialisations and take an across- the- board, interdisciplinary and cross-cultural view of the issue of vulnerability to present a more complete and holistic analysis of vulnerability for meaningful interest articulation and policy formulation in the area. Physical vulnerability has also to be understood in the context of political conflict, issues of class struggle, unequal access to power and social backwardness to formulate comprehensive vulnerability reduction approach. The same should be attempted by integrating, through a conceptual model, through research, these different and diverse “traditions in a coherent yet flexible fashion.”The attempt on the part of all involved specialists/academics is to get closer to the root causes of vulnerability. The closer the analysis gets to the fundamental causes rather than the symptomatic aspects of vulnerability, the more difficult and complex vulnerabilities get/are in fact to address. However, the more fundamental the vulnerability addressed, the more hazard-resistant the vulnerable group is likely to become as a result.

In most vulnerability analysis methods, there is a clear sense of comparability and convergence in the analysis of vulnerability factors (encompassing the different components of vulnerability discussed above). There is also a vivid realisation that vulnerability conditions are themselves determined by processes and factors that are apparently quite different from a hazard, which is mistakenly held singularly responsible for losses. These root causes, or institutional factors, or more general, political, economic and social processes and priorities are highlighted in much of the vulnerability analysis work that has been done. As peoples’ livelihood and wider political and economic processes determine opportunities and their patterns of assets and incomes, vulnerability to disasters is also a function of this wider environment. All the vulnerability variables are inherently connected with peoples’ livelihoods (lower vulnerability is likely when livelihoods are adequate and sustainable), and their innate resilience related with issues such as poverty (in most disasters) since, it is mostly the poor who are disproportionately more at risk than other groups, and much less capable of recovering easily.
Related concepts are sensitivity, resilience and adaptive capacity. Sensitivity refers to the degree of proneness of a particular ‘element at risk’ to a particular threat, such as climate risk, land degradation etc. Sensitivity would refer to the degree of change that would be brought about as response in one variable that is correlated to the other. Assessing Sensitivity would involve working out the correlation. Resilience is explained as fortitude in the face of a potential threat. In one word, it means resistance. Adaptive capacity refers to preparedness through an ancillary way in that it means how much absorption capacity is here or is needed by policy intervention in this regard, specifically what, in order to withstand natural changes and how to adapt to them. For example, retreat of glaciers in the Himalayas due to global warming, or changes in harvest seasons that could be possible (grain suffers due to early summer) would need to be tackled through adaptation measures such as resistant varieties of seeds, manures, innovative irrigation techniques, etc.
To understand differential vulnerability of different segments of population in a given area exposed in the same measure to a given hazard, it is important to inquire into the differential causes of vulnerability. It encompasses poverty, marginalisation, or other deprivations that accentuate the vulnerability to climate risks or specific biological hazards that affect particularly the sections of the population who are disadvantaged, ‘at risk’, or in other ways in need. Vulnerability involves a predictive quality since it is a way of conceptualising what may happen to an identifiable population under conditions of particular hazards. Precisely, because it should be predictive, vulnerability analysis (VA) should be capable of directing development aid interventions, as also public

policy interventions on the part of governments seeking ways to protect and enhance peoples’ livelihoods, assist vulnerable people in their own attempts at self-protection, and support institutions in their role of disaster prevention.

