Abstract - Study 3 (DRR Cap of HEIs)
Abstract - Study 3 (DRR Cap of HEIs)
Abstract - Study 3 (DRR Cap of HEIs)
INTRODUCTION
Disasters threaten the lives of millions of people around the world. Over the last
decade, the world has experienced catastrophic disasters both man-made and natural.
In the coming years, vulnerability to disasters is expected to increase as the frequency
and intensity of natural hazards rises due to climate change (Webster, 2008).
Schools (to include higher education institutions) are considered the best venue
for forging durable collective values and, therefore, suitable for building a culture of
prevention and disaster resilience (http://www.irinnews.org/report/96909/philippines-
teaching-disaster-preparedness-in-schools, retrieved 02/01/2015). In the Asia-Pacific
Region, there is a marked increase of initiatives to promote the integration of disaster
risk reduction into school education in the light of the havocs brought by so many
calamities that hit the Region.
School-based disaster risk reduction trainings significantly form part of the NSTP.
Universities and colleges, through NSRC, has an opportunity to develop students as a
continuous source of volunteers for DRR and other related activities and programs. This
is to stress that HEIs are important venues for management capacity development for
disaster prevention education. However, preliminary report (2013) of the Philippine
Society of NSTP Educators and Implementers, Incorporated (PSNEI), the premier
national association for NSTP composed of more than 150 higher education institutions
(HEIs), reveals that inclusion of disaster awareness and risk reduction in school
programs has been sporadic. Among other reasons this may be attributable to
ineffective approaches being used and the lack of clear implementation guidelines.
Moreover, while there are periodic attempts by some educational institutions to offer
DRR training and volunteer support to local government units, there are no common
standards upon which these programs are based. Since the achievement of disaster
risk reduction is critical and can be achieved through capacity development of HEIs as
they play quintessential role in disaster education via educational programs such as
NSTP, through the operation of NSRC in particular, this study was conceptualized.
The study attempted to look into the capability of the higher education institutions
(HEIs) as providers of local training and volunteer support on disaster risk reduction and
management (DRRM) through the National Service Reserve Corps (NSRC) under the
National Service Training Program (NSTP). Specifically, the study attempted to
empirically examine the following: a) the extent of management capacity of the
Philippine HEIs in the operation of the NSRC for local DRRM training and volunteer
support along the thematic areas of DRR as Internal Priority, Risk Assessment and
Monitoring, Knowledge and Education, Underlying Risk Factors, Preparedness and
Response, Local Government Support, and Cross-Cutting Issues; b) difference in the
extent of management capacity of the HEIs in operating NSRC for local DRR training
and volunteer support when categorized according to types of HEI and by region; and c)
enabling and constraining factors in the context of the extent of management capacity of
the Philippine HEIs in operating NSRC for local DRR training and volunteer support.
The HEIs, through the NSRC, are potential DRRM training organizations in the
local levels. The colleges and universities under the auspices of the Philippine Society
of NSTP Educators and Implementers, Incorporated (PSNEI) across the regions of the
country play a pivotal role insofar as mobilizing volunteers DRRM and CCA are
concerned. Hence, gauging the competence of the training organizations is significant
in the purview of intensifying the efforts alongside building Climate Change-Proof
Philippines via Disaster-Resilient Communities.
The findings of the study could serve as baseline data in formulating strategic
directions for the NSRCs of the public and private HEIs towards disaster-resilient and
climate-change-resistant communities. It could be useful in the formulation of the DRR
capacity development framework.
METHODOLOGY
Mixed methods approach was used for this study, where both qualitative and
quantitative methods were combined. A total of 94 HEIs from the 15 regions of the
country participated in the study. Of these, fifty-one (51) are public and forty-three (43)
are private HEIs. These HEIs are member-institutions of the Philippine Society of NSTP
Educators and Implementers, Incorporated (PSNEI), a national network of NSTP and
NSRC implementers in the country. A survey questionnaire was the main data-
gathering instrument used in this investigation. This questionnaire was derived primarily
from the one used in a study by OCHA. It covers seven (7) thematic areas and a total
of thirty-two (32) indicators, to wit: DRR as Internal Priority (4 indicators); Risk
Assessment and Monitoring (3 indicators); Knowledge and Education (3 indicators);
Underlying Risk Factors (3 indicators); Preparedness and Response (6 indicators);
Local Government Support (5 indicators); and Cross-cutting Issues (8 indicators).
