Download
learning from disaster recovery n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Learning from Disaster Recovery PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Learning from Disaster Recovery

Learning from Disaster Recovery

153 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

Learning from Disaster Recovery

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Learning from Disaster Recovery International Recovery Platform (IRP) Review of Emerging Lessons

  2. The Indian Ocean Tsunami

  3. Hurricane Katrina

  4. Kashmir Earthquake

  5. What is disaster recovery? “ ….the permanent construction or replacement of severely damaged physical structures, the full restoration of all services, and local infrastructure, the re-vitalization of the economy and the restoration of social and cultural life.” An overview of Disaster Management, UNDP, 1991

  6. Who is undertaking this review? • This is a combined operation involving: • Government of Japan • UNDP • ISDR secretariat incl. PPEW • ADRC • The review is being edited by a team led by Professor Ian Davis Resilience Centre, Cranfield University, UK

  7. Why is this learning needed? • Because there is a gap. Currently, there is no documentation that compares disaster recovery lessons across sectors, cultures and hazard types. • To document vital experiences of recovery management in order to share relevant knowledge with those needing it.

  8. Without this study there is a serious risk of decision makers ‘re-inventing wheels’. • A template is needed to enable future recovery studies to be undertaken to aid comparison and analysis.

  9. The Learning Cycle

  10. What aspects of recovery will be examined? • Following natural disasters. • Following all main natural hazards. • Recovery in all phases, from early phases to long-term recovery. • All sectors (e.g. livelihoods, shelters) of recovery management. • Administrative patterns to support recovery • Analysis of recovery will follow thematic lines of the project.

  11. Who are the audience? ALL STAKEHOLDERS: • Government officials responsible for recovery management. • UN staff in agencies with recovery roles (i.e. UNDP, UNICEF, UNESCO, UNCHS, ISDR etc.) • Staff in International Development Banks.

  12. National and International NGO’s. • Private Sector (Construction, Small Business Sector, Agriculture, Financial Investment, Insurance, etc.). • Donors supporting Disaster Recovery.

  13. Three dimensional recovery The review will seek to find lessons concerning the three dimensions of recovery: • PSYCHO-SOCIAL • ECONOMIC • PHYSICAL (including the natural environment)

  14. processes Political Re Environmental - Cultural n trauma stress Context national economic Social rehabilitation / recovery - establishing local and Psycho / Social Recovery: Economic Recovery: indirect disaster consequences - The addressing post Recovery addressing Process n Physical Recovery: n Buildings / infrastructure / agriculture / forestry / transport 132 Three dimensional recovery The review will identify lessons concerning three dimensions of recovery:

  15. Typical issues to be included

  16. Long-Term effects of early decisions

  17. ‘Temporary Housing’ in Skopje that survived and shaped a city…. 1963 - Skopje

  18. 1970 - Skopje

  19. 1974 - Skopje

  20. 1989 - Skopje

  21. Time Constraints In Recovery

  22. Risk Reduction in Recovery

  23. How will this be undertaken? • Key recovery documents have been assembled to form a data base (currently 56 disaster recovery examples compiled by IRP). • A team of staff in IRP (Hyogo), ISDR Geneva, Platform for the Promotion of Early Warning (PPEW Bonn), Colombia and Oxford will develop the recovery review from December 2005-April 2006 based on analysis along five thematic lines.

  24. What will be the result of this exercise? • Improved global recovery management • Better understanding concerning the integration of psycho-social, economic, and physical recovery actions. • Advice on ways to incorporate risk reduction into recovery. • Better use of money invested in recovery through an ‘evidence based approach’ based on what works and what fails.