 VULNERABILITY AND CAPACITY

There appears to be two separate approaches to Vulnerability Analysis. The first conceives of them being the two ends of a spectrum, so that people who have a high degree of vulnerability are low in capacity and vice versa. In this approach, there is no ‘separate set of factors’ that should be considered as vulnerability factors or capacities or capabilities; there are simply scales on which high levels of capacity axiomatically indicate low level of vulnerability. The second perceives them as two distinct or only partly inter-related sets of factors since capacity might include institutional membership, group cohesion, or even literacy, which positions people better to cope with adverse conditions, in relation to others, vulnerabilities notwithstanding. The implication is that some capacities may not always be the opposite of vulnerabilities, in that being part of a particular network may be a capacity, or a denial of capacity to others, as is the case with cohesion norms based on caste behaviour in India. This is not to construe that the term vulnerability cannot imply capacities as scalar ‘opposites’. Different conception is simply purported to facilitate conceptual understanding of vulnerability, not to confuse it in any way.
The use of the concept of capabilities emerged in response to the supposedly negative connotation of the term vulnerability, and has been especially stressed in the World Disasters Report, 2004. Instead of Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis, or VCAs, the term employed now is CVA or Capacity and Vulnerability Analysis, signifying the change in approach from vulnerability reduction to capacity enhancement, as policy focus/emphasis. It has been realised that a lot more effectiveness in disaster response and mitigation could be achieved if the emphasis shifted from tackling vulnerabilities singly, to reinforcing capacities that enable communities to fight disasters and recover after suffering losses from any such event. It was suggested that to speak of people as being vulnerable was to treat them as passive victims and ignore the many capacities that make them competent to resist hazards through self-help.
If we accept that measuring vulnerability includes any factor or process that can alter the ‘exposure’ of a person or household to risk, then capacities can also be considered as factors that lead to greater danger (vulnerability) when they are low, and reduced danger when they are high. As per Palakudiyil and Todd (2003), Vulnerability/Capacity could be physical/material, social/organisational/ or motivational/attitudinal.
Physical/Material Vulnerability and Capacity: The most visible area of vulnerability is physical/material deprivation. Variables include land, climate, environment, health, skills and labour, infrastructure, housing, finance and technologies to which the poor are denied access. Poor people suffer from crises more often than the rich because they have little or no savings, few income or production options, and limited resources. They are more vulnerable and also recover more slowly. To understand physical/material vulnerability, one has to ask what made the people affected by the disaster physically vulnerable, in that was it their economic activities (for example, farmers cannot plant because of
floods), or geographic location (for example. homes built in cyclone-prone areas) or lack of access to relief resources that made them suffer particularly.
Social/Organisational Vulnerability and Capacity: How society is organised, its internal conflicts and how it manages them are just as important as the physical/material aspects of vulnerability, though less visible and less well understood. This includes ‘formal political structures’ and the ‘informal systems’ through which people get politically empowered/ socially networked which is a capacity/vulnerability, however the case, which determines access to relief in disaster times and to livelihood means in general. For example, during the recent tsunami, it was realised that aid did not reach many because of caste seclusion. Hence, constitutional provisions/guarantees provided in the Constitution under articles, 14, 15, 16, 17, 21, that safeguard the rights of the socially marginalised would need to be invoked in future in such possibilities.
Poor societies that are well- organised and cohesive can withstand or recover from disasters better than those that are ill- organised or lacking in cohesion on some irrational principle as divisiveness on race, religion, and class or caste lines. To explore this aspect in depth with a view to inquiring into the causes of vulnerability, one has to ask what the social structure was before the disaster struck and how well it served the people in relief and recovery; one can also ask what apocalyptic impact disasters had on social organisation, since there has been evidence of attitudes changing or even new ‘permutations and combinations’ emerging in social alignments in post-disaster situations. This underscores the significance of research into social networks/attitudes and how improvements could be affected, possibly through policy interventions to reinforce/discourage behaviour as aforestated

Motivational/Attitudinal Vulnerability and Capacity: This implies how people in society view themselves and their ability to protect themselves in the event of disasters. Groups that share strong ideologies or belief systems, or have experience in cooperating successfully, may be better able to help each other at times of disaster than groups without such shared beliefs or those who feel fatalistic or dependent. Crises can stimulate communities to make extraordinary efforts. Questions to be asked include; what people’s beliefs and motivations are how they affect their behaviour during disasters. The more pertinent question would be: what is the general worldview, implying culture, in that whether communities place reliance on some metaphysical regulation of life or believe in human action. Public policy intervention in this case would need to aim at changing attitudes within communities, since such attitudes could be counter- productive. Long-term measures in this respect would be education of the masses, through which cognitive development could be achieved.

DISASTER PREVENTION

The United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR) defines disaster prevention as “activities to provide outright avoidance of the adverse impacts of hazards and means to minimise related environmental, technological, and biological disasters. Depending on social and technical feasibility and cost/benefit considerations, investing in preventive measures is justified, particularly in areas frequently affected by disasters. In the context of public awareness and education, related to disaster risk reduction, changing attitudes and behaviour contribute to creating a “culture of prevention.”
Preparedness includes measures taken to ensure readiness of the administrative apparatus to respond quickly and efficiently to a disaster in order to minimise the loss to life and property. Disaster preparedness and prevention require policy and resources for the purpose. Pertinent questions to be asked in this regard include:

What is disaster prevention? What does it mean to us and should we invest effort in its application? If the answer is “yes”, then what needs to be done, and how is it to be translated into policy and action? In order to address these questions, the government would need to allocate resources for disaster management, which would envelop the aforesaid concerns.

SIGNIFICANCE OF DISASTER PREVENTION

The continued effects of disasters (man-made and natural) are all too evident to be overlooked. Recent events alone include the devastating effects of Hurricane Katrina in America, Tsunami destruction in South Asia and the recent Earthquake in Pakistan and India, as well as the so-called complex political emergencies (CPE) in Iraq, Afghanistan and Sudan. Such incidences command large- scale emergency response, the arena in which humanitarian agencies have the highest profile. Such events also raise retrospective questions, such as, whether anything could have been done to prevent or reduce the scale of such disasters. In the case of CPE, prevention requires the political will of all those directly involved and able to influence the course of events. For natural disasters, efforts can be directed at reducing the scale of lives lost and property destroyed.

