210 likes | 298 Views
Integration of earthquake science into disaster reduction programmes: Lessons from West Sumatra. Project Aim.
E N D
Integration of earthquake science into disaster reduction programmes: Lessons from West Sumatra
Project Aim Provide generic insights with the potential to inform how collaborations between the humanitarian and scientific community could contribute to better disaster risk reduction policies and practices
Padang 100,000s of people in Padang are exposed to destructive tsunami hazard KOGAMI most prominent DRR NGO for earthquake and tsunami
M 6.7 Earthquake 10 April 2005 M 7.6 Earthquake 30 September 2009
Nature of the science used • How relationships formed • Characteristics of relationship • Barriers between the scientific and humanitarian communities threatening the positive absorption of science into DRR
Global International National Local BNPB
Contribution of science to DRR in Padang • Put tsunami hazard on the radar of NGOs in West Sumatra • Helped remove initial resistance and scepticism towards DRR activities for earthquake and tsunami hazard. • Inform and provide important tools for DRR and emergency response planning at community and organisational level • Can assist in refuting unscientific, potentially dangerous messages through provision of clear, trusted messages.
First Generation Tsunami Hazard Map for Padang • Based on simple • topographic map of Padang • Inform DRR initiatives • Increase communities risk perception • Plan evacuation maps 0-5 m Elevation 5-10 m 10-15 m
Vital DRR Tools Accompanied by Simple Messages “ As long as we live near the Indian Ocean then we are at risk from earthquake and tsunami hazard and we must prepare”
Contribution of science to DRR in Padang • Put tsunami hazard on the radar of NGOs in West Sumatra • Helped remove initial resistance and scepticism towards DRR activities for earthquake and tsunami hazard • Inform and provide important tools for DRR and emergency response planning at community and organisational level • Can assist in refuting unscientific, potentially dangerous messages through provision of clear, trusted messages
Features of Relationship • Relations developed in an unplanned way • No formal mechanisms to facilitate communication between the two communities • Key characteristics: • Informal-approachable (friendships) • Trust • Mutual understanding • Clear messages • Quick response
Challenges • Timescales: • Long vs Short • Abstract theory vs Practical usefulness • Specialised vs Holistic • Ongoing debate vs Trust
“It’s difficult to plan properly without the official tsunami hazard map....I asked them (the scientific consortium) to hurry with the map as the tsunami may happen tomorrow!” Patra, KOGAMI “since we do not fund the scientists, we cannot force them to hurry up....the scientists were reluctant to share their data until 2009” Professor Febrin Andalas University
Challenges • Timescales: • long vs short • Abstract theory vs Practical usefulness • Specialised vs holistic • Ongoing debate vs Trust
“The problem with scientists is that they never agree’ and that these particular scientists were ‘just showing off” Tormizi, SurfAid.
Science is having a positive contribution to DRR in Padang. • Relationship developed in an ad-hoc way and is strongly reliant upon personal contacts. • Can these relations be replicated elsewhere? • Are the relations sustainable in the longer-term?