Data obtained through the questionnaire were complemented by the data gathered from
focus group discussions (FGDs) and key informant interviews (KIIs) with the NSTP-
NSRC implementer-participants. In analyzing the data on the extent capacity of the
HEIs along training and volunteer support, the measure of central tendency, specifically
the arithmetic mean, was utilized. In determining significant difference on the extent of
training and volunteer capacity of public and private HEIs, t-test was used; ANOVA was
used in determining significant differences in the extent of management capacity of
HEIs by Region.
Findings of this study showed that the HEIs recognize the importance of disaster
risk reduction and management, as indicated by their inclusion of DRR programs in their
institutional development policy. However, this recognition is not translated into
concrete actions as shown by their limited allocation of financial and human resources
for DRR trainings and volunteer mobilization. This indicates that DRR is not among
the top priorities of the HEIs.
The results of the study showed that the HEIs have low capacity in terms of
early warning systems; that is, it has limited provision for access to early warning
system for the community they serve (including the schools themselves)
in high risk areas. The capacity of the HEIs to carry out participatory risk assessments
on potential hazards and vulnerabilities within disaster-prone communities is moderate.
The same is true for their capacity in monitoring standards , sharing information on
potential risks and having an emergency plan of action.
The HEIs were perceived to be having high capacity with respect to the first two
indicators and only moderate capacity in the last indicator. This indicates that the HEIs
have the capacity to provide knowledge and skills related to effective environmental
protection and management to prepare individuals for any environmental risk decision
the later might have to make, as well as the capacity to extend support to communities
to help them cope with climate change and adapt to future conditions.
For disaster response and recovery, HEIs were assessed in terms of their
capacity to operate NSCRs for DRR training and volunteer management along the
conduct of post-disaster review exercises with affected communities.. Assessment of
emergency resources focused on access by and of HEIs to financial provisions and
contingency funds that can be made available quickly to support a rapid response to
disasters.
The capacity of the HEIs in all indicators of this area was rated to be moderate,
with disaster response and recovery and emergency resources getting the lowest rating.
This finding can be attributed to the constraints brought by the seemingly technical post-
disaster review exercises and points to the need to capacitate the implementers of DRR
training and volunteer management program.
Differences Among HEIs in Operating NSRC for Local DRR Training and
Volunteer Support. There is no significant difference between the public and private
HEIs with respect to their capacity to manage National Service Reserve Corps (NSRC)
for DRR Training and Volunteer Management. This could be attributed to the fact that
the HEIs, regardless of type, are guided by the same laws and implementing guidelines.
The capacities of the HEIs, however, differ by Region. Factors like geographical location
and local poverty threshold level seem to influence the capacity of the HEI in the area in
managing the NSRC.
Enabling and Constraining Factors. The factors that enable the HEIs in
operating the NSRC for DRR Training and Volunteer Management include strong
partnership with the government , non-government and peoples organizations,
including other agencies that can be tapped for DRR initiatives, like the Red Cross and
Local DRRM Council, among others; commitment of NSTP/NSRC personnel;
organization/mobilization of volunteers for DRR; and awareness of the laws pertinent to
DRR. The constraining factors, that cut across all the DRR Training and Volunteer
Management thematic areas, are: financial limitations; technical difficulties; time
constraints; lukewarm attitude of the Administration, the LGUs and the community
people; lack of research-based initiatives to support DRR training and volunteer
mobilization; and lack of measures to sustain DRR initiatives.
CONCLUSION
The HEIs in the country lack the necessary capacity to manage the National
Reserve Service Corps for DRR training and volunteer mobilization, thus, their role and
potential in disaster risk reduction have not been optimized.
While there is no variation in the capacity of public and private HEIs in managing
their National Reserve Service Corps for DRR training and volunteer mobilization,
premium can be placed on elements that affect their capacities along the five (5)
thematic areas. These elements can serve as basis for the formulation of a capacity
development program for HEIs to enhance their NSRC operation.
Drawing from the findings and conclusions, the following recommendations are
hereby advanced: 1) formulation of strategic capacity development model to serve as
an impetus in making NSRCs and HEIs functional and relevant DRR organizations;
2) widest dissemination of the results of the investigation through the Philippine Society
of NSTP Educators and Implementers, Incorporated; the Commission on Higher
Education; and other organizations; 3) Sharing of the findings of the study to the
Department of Interior and Local Government, through the Local Government Academy,
and other concerned agencies in aid of legislation for more efficient and productive DRR
programs; and 4) conduct of further and parallel studies to bring about more empirical
data to aid better understanding of climate change and the disasters it causes.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ciampi, M., et al. "Gender and Disaster Risk Reduction: A Training Pack". Oxfam House:
Oxford, United Kingdom, 2011.
