GLOBAL BLUEPRINTS FOR CHANGE

SUMMARIES OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR

 THEME A: LIVING WITH THE POTENTIAL FOR NATURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL DISASTERS

1.      Improving Community Sustainability

2.      Reducing Vulnerabilities in Existing Buildings  and Lifelines [with Consideration of 
         Social and Environmental Factors]

3.      Enhancing Continuing and Distance Education

4.      Enhancing Public Awareness

5.      Improving Business Contingency and Business Recovery Planning 

6.      Improving Emergency Management

7.      Improving Real Time and Near Real Time Communications

8.      Reducing the Impact of Disasters on Public Health

9.      Mitigating the Interaction of Natural, Environmental, and Ecological Disasters

10.    Improving Urban and Land-Use Planning

11.    Reducing Risk to Cultural Heritage

12.    Human Rights, Rural Hazards, and Livelihood Security in Disaster Situations

13.    Improving the use of Insurance and Other Financial Instruments for Risk Management 

                           THEME A: LIVING WITH THE POTENTIAL FOR NATURAL 
                                           AND ENVIRONMENTAL DISASTERS

Preamble: The topics, scope of work, and a summary of the recommendations for each of the Global Blueprints for Change for this theme are provided below.

Topic A.1: Improving Community Sustainability: This Blueprint for Change will provide guidance that will assist communities throughout the world in becoming sustainable over time to the threats posed by the disaster agents generated by natural and environmental hazards.  A sustainable community is the result of a long-term process based on coordinated anticipatory planning and collaborative actions at the local level by community stakeholders and policy makers who are working together to preempt the unthinkable, control the controllable, and plan for the inevitable.

Recommendations for Overcoming Barriers to Implementation:

·         United States: Fred Krimgold and Nesrin Basoz

On the basis of experience with natural and environmental disasters throughout the world, we recommend the actions outlined below as a means for improving community sustainability.

      1.    Every community of every Nation should start the process for achieving sustainability.  This process is complex, requiring applications of science, traditional knowledge, and technology in conjunction with to the hazard, built, and policy environments of each nation.   It also requires the formation of networks of cooperating organizations that will collaborate in the development and implementation of public policies for disaster management.  The scope includes science, engineering, and technology needed to resolve issues of public safety, security, health-care, and economic, environmental, ecological, and energy concerns associated with natural and environmental hazards on local, national, and regional scales.  The strategy is to capitalize on the gains made in past activities and the possibilities represented by new initiatives, turning both into opportunities to improve the peoples' capability in every nation to live with, build to withstand, and to learn from natural and environmental disasters.

2.        Use the Global Blueprints for Change (e.g., unified strategies for achieving sustainable (smart) development) as a tool to accelerate the process.  The Blueprints, which will be developed, disseminated, and promoted by the Alliance for Disaster Reduction, are to be implemented at local and regional levels, after adjustments have been made to meet specific local situations.  The blueprints will focus on SMART solutions (i.e., solutions that integrate social, technical, administrative, political, legal, and economic considerations) in order to eliminate the underlying causes of physical, social, enterprise, and environmental vulnerabilities in every community of every nation. Implementation of each Blueprint will be in accordance with existing public policies and professional practices in place at the local and regional levels of each Nation.

       3.        Use the collective guidance contained in the Global Blueprints for Change to improve the following   
       kinds of choices that incrementally lead to sustainability: 

·       Prevention, mitigation, preparedness, early warning, emergency response, intervention, recovery and   
        reconstruction. 
·       The safety of citizens, and the resilience of the built environment. 
·       Incentives for citizens, businesses, and communities to perform impact assessments and to prepare and   
        exercise contingency and recovery plans. 
·       Performance codes and standards for buildings and infrastructure.
·       Cost-effective repair, strengthening, and retrofit strategies to reduce vulnerabilities in residences,
        commercial buildings, and infrastructure caused by flaws in planning, siting, design, construction, and 
        use. 
·       Integrated risk-based urban planning that is based on land-use capability analyses. 
·       Ways to mitigate by spreading the risk through insurance and other economic solutions.
·       Creation of Centers of Excellence for Sustainable Development. The Centers are envisioned as the legacy
        of the Alliance for Disaster Reduction. Each Center is an existing organization (or a consortium of
        organizations) that is committed to making sustainable (smart) development a reality in all the
        communities in the region. The goal of each Center is to promote sustainability of the built environment    
        in their geographic region. Its functions include serving as a regional clearinghouse for information and   
        a resource for implementation of the Global Blueprints for Change, provision of technical assistance, and   
        sustaining professional education.  The first of up to 100 Centers of Excellence is expected to be  
        established by the end of 2002. 

