Dr Elretha Louw

Technical Director
Disaster Risk Management and GIS
Aurecon
[email protected]

Simon van Wyk

Senior Risk Consultant
Aurecon
[email protected]

Disaster Risk Management

planning for resilient and sustainable societies
INTRODUCTION operational risks develop, due to increasing vulnerability, re-
It is generally accepted that disasters are having an increasing sulting in decreasing coping capacity.
impact on our lives, property, environment, infrastructure, and
economic and social activities. Globally, severe weather and DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT AN OVERVIEW
other natural phenomena, as well as human activities, are ex- As dened by the South African Disaster Management Act
acting a heavy toll on us and the environment we depend on. (Notice 654 of 2005), Disaster Risk is dened as the possibility, or
The results of disasters are human suffering, and damage chance, of harmful consequence, or expected loss (of lives, people
to the resources and infrastructure on which humans rely for injured, property, livelihoods, economic activity disrupted or en-
survival and quality of life. In the aftermath of a disaster, it is vironment damaged) resulting from interactions between natural
critical to rapidly determine the exact nature of the impacts and human-induced hazards and vulnerable conditions. It is im-
and what will be required to restore the situation, or prefer- portant to note that not all disasters happen with a sudden onset,
ably to improve the situation by reducing vulnerability to such as earthquakes or tsunamis. It is often the slow onset disas-
future impacts. ters (e.g. environmental degradation, drought, changes in ood
It is even more important to intervene pro-actively, before prone areas / ood lines) that pose the higher risk if not identied
disasters occur, to inuence the process by which disaster and and planned for in the Disaster Risk Management (DRM) process.
Although generally perceived as such, DRM is not only
1 The Disaster Risk Management continuum reactive (the so-called response paradigm). The South African
2 The relationship between disasters (risk) and development Disaster Management Act (Act 57 of 2002) denes DRM as a

Prevention &
Prevention &
Mitigation strand
Mitigation strand
Preparedness
strand Relief & Response
strand
Recovery &
Rehabilitation strand

CRISIS

Time

16 Civil Engineering | August 2011

continuous and integrated multi-sectoral, multi-disciplinary functions. Th is new approach gave rise to the so-called second
process of planning and implementation of measures aimed at: generation IDP, where integrated development planning is
(a) preventing or reducing the risk of disasters performed through the implementation of a systematic process,
(b) mitigating the severity or consequences of disasters targeting distinct deliverables portrayed in the IDP to be ad-
(c) emergency preparedness dressed by councils for implementation (Louw 2007). It is
(d) a rapid and eective response to disaster, and within this planning context that disaster risk must be identi-
(e) post-disaster recovery and rehabilitation. ed, quantied, planned for and implemented.
Figure 1 illustrates this life cycle of Disaster Risk Management
the DRM continuum illustrating a strong paradigm shift from A FOCUS ON RISK REDUCTION
response towards risk reduction, shown as a continuous process Risk reduction initiatives are essential as they form the rst
(the green strand), even during an event. real barrier that, if nothing else, acts as a buer by lowering the
Internationally, governments have committed themselves to vulnerability of the area impacted. Furthermore, reduction is
taking action against disaster risk, and have adopted a guideline to pre-emptive and is based on the perceived anticipated risk sup-
reduce vulnerabilities to hazards. This guideline is known as the plemented by historical data.
Hyogo Framework for Action, as dened by the United Nations A disaster risk assessment is the rst step towards risk reduc-
International Strategy for Disaster Reaction (UNISDR 2004). tion. Disaster risk assessments, supported by eective moni-
The rst step for action is to make risk reduction a priority with toring, are essential for:
a strong institutional basis for implementation. In South Africa, eective risk management planning
DRM is now regarded as everybodys business, emphasising the sustainable development planning
responsibilities of all role-players, and is especially not limited to identifying potential threats that can undermine a develop-
those historically associated with DRM. The Act (Act 57 of 2002) ments success and sustainability, making it possible to incor-
also recognises that disasters know no boundaries and that plans porate risk reduction measures into project design prior to
and strategies should be nalised in conjunction with neigh- implementation
bouring municipalities and higher/lower spheres of government to identifying high risk periods and conditions, and
curb, where practical, the onslaught of disaster risk. activating response and preparedness actions.