FEMA, "Guidebook for Developing a School Earthquake Safety Program". FEMA, 1989.
IFRC, "International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. A Framework for
Community Safety and Resilience in the Face of Disaster Risk". IFRC, Geneva, Switzerland,
2009.
IFRCRCS, "Public Awareness and Public Education for Disaster Risk Reduction". International
Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Geneva, Switzerland, 2011.
International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, School Seismic Safety,"Disaster Prevention for
Schools Guidance for Education Sector Decision-Makers Consultation". International Strategy
for Disaster Reduction, School Seismic Safety, Vancouver, B.C., 2008.
UNISDR, "United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction. Terminology of Disaster
Risk Reduction". UNISDR, 2004.
UNISDR, "United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction. Hyogo Framework for
Action 2005-2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters (HFA)".
UNISDR, Kobe, Japan, 2005.
UNISDR and UNOCHA, "Disaster Preparedness for Effective Response Guidance and Indicator
Package for Implementing Priority Five of the Hyogo Framework. UNISDR and UNOCHA,
Geneva, Switzerland, 2008.
ADPC, “16th Community Based Disaster Risk Management Course, Module 6: Community
Disaster Risk Reduction Implementation, Session 7: Childhood Focused Disaster Risk
Reduction.” (Published Material), Asian Disaster Preparedness Center Bangkok, Thailand,
2007.
Basher, R., “Global Early Warning Systems For Natural Hazards: Systematic And People
Centered.” (Published Material), Philosophical Trasactions of the Royal Society, 2006.
CRED, “Center for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters.” (Published Material), CRED
Crunch #12, Brussels, Belgium, 2008.
Das, S., “International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development 2015: 8-11
Community Based Disaster Risk Management: Managing Disaster In Small Steps.” (Published
Material), IJMRD, 2014.
ESCAP, “Implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action for Action in Asia and Pacific:
Follow-up to the Outcome of the Third Asian Ministerial Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction
– From the Regional to the Global Platform.” (Published Material), ESCAP, Bangkok, Thailand,
2009.
Mileti, D., et al., “Public Hazards Communication and Education: The State of the Art.”
(Published Thesis), Boulder, CO: Natural Hazards Research and Applications Information
Center, 2004.
Petal, M., “Disaster Risk Reduction Education: Material Development, Organization and
Evaluation in Kelman, I ed.” (Unpublished Material) Regional Development Dialogue Journal,
Kobe, Japan, 2007.
Petal, M.,“Disaster Risk Reduction Educa ion in Shaw, R and Krishnamurty, R eds, Disaster
Management: Global Challenges and Local Solutions.” (Unpublished Material), Universities
Press India, 2008.
Pitt, M.,“The Pitt Review: Learning Lessons from the 2007 Floods and Independent Reviews by
Sir Michael Pitt.” (Published Thesis), Crown Publications, London, 2007.
Schick, O.,“Disaster Risk Education and Safer Schools.” (Published Material), Association
Française pour la Préventiondes Catastrophes Naturelles (AFPCN) and Prevention 2000, 2007.
SEEDS, “Ahmedabad Action Agenda for School Safety, International School Disaster Risk
Reduction Conference.” (Published Material), SEEDS, Delhi, India, 2007.
Tran, H.P,“Regional Analysis on Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) Education in the Asia Pacific
Region: In the Context of Priority of Action 3 of the Hyogo Framework for Action.” (Published
Material), UNISDR, Bangkok, Thailand, 2009.
UNISDR,“Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and
Community Disasters.” (Published Material), United Nations International Strategy for Disaster
Reduction, Geneva, Switzerland, 2005.
UNISDR, “Words in Action: A Guide for Implementing the Hyogo Framework.” (Published
Material), United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, Kobe, Japan, 2007.
UNISDR, “Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction – Risk and Poverty in a
Changing Climate.” (Published Material), UN, Geneva, Switzerland, 2009.
Webster, et. al,“The Humanitarian Costs Of Climate Change.” (Published Material) Feinstein
International Center, 2008.
Wisner, B.,“Let Our Children Teach Us! A Review of the Role of Education and Knowledge in
Disaster Risk Reduction.” (Published Material), UNISDR, Geneva, Switzerland, 2006.
Wisner, B., et. al, “School Seismic Safety: Falling Between the Cracks?” (Published Material)
Radix, 2006.
IGP of RA 10121
IRR of RA 9163
IRR of RA 10121