·       United States: David Simpson

On the basis of our experience, we recommend implementation of the actions outlined below:

    1.  Forming a multi-disciplinary USA working group to identify the best examples of this model as it has
         been implemented in USA communities.
    2.  Evaluating the current model for increased adoption in USA communities, identifying ways in which the
         model can be promoted as a needed component to local emergency management efforts.
    3.  Examining and evaluating the ways in which the USA model could be adapted to other cultural contexts.
    4.  Creating a Global Blueprint that promotes community self-sufficiency (i.e. sustainability) using the
         grassroots model (i.e., some form of CERT) as a basis to increase preparedness, resiliency and local
         social capital.

 ·         Burkina Faso: Salibo Some and Joseph Sedgo

We define “sustainable development” as a process where social, environmental and economic actions are integrated in a balanced way with flexible prioritization for rapid recovery, so as life be preserved and enhanced over time”.  This definition encompasses economic, environmental and social aspects, takes into account disastrous eventualities and implies that resilience is key factor of sustainability.  Following this definition, we can now define a “sustainable community” as one that can maintain and strengthen harmony and peace among its members in all situations, and has the ability to organize for self-promotion and to assure individual well-being over time

We recommend:

1. A program geared at educating the villagers on the importance and roles of each of the 3 sub-divisions of the environment, the stakes related to their pollution or degradation, as well as on the options regarding their restoration and preservation.

2. In conjunction with other HPI projects in the area, such as livestock and beekeeping projects, we recommend the organization of “environment days” to bring the environment clubs to compete for best booths on the complexity, diversity, kindness and beauty of nature, as well as for most impressive environmental accomplishments. 

3. Prior to this day, volunteer knowledgeable people, including men and women villagers should be selected to serve on a jury that will go around the villages to evaluate club environmental activities.  Criteria for this evaluation will be determined in collaboration with the jury members and will include such things as sanitation, number of trees successfully planted, amount of compost produced, level of livestock/crop production integration, etc.  Best clubs will be rewarded with tree plants or seeds.

4. Special attention should be given to the spread of all gifts provided (knowledge, trees, etc.) in order to promote  “pass-on the gift” as an important cornerstone of sustainability. In this regard, many actions are foreseen as a way to comply with this principle.  For instance, we think that organizing the ecology day will allow environment clubs to share their experience and knowledge with the large public on the diversity, complexity, beauty and kindness of nature.

 ·         Israel: Avi Shapira, Yaacov Heichal, and Yael Kligman

The average return period of earthquakes with magnitudes 6 and above is of the order of 100 years. It implies a realistic barrier in convincing the public at large, the people in the building industry who have to invest money to reduce vulnerability, and politicians that the earthquake threat is acute. We recommend two actions on the basis of our belief that we may overcome these difficult6ies: 1) Enhancing public awareness (Blueprint A.4) and 2) Imposing formal regulations (Blueprint B.9). 

·         Taiwan: Liang-Chun Chen

We recommend that we become more aggressive in seeking to attain the goal of the construction of disaster-resistant and disaster-sustainable communities in Taiwan.

1.   On the one hand, we need to improve and resolve the current problems encountered in meeting this goal, and on the other hand, we must integrate our actions and strategies to address the issues. Then the different strategies can be linked and work together to achieve the multiple effects desirable.

2.   At the heart of the problem is how to enhance the understanding and identification of our populace toward sustainable community including to change our populace and the public decision-makers’ value concept and life attitude from the perspective of being oriented to economic development, asking for maximum efficiency, etc to that of the sustainable community, which is probably the most urgent and fundamental issue or challenge for our society.