In the last two decades, reducing risk through the implementation of disaster preparedness and prevention measures has been gaining ground. The UN named the decade of the 90’s as the “International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR).” Whilst the success of the IDNDR is believed by many to have been muted through lack of interest and limited funds, organisations including the European Union, World Bank, DFID, UN and USAID (OFDA) are all investing resources in disaster prevention. Regarding International NGOs; IFRC leads, assigning disaster preparedness delegates to several country teams. Several NGO networks also exist, including the La Red in Latin America, ADRRN in Asia and a new network funded by DFID in sub-saharan Africa. In addition, local NGOs and specialist centers such as SEEDS and ADRC are known for implementing DPP (Disaster Prevention Planning) training and research.
The message inherent in these initiatives is the growing acceptance and action towards the same by many key players in the international aid business that more can and must be done to prevent and/or mitigate the impact of disasters to reduce the risks to vulnerable communities.
To foster a common understanding of the concept of DPP, it is worth looking briefly at what disaster mitigation and preparedness are. A disaster happens when a “hazard” (earthquake, flood, drought, fighting, etc) coincides with a “vulnerable” situation (cities or villages in earthquake/flood prone zones, impoverished people, etc). This is often written as:
Disaster = Hazard + Vulnerability.
Without the coincidence of both these conditions, a disaster would not occur (a hurricane at sea affects nobody, volcanic activity in Hawaii is a tourist spectacle). What this means therefore, is that development actions need to be targeted at reducing vulnerabilities, which are social, physical and economic in nature, incident amongst the most vulnerable, which are the poorest communities in society.
Disaster prevention is analogous to preventive health care. Whilst most efforts are directed towards post -disaster relief, reconstruction and rehabilitation (where the need is all too visible), prevention is often the ignored stage of the cycle of 2

disaster (the ‘invisible’ side to disaster). There is often little interest or political will to take measures for preparation for a disaster that hasn’t happened yet. Yet of course failures to address this can result in enormous losses of life and livelihoods.

ISSUES INVOLVED IN DISASTER PREVENTION

Disaster Prevention therefore implies the protective and preventive actions taken prior to a disaster, directed towards the reduction of risk and the effects of the hazard, that is, the actions that impede the occurrence of a disaster event and prevent and reduce the harmful effects of the event on communities and key installations. Constructing a dam or a levee (embankment) to control floods is an example of a preventive measure. Preventive Measures may include:
􀂄 Structural Measures: Engineering or Technical Inputs

􀂄 Non- Structural Measures: Administrative and Managerial Inputs

HAZARD MAPPING FOR DISASTER PREVENTION

Hazard mapping is explained as “the process of establishing geographically, where and to what extent, particular phenomena are likely to pose a threat to people, property, infrastructure, and economic activities. Hazard mapping represents the result of hazard assessment on a map, showing the frequency or probability of occurrences of various magnitudes or occurrences”(DMTP, 1994).
Two parameters are used in hazard maps, event parameter (intensity of the hazard), and site parameter (physical characteristics of the area), since the physical characteristics of the area with respect to that particular hazard determine the extent of losses that would be suffered in the event of an actual disaster. Event parameters give the nature of the hazard and site parameters give the impact that is likely in the event of a disaster.

A flood hazard map will show the maximum impact of floods with different return periods superimposed on each other. This would give the probability of occurrence along with the likely impact in different geographical settings.
A volcanic hazard map will give areas of variable risk, though it is comparatively difficult to quantify volcanic hazard than other hazards. Areas closest to the summit are permanently prohibited for habitation. Areas around a certain diameter, for example, 20 km. are subject to pyroclastic (airborne volcanic debris) surges and lahars (lava flows), which are subject to evacuation during eruptions. Parts of lower slopes, which are possible mud flow paths; since satellite imagery has made it possible to trace mud- flow paths based on observation through remote sensing and past data analysis, are second danger areas.
The critical factor in the preparation of maps is availability of data pertaining to past events with a view to preparing databases. Knowledge regarding spatial distribution of some natural hazards, namely, earthquakes, floods and droughts is now so advanced that it has been possible to account for minor variations in involved variables like area or population ‘at risk’. Hence, it has been possible to prepare micro-zonation maps, which give detailed information about the susceptibility of different areas at risk from these hazards, even in case of multi-hazard vulnerability of a given area.
According to Odaka (2002), the objective of a hazard map is to provide residents with information about the range of possible damage and the disaster prevention