A widely-accepted concept of the disaster cycle entails four cycles – mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery. In Trinidad and Tobago, our cultural practices regarding risk, thus far, have enticed us to focus almost entirely on response and recovery, coupled with a somewhat half-hearted attempt at preparedness. If we are to retain the gains we would make on the road to sustainable
development it is imperative that our attitude towards all forms of risk, including disaster risk, change for the better.
Perhaps a small step in this direction could be made, beginning with an expanded understanding of what preparedness entails. In the disaster lexicon of the United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR), preparedness’ involves “The knowledge and capacities developed by governments, professional response and recovery organizations, communities and individuals to effectively anticipate, respond to, and recover from, the impacts of likely, imminent or current hazard events or conditions.” Commenting further, the UN noted that, within the context of disaster risk management, preparedness action is carried out “ to build the capacities needed to efficiently manage all types of emergencies and achieve orderly transitions from response through to sustained recovery. Preparedness is based on a sound analysis of disaster risks and good linkages with early warning systems, and includes such activities as contingency planning, stockpiling of equipment and supplies, the development of arrangements for coordination, evacuation and public information, and associated training and field exercises. These must be supported by formal institutional, legal and budgetary capacities.”
In pursuing the goal of facilitating a positive change in our disaster risk culture EMATT will definitely be attempting, in collaboration with partner stakeholders, to ensure that our preparedness actions (at whatever level) are based on “a sound analysis of disaster risks”, inter alia. EMATT believes that a sound analysis and understanding of disaster risks is fundamental not only to effective preparedness but also to the process of risk culture change. A sound analysis and understanding of disaster risks should also facilitate a better appreciation of the benefits also to be had from engaging in disaster prevention and mitigation activities.
Referring again to the UNISDR’s disaster lexicon, ‘prevention’ is: “the outright avoidance of adverse impacts of hazards and related disasters”. Mitigation, on the other hand, involves “The lessening or limitation of the adverse impacts of hazards and related disasters”, noting that “The adverse impacts of hazards often cannot be prevented fully, but their scale of severity can be substantially lessened by various strategies and actions”. These strategies and actions may be either structural or non-structural in nature. For example, a structural mitigation action would be the building of retention ponds and embankments along river courses to eliminate or reduce the flood risk. A non-structural mitigation strategy would be the imposition of land use regulations that prohibit human settlement in a high risk zone. It is noted that the complete avoidance ( i.e. prevention) of hazard risk is often impossible, leaving mitigation as the only reasonable option. Partly for this reason, the terms ‘prevention’ and ‘mitigation’ are sometimes used interchangeably in casual use.
For the purposes of this discussion EMATT will focus on mitigation as we are of the view that when we, as a society, lessen or limit the adverse impacts of hazards and related disasters, we also achieve two disaster risk reduction goals – vulnerability reduction and resilience strengthening. It can thus be argued that actions taken to achieve mitigation will invariably also result in an improved state of preparedness. As June 1st approaches, marking the official start of the Atlantic Hurricane Season, everyone ought to be giving some thought to (and, hopefully, taking reasonable action towards) being prepared for what is predicted to be yet another “above-average” hurricane season. Therefore, EMATT is suggesting that, in our pursuit of DRR, we simply need to expand our current understanding of preparedness to better appreciate the need for, and value of, mitigation.
Comments