Topic A.2: Reducing Vulnerabilities in Existing Buildings and Lifelines [with Consideration of 

Social and Environmental Factors]: This Blueprint for Change will provide guidance that will assist communities throughout the world in the identification of the physical, social, enterprise, and environmental vulnerabilities that are prevalent in their community and in devising cost-effective solution sets for reducing them. 

Recommendations for Overcoming Barriers to Implementation:

·         United States: Jim Beavers and Dennis Mileti

·         United States: John Wiener

We recommend actions to "close the circle."  "Closing the circle" requires a response to the fact that disasters worsen poverty and deprivation, which narrow the range of human choice, and compel ever-greater environmental destruction, leading to ever more frequent disasters.  We are in a cascade of failure, at present, but the following actions can reverse that trend.

1.   A Witness Function: All educated persons with access to the scientific and academic communities should undertake to provide a "Witness" function, in which they note wherever appropriate the conditions of the local human-environment relationship.  The sustainability of a given combination of place and people depends on all the relationships, to some extent, but some are clearly more critical than others.  Soil degradation, for example, is often concealed by massive inputs transformed from petroleum and other sources (the annual and biennial volumes referenced cover this well, especially World Watch). Building on steep slopes, especially downhill from drainage areas badly affected by deforestation or land clearing, is obvious in many places.  These blueprints identify scores of examples.  A huge range of local and traveling expertise can be brought to bear on mapping the hazards.  But, the witness function goes a little farther, in making this knowledge public.  We may not be able to force a government to care for its people, but we can help prevent concealing the malignancy.

 2.   Accounting: The second activity is accounting, as made more honest over the last few decades (Repetto et al. 1989, Bromley 1995).  Counting all economic activity as if it were equally productive is wrong.  Desperate efforts to restore destroyed landscapes may move funds around, but the net is an effort to get back to zero, compared to the value of ecological and productive services provided before the destruction.  While the economists wrestle with technical issues of "green accounting", the rest of us can simply note the loss and waste of assets and destruction of productive potential (see Ascher 1999, Ascher and Healy 1990, World Resources Institute 2000/2001).

 3.   Labeling: The third activity is labeling.  The conventional response to a huge variety of hazard conditions has been to resort to use of a buffer or emergency supply of some sort – the classic modern example is pumping ground water during times of drought.  But after the stress is eased, the "ratchet" characteristic of irreversible changes of resource use applies (Blaikie et al. 1994 discuss this very well; World Resources 2000, Zerner 1999, 2000).   Buffers must be understood to be buffers, and converting them to resources to consume, especially non-renewably, should be labeled as such.  Worldwide, increasing pressure on resources has resulted in conversion from buffer to consumable to consumed.  We must at least label this.

 4.  Identification of disconnections: Fourth, we should strive whenever possible to identify the terribly misleading and destructive disconnections between capacity to damage and exposure to the consequences; between the capacity to enjoy benefits while displacing the costs onto the future or others (Bender 1997, Bromley 1995, Clark 1991, Norgaard and Howarth 1991, Ribot et al. 1996).  Despite great progress in rhetoric, ownership as capacity to destroy is almost universally privileged over ownership as stewardship, and the results are obvious in resource destruction worldwide.

·         India: Ravi Sinha

Our primary recommendation is to develop comprehensive and authoritative case studies, starting in the Kuchchh region, but not limited to it.   The objectives include:

       1.        Identification of the specific causes of high vulnerability in earthquake affected urban regions in
                  Gujarat.
       2.        Establishing the link between high vulnerability and prevalent engineering practices.
       3.        Establishing the role of development control rules and other legal procedures in unintentionally
                  promoting poor professional practices.
       4.        Identification of the kinds of changes that are needed to move towards acceptable engineering
                  practice and development control rules.
       5.        Analysis of and aggressive communication and transfer of the lessons learned from the situation
                  prevalent in Gujarat before the earthquake for the benefit of other cities in India having high
                  seismic vulnerability

