Presidentiable forum on disaster preparedness platform set

A group of nongovernment organizations are setting up a forum for the 2016 presidential candidates to present their platform of governance particularly on disaster risk reduction and preparedness.

Speaking at a forum “Paglaum: Experiences, lessons learned and best practices from Haiyan” organized by the Consortium for People’s Development-Disaster Response on Friday, Center for Disaster Preparedness President Zenaida Delica Willison said the forum would be held at the University of the Philippines Diliman on Nov. 24.

She urged the audience not to vote for a president who has no clear disaster preparation platform.

“We are together with some NGOs in organizing a forum for the presidentiables. We are calling now to all the people never to vote a president… who does not have an agenda in building resilience, who does not have an agenda on disaster risk reduction,” Willison said in the forum.

“We should vote personally for those people who understands disaster risk reduction,” she added.

With the country set to commemorate the second year anniversary of supertyphoon Yolanda (international name: Haiyan), Willison said natural phenomenon such as typhoon and earthquakes are hazards which can be prevented from becoming a natural disaster through resilience-building and disaster preparedness.

“They are not disasters. They are mere hazardous events because the Philippines is a country with many vulnerabilities,” Willison said.

“(The) most important is preventing these hazards to become disasters… Let us focus on the bigger picture that Haiyan can happen again… if we don’t promote building resilience at the community, provincial and national level,” she added.

Disaster risk reduction and development

Feng Min Kan, head of the Regional Office for Asia-Pacific of the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, also spoke in the forum about the complementary relationship between development and disaster risk reduction.

She proposed the building of disaster-resilient infrastructure so that the damages from previous disasters would no longer be repeated.

“Development and investment are not disaster-neutral… Reconstruction and recovery is a great development process. But make sure you do not reconstruct risks so that whatever you reconstruct is disaster-resilient,” Kan said.

She reiterated the need for climate change adaptation because at least 80 percent of disasters are climate-related.

“At least 80 percent of disasters we are managing today are climate-related… Disaster risk reduction and climate change are all complementary for development goals,” she said.

Kan also presented the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030, which was adopted at the Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction in Sendai City, Miyagi Prefecture, Japan.

The framework is a 15-year, voluntary, non-binding agreement which recognized that the state and stakeholders share the responsibility of reducing disaster risk.

The Philippines is set to commemorate the second year anniversary since supertyphoon Yolanda struck on Nov. 8, 2013, leaving over 6,000 people dead, mostly in the severely-hit provinces of Central Philippines.

The super typhoon, said to be the strongest typhoon to hit land, is touted as an example of extreme weather patterns brought about by an ever-changing climate.

Yolanda experience

During the forum, UP Prof. Ma. Corazon Jimenez-Tan also presented the findings of the University of the Philippines College of Social Welfare and Community Development research publication titled “Shifting Paradigms: Strengthening Institutions for Community-Based Disaster Risk Reduction and Management.”

The team studied the disaster risk reduction plans of the villages hit by Yolanda – barangays Sapao and Banaag in Guiuan, Eastern Samar, Barangay Candahug in Palo, Leyte and and Barangay Esperanza in San Francisco, Cebu.

The study found out that “there is still a low level of disaster preparedenes in three of the four baangays, namely Sapao, Banaag and Candahug,” Tan said in her presentation.

Tan said before Yolanda struck, the risk of disaster and even the meaning of storm surge which brought the most destruction and deaths were not adequately communicated by the local officials to residents.

“Consequently, communities were generally unaware and ill-prepared  to deal with a hazard they knew little about,” she said.

She added that the barangays did not have a community risk assessment before Yolanda struck, “hence communities had little understanding of the risks they face and the possible actions to reduce or prepare for such risks.”

Tan said there was no contingency planning in all four areas, even in Barangay San Francisco, which is relatively more advanced in disaster risk reduction and management.

Only Barangay San Francisco has an incident command system. Meanwhile, the three other barangays were not aware how such a system should be in place, Tan said.

“Disaster risk reduction and management capacity remains low in Banaag, Sapao and Candahug,” Tan said.

Of the four barangays, only San Francisco conducted a detailed damage and needs assessment after the storm, Tan said, while the three others conducted an assessment in an informal manner just so a list could be submitted to the municipal hall.

Only San Franscisco was able to stockpile rice and other relief goods, while the three other storms only received relief goods two to three days after the typhoon’s landfall, Tan said.

Even the evacuation centers were not sturdy enough. Tan said the evacuation centers in Candahug, Sapao and Banaag were not strong enough to protect residents. The walls and roof of the Palo Municipal Convention Center collapsed, Tan said.

“Generally, in all research areas, the assistance for rehabilitation and recovery turned out to be limited as compared to emergency relief assistance. For most residents, there is a sense that life is not ‘back to normal,'” she said.

To conclude, Tan said there is a low level of disaster preparedness in the three of four barangays, attributed to the low awareness of the Republic Act 10121 or the  Philippine Disaster and Risk Reduction Management Act of 2010.

“The paradigm shift towards a proactive and preventive approach to disaster management emphasized in RA 10121 still remains to be seen in the three areas. Much of the work in the three barangays focused on emergency response and was weak in the preparedness, recovery and mitigation aspects,” Tan said.