Common Disasters and Uncommon Responses

Shamima Khan

Common Disasters and Uncommon Responses

Shamima Khan

February 24, 2011Knowledge Series – Emerging IndonesiaMC 9-401

Key Messages

1. Indonesia remains vulnerable to disasters with high risks and high costs - prevention is increasingly important

2. Indonesia has developed successful responses – a result of government leadership and broad partnerships

3. There are many lessons learned from the Indonesia experience – effective models can be replicated globally, and challenges remain

1. Indonesia remains vulnerable to disasters with high risks and high costs – prevention is increasingly important

Indonesia’s Disaster ContextIndonesia’s Earthquake RiskIndonesia’s Tsunami RiskIndonesia’s Flood RiskIndonesia’s Landslide Risk

For all of Indonesia, exposure to disasters is high

Probability/Risk: varies significantly Climate change: increases risksExposure: high Preparedness: reduces vulnerability,

reduces losses

2000-08, 20% of total humanitarian aid spent on disaster relief; prevention support increased from 0.1% to 0.8%

Costs and Financing Small disasters also contribute to huge costs

Aceh Tsunamii US$ 4.45 bn

Yogyakarta earthquakeUS$ 3.13 bn

Damage and Losses of Disasters

-20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Events

Percentage of D&L in 5 Key Sectors

Productive-LProductive-DOther Social-LOther Social-DEducation-LEducation-DTransport-LTransport-DHousing-LHousing-D

-20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Events

Percentage of D&L in 5 Key Sectors

Productive-LProductive-DOther Social-LOther Social-DEducation-LEducation-DTransport-LTransport-DHousing-LHousing-D

Divine intervention?

Human intervention… Quality of Construction (Prevention reduces losses)

Focused Interventions Can Reduce Vulnerability: Schools

Legend:: Very High: High: Moderate: Low: Very Low

-

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

Jakart

a

W. Java

C. Java

Yogya

karta

E. Java

Aceh

N. Sumatr

a

W. Sumatr

aRiau

Jambi

S. Su

matra

Lampung

W. Kali

mantan

C. Kalim

antan

S. Kali

mantan

E. Kali

mantan

N. Sulaw

esi

C. Sulaw

esi

S. Su

lawesi

SE. S

ulawesi

Maluku Bali

W. Nusa Te

nggara

E. Nusa

Tenggara

Papua

Bengkulu

N. Malu

ku

Banten

Bangka Belitu

ng

Gorontalo

Kepulauan Riau

W. Papua

W. Sulaw

esi

Senior High

Junior High

Elementary

Schools- Earthquake Risk Index

2. Indonesia has developed successful responses – a result of government leadership and broad partnerships

10/16/08

MDTFs for Reconstruction and Rehabilitation

10/16/08

The Multi Donor Fund for Aceh and Nias (MDF): Established April 2005; 15 Donors; US$678 million Support post-tsunami rehab/recon. of Aceh and Nias Open menu approach, six focus areas

The Java Reconstruction Fund (JRF): Established 2006; 7 Donors; US$ 94 million Support post-earthquake rehab/recon. of Central

Java/Yogyakarta and tsunami affected West Java Providing Housing and Livelihoods recovery

MDF Focus Areas of Support

Recovery of Communities(Rekompak)

Large Infra. & Transport(IRFF)

Governance and Capacity Blding

(ILO Roads)

Economic Devt. And Livelihood(EDFF)

Sustaining the Environment(AFEP) Enhancing Recovery Process

(DRR-A)

JRF Focus Areas of Support

Recovery of Livelihoods(IOM)

Recovery of Communities(CSRRP/Rekompak)

Innovations in Design and Structure

• Government • Institutional structures matched to nature of

reconstruction needs• Agenda and priority setting

• MDF-JRF• Inclusive Governance Structure• Forum for policy dialog and coordination• Flexible Funding – gap filling• Range of Partner and Implementing Agencies• Builds on Existing Mechanisms and Programs

Govt. leads, partners support Gap filling, in key phases

3. … many lessons learned from Indonesia –effective models can be replicated globally, but challenges remain

Replication: Models and Lessons Learned

• Models: Community Based Housing – ownership, transparency, cost-effectiveness Mainstreaming DRR – Existing WB-Govt partnerships a key asset (e.g. in

Indonesia PNPM, BOSKITA, DAK) Aceh – linkages of recon, post-conflict programming and broader devt.

• South-South Exchanges: Indonesia emerging as regional resource on post-disaster recovery

• Lessons Learned: Govt: strong institutional capacity, specialized authorities, policy and

strategy Partners: pre-existing programs, multiple PAs/IAs, internal emergency

processes Programs: Adapting to changing needs, sequencing, timelines geared

for speed and closure, exit strategy Financing: Mix of prevention/response, Incentive for prevention

A New Framework: IMDFF

1. Challenges:• High Disaster Risk• Also related to Climate

Change

2. Desired Attributes: • Ownership• Speed• Quality/ Oversight• Flexibility

Proactive, not Reactive

IMDFFStanding FundInclusive Governance2 Windows

Activities• Preventive

• DRR • Financing• Capacity

Building

• Response• Housing• Infrastructure• Livelihoods

Challenges to Address

Internal:• Bank’s processes (procurement, safeguards)• Risk aversion to complex engagements • Working with different partners

External:• Climate change and increasing vulnerability• Changing mindsets to prevention, preparedness • Government’s institutions and systems

Conclusions and Questions

Some Open Questions: Rapid Response policies and procedures for governments? Quality, speed, ownership – where’s the balance for acceptable

levels of losses? Before or After Disasters – how to match needs to partners? Can we design a “Callable Resources” model?

Summary: Indonesia can benefit from global experience on prevention Indonesia has lessons to offer on response Indonesia is well positioned to manage disasters on both

prevention and response Development partners can support by strengthening the relevant

institutions who have the mandate

Terima Kasih!Thank You!