·         Russia: Mark Klyachko

We recommend:

1. A step – by – step approach that incrementally improves the identification of vulnerabilities in buildings and infrastructure in every community

2. Preparation and broad demonstration of the best available examples of risk management for disaster reduction and safe & sustainable development (and versa);

3. Special education, especially for the very young, and the emerging professionals. 

4. Provision for financial risk analysis within every large construction design;
   
5. Supporting the penetration of risk-experts and risk-knowledge into governments
   

6. Development of the strongest possible Centers of Excellence;

·         Taiwan: Maw-Shyong Sheu and Chin-Hsiung Loh
 

We recommend implementation of the actions outlined below. 

1. The development and implementation of an integrated multi-hazard mitigation strategy having five interrelated elements:

·     To develop methodologies for hazard potential analysis, and to apply them to evaluation of the hazard potential in Taiwan area.

·     To select one or two demonstration regions for developing risk assessment methodologies and for simulating disaster scenarios.

·     To develop a disaster scenario display system in order to incorporate the risk assessment and  scenario simulation results, so that the government agencies and non-profit organizations can respond rapidly and correctly to reduce loss of lives and properties.

·     To develop model hazard mitigation plans for local governments in the demonstration regions.

·     To review current seismic design codes and to re-evaluate the hazard mitigation plans of local governments, and based on the evaluation results, to guide future improvement of the whole disaster mitigation work.

Topic A.3: Enhancing Continuing and Distance Education: This Blueprint for Change will provide guidance for enhancing continuing and distance education in communities throughout the world in order to meet the rapidly evolving needs of an increasingly diverse community of practitioners.

Recommendations for Overcoming Barriers to Implementation:

·         United States: Janet Dilling, Walter Green, Jane Kushma, Ian Manock, Avagene Moore, David Neal, and Don Schramm

We recommend implementation of the actions outlined below:

1. Development of a formalized global network where various sectors within the field of emergency management meet via the World Wide Web and share standardized practices, lessons learned, best practice models and training materials. This network should be organized on two levels: 1) regional nodes to accommodate regional differences and concerns, and 2) combined global community access.

2. Development and promotion of professional competencies by all related disciplines as they relate to disaster management and risk reduction. To that end, we first recommend the development of a guidance document on factors to consider in developing competencies.  The completed compendium of professional competencies should be distributed to professional organizations, major NGOs, lead country agencies, and academic institutions worldwide.

3. Use of the mechanism of the World Congress to develop an outreach campaign that is targeted to major grant-funding sources worldwide, encouraging them to fund more research related to disaster management and risk reduction.

Topic A.4: Enhancing Public Awareness: This Blueprint for Change will provide guidance for enhancing public awareness in communities throughout the world so that all sectors of the public are able to contribute to a process that will, over time, make their communities sustainable.

Recommendations for Overcoming Barriers to Implementation:

·     United States: James F. Davis, Michael Reichle, Toussan Toppozada, Tianqing Cao, David Branum, and Badie Rowshandehl

We recommend a series of steps outlined below to get us from where we are now to where we need to be.  The basis questions are: "Where do we go from here?" and "What can we do, as scientists, engineers, economists and sociologists, to help alleviate future losses?"  

      1.   Better communication needs to take place between the technical community and the policy makers  and general public. It is clear that California faces a serious financial threat to its buildings and economy from future earthquake losses.  But the problem receives serious attention only after catastrophic events. 

 2.  The full range of solutions needs to be communicated.  Solutions seem too expensive for the nebulous gain to be received at some distant time in the future. To many people, the threat of $150 per person per year doesn't seem like very much money—slightly more than $12 per month—especially if the federal government is likely to pay the brunt of the cost.  Scenario loss estimates fare just as poorly.  A scenario event may be catastrophic and cost tens of billions of dollars, but it's likely not to occur in our lifetime, or at least in the tenure of a City Councilperson or County Supervisor. 

             3.   New approaches must be invented to better communicate the level of risk to the general public,
             the public policy and decision makers and the financial institutions.  A process of assessing the success
             of important new communication efforts by surveying the intended audiences will facilitate continuing
             improvement of our efforts.