DISASTER RISK AND INTEGRATED PLANNING Relevant national organs of state must execute systematic dis-
The Act (Act 57 of 2002) requires that the disaster management aster risk assessments in the following instances:
plan forms an integral part of the Integrated Development prior to the implementation of any risk reduction, prepared-
Planning (IDP) process. Th is inter-relationship is also reected ness or response programme
in Section 26 of the Municipal Systems Act (Act 32 of 2002). as an integral part of the planning phase for large-scale
The National Spatial Development Perspective has broad- housing, infrastructure or commercial/industrial develop-
ened the functionality of the IDP. It focuses on development ments of national signicance
planning within a spatial extent, not a managerial entity, ir- as an integral component of the planning phase for nationally
respective of the sphere of government responsible for certain signicant initiatives that aect the natural environment, and

Linking Disasters and Development:

Some requirements are undefined

Positive developmental outcome

Disasters
create Development
development reduces
opportunities disaster risk

Disaster Development
Impact Intervention
Disasters Development
destroy increases
development disaster risk

Negative developmental outcome

Civil Engineering | August 2011 17

 when social, economic, infrastructural, environmental, cli- dealing with losses and recovering from it. Examples include
matic or other indicators suggest changing patterns of risk. incentive grants, tax rebates and economic diversification.
Risk assessments must be undertaken to ensure that develop- Economic development should be one of the main focuses of
ment initiatives maximise their vulnerability reduction out- regional planning.
comes. The relationship between development and Disaster
(Risk) is illustrated in Figure 2. 4. Management and institutional measures
Theoretically, the measures that can be considered for re- Institutional measures are very important and a longer term
ducing the risk of an area are ve-fold, taken from Botha and initiative, requiring institutional buy-in. Education, training, pro-
Louw (2004) and summarised in Louw (2007): fessional and technical competence, as well as budget allocations,
are crucial for success. It includes measures such as the regula-
1. Physical planning measures tion of building below ood lines.
Physical planning measures include the location of public
sector facilities that can reduce the vulnerability of an area, 5. Societal measures
such as schools, hospitals, major infrastructural elements Public awareness is a key component of reducing risk. The crea-
like wastewater treatment works and power transformers. tion of a safety culture is encouraged, where the community
However, the consideration of disaster risks in spatial plan- reaches consensus that risk reduction measures are desirable,
ning is extremely important. The development of residential feasible and aordable.
areas and the supporting infrastructure should always aim to
reduce risk. CONCLUSION
The risks involved in disasters are determined by our everyday
2. Engineering/construction measures living conditions through the vulnerabilities created by such
Two types of engineering measures are possible. The rst option conditions (Wisner et al 2004). Disasters are therefore a com-
results in stronger individual structures which are more resistant plex mix of natural and other hazards and human action (and
to hazards, while the second option creates structures to protect vulnerabilities). They consist of a combination of factors that
and alleviate against hazards, e.g. dykes, levees and dams. determine the potential for people to be exposed to particular
types of hazard. The impact of the disaster also depends fun-
3. Economic measures damentally on how social and political systems interact in dif-
Risk reduction measures that increase the capacity of a ferent societies. These factors determine how groups of people
community to cope with future losses create resilience in dier in relation to income (economy), health, employment,
housing and social environment.
Resilience can also be impacted (positively or negatively)
by risk reduction initiatives and measures. DRM therefore
entails a holistic and considered approach which includes,
amongst others, risk management planning, advisory services
and engineering innovation. Assessing risk is the first step
towards planning for it. Risk reduction measures must be
inter-sectoral, inter-departmental and be part of a continuous
process. DRM is a coordinating function, recognising that
solutions towards risk reduction are a team effort therefore,
everybodys business.

REFERENCES
Botha, J J & Louw, E J M 2004. Step by step guidelines to prepare a
disaster management plan ~ Guideline 2: how to prepare disaster
risk reduction plans. Cape Town: Business and Information Solutions
Division, AFRICON. Unpublished guidelines.
Louw, E J M 2007. Climate Change in the Western Cape a Disaster Risk
Assessment of the Impact on Human Health. Unpublished PhD
Dissertation. University of Stellenbosch.
South Africa (Republic of) 2003. Disaster Management Act No 57 of 2002.
Pretoria. Government Printer.
South Africa (Republic of) 2003. Municipal Systems Act No 32 of 2002.
Pretoria. Government Printer.
South Africa (Republic of) 2005. National Disaster Management Act: Policy
Framework. Notice 654 of 2005. Pretoria. Government Printer.
United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction 2004.
Hyogo Framework for Action, 2005 - 2015. Available from
http://www.unisdr.org/hfa
Wisner, B, Blaikie, P, Cannon, T & Davis, I 2004. At Risk: Natural hazards,
people's vulnerability and disasters. London: Routledge.

18 Civil Engineering | August 2011

Source:
http://www.saice.org.za/downloads/monthly_publications/2011/2011-Civil-
Engineering-august/files/res/downloads/book.pdf