Preventative Risk Management Community Based Risk Managment Approach - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 15
About This Presentation

Preventative Risk Management Community Based Risk Managment Approach


Community Based Risk ... The development community generally continues to view disasters ... a systematic and coherent fashion must be an explicit ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:222
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 16
Provided by: leilaol


Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Preventative Risk Management Community Based Risk Managment Approach

Preventative Risk Management Community Based
Risk Managment Approach
Cláudio Jamal Leila Oliveira World Vision
  • Humanitarian actions do not address the
    development processes that are shaping disaster
    risk in the first place. The development
    community generally continues to view disasters
    as exceptional natural events that interrupt
    normal development and that can be managed
    through humanitarian actions
  • (UNDP Report on Risks 2004)

New focus on risk as key to development
Confronting disaster issues in a systematic and
coherent fashion must be an explicit objective of
development strategies(World Bank, 2005).
  • The impact of shocks put a high toll on human
    development and seat back future investiments
  • The impact of shocks will be directly driven by
    the development characteristics of the affected
  • Poverty Risk trap recurrent shocks minimize
    the long-term development perspective and the
    long-term development increases vulnerability

Disaster seek the poor and they stay poor.
Vulnerability key to risk
  • Hazards are inevitable butthey can be managed
    and mitigated through appropriate development

 Risk Hazard Vulnerability
Risk Chance of a loss or loss itself,
characterized by the change in welfare that
results from the realization of the hazard and
from the success or failure of risk management
measures applied.
Hazard/Shock Physical or man-made
event that has potential for causing injuries to
life and damaging property, environment and
Vulnerability Characteristics of person or group
in terms of their capacity to anticipate, cope
with, resist, and recover from the occurence of a
Community as key to vulnerability
  • Socio-economic vulnerability, rather than
    physical hazard explains the impact of disasters
  • Vulnerability, in turn is driven by community
    capabilities (physical, social, economic, human,
  • People in high-risk areas have often developed
    their own coping mechanisms and strategies to
    reduce the impact of disaster
  • First response is given by informal loosely-knit
    groups from within communities before formal
    organizations are able to mobilize
  • Accumulated losses from small hazards can exceed
    the losses and impacts from big disasters and
    contribute significantly to increased
    vulnerability at the local level
  • Small hazards attract little media attention and
    communities are often left on their own to cope
    with the destruction

What is GERANDO?
  • Gestão de Risco à Nível da Comunidade
  • Community Based Risk Managment
  • It is an application of CBRM approach, not a set
    of guidelines
  • It integrates the various phases and levels of
    risk management and development
  • It is truly community based community is
    capacitated to plan, implement, sustain, and own
  • It focus on sustainability community ownership,
    equity, long term viability, environmental,
    social and cultural protection

Communities reduce their vulnerabilities
and enhance their capacity
Community and stakeholders act upon risks
Community and stakeholders understand risks
  • Mitigation Plans and Implementation
  • Hazards identification and Analises
  • Preparedness and Response Plan and Implementation
  • Vulnerability Analyses
  • Early Warning/Surveillance
  • Access to sustainable resources
  • Monitoring and Evaluation
  • Communication system

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

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

Surveillance Early Warning
Many times, community based surveillance is
covertly viewed as a way of appoint local people
to undertake certain tasks cheaply, so as to
further goals set by external programmers. In
such approaches, community participation in
implementation is not matched with power over
decision-making or control over the use of
resources. (Tonisirin and Gillespie 1999)
  • Community based surveillance has two main
  • Strengthen Communities It is the process of
    awareness and actions following the collection of
    indicators that makes community surveillance
    important for rural development.
  • Produce Actionable Data Community information
    should guide external assistance.
  • Community based surveillance has dual roles
  • Hazards
  • Vulnerability
  • Outcomes

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

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

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

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

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

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

Key Questions
  • Objective
  • Is GERANDO Approach a good tool to assist risk
    managment and devlopment?
  • Method
  • Share experiences and perceptions from the group
    by general topic
  • Is GERANDO really sustainable?
  • Is the information generated by GERANDO usefull
    for World Vision, communities and partners?
  • Can GERANDO fulfill the requirements for an
    approach to facilitate successfull WV projects in
    the field?
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)