       4.  Communication of the risk is worthless without also providing advice the appropriate response
       options for the public, public officials and financial institutions.  What are current cost-effective
       loss-reduction solutions?  What interdisciplinary efforts could be undertaken to develop better, more
       cost-effective solutions?  How can the investment advantages of these solutions be best communicated
       to the public? To public officials? To financial institutions, such as lending institutions and insurance
       companies?  The development of answers to these questions needs urgent attention.  An
       interdisciplinary working group empanelled to make recommendations to both earth science and
       engineering communities is urgently needed.

       5.  We need to put both the uncertainties and the significance of the current loss estimates into a
       perspective that will justify action and not favor procrastination. We recognize that it's difficult to
       understand how to use estimates of future loss that are uncertain by a factor of four.

       6.  The scientific and technical community must continue its efforts to improve the loss estimation
       methodology and to reduce the uncertainty in the results.  Dollar loss estimates should be more
       comprehensive, including loss estimates for critical facilities and lifelines.  The better the results
       presented to the public, the more credible the message and the more useful the understanding is to
       design mitigation strategies.  Together these increase the likelihood that the public and policy makers
       will respond meaningfully to the loss estimation insights.

·         Israel: Avi Shapira et al

We recommend implementation of the actions outlined below on the basis of our experience: 

 1.  Earthquake catastrophes anywhere in the world should be used as reminders of what might happen to us if we neglect preparedness and mitigation actions. Earthquakes in Israel are infrequent and thus, awareness is relatively low. The relative low seismic activity is obviously a blessing, however, the hazard and risk are still significant both in individual and national terms. It is therefore very difficult to keep the public interested in the topic of earthquake hazards and risk and maintain a minimal level of awareness.

 2.  We need to continue to awaken the populace. Living in the era of satellite communication and Internet
      we often can spot on unfortunate catastrophes in other parts of the world. The current “awakening” in
      Israel is primarily due to the television reports from Izmit (Turkey) in 1999 and the fact that many
      Israelis spent their vacation in Turkey during the earthquake.

3.   Probably the best sustainable program is to educate the young generation through teaching, annual drills, educational projects etc. One example is an experiment that is initiated in Norway (Prof. Huseby, Univ. of Bergen) and the Seismology Division is trying to promote in Israel. This experiment involves establishing non-expensive seismic stations in schools that should be run by the students and is supported with a curriculum in the Earth sciences that might attract the interest of many students and maintain awareness among the students about the existence of seismic activity at close proximity to their homes and playground.

 ·         Taiwan: Yi-Ben Tsai

We recommend the following actions, because of Taiwan’s unique natural environment and societal development; Taiwan faces a high potential for natural and environmental disasters. Experiences during the last few years make it amply clear that if we do not pay more attention and take effective actions now to mitigate the effects of these hazards, many people will directly suffer from future disasters, and, ultimately, the whole nation will pay.

1.  Immediate enhancement in public awareness is a necessary first step.  We should make a concerted
     campaign to enhance public awareness in Taiwan of the high potential for natural and environmental
     disasters, on the seriousness in detrimental impact if we do not take actions to mitigate them, and most
     importantly, on the availability of a wide array of effective means and resources to reduce potential
     losses in human lives, properties and to avoid catastrophic interruptions in economic and social activities
     of the people in Taiwan. Fortunately, a new national Law for Hazards Mitigation has been enacted on
     July 19, 2000. This is a major milestone on the road to more effective disaster reduction in Taiwan.
     Enhancement of public awareness is the first step to prepare the whole society mentally for the long,
     and hopefully beneficial journey on this road.

2.  We should make maximum use of contemporary information and communication technology to get our
messages across to all segments of the society.

3.  Traditional ways of outreach programs have achieved good results. But much more can be done and
accomplished. For example, we may package our messages through entertainment industry. In the last few years there are several popular films profited from the dramatic aspects of natural or environmental disasters. If some of the over exaggerated aspects in these films are moderated, they can be made to become power media for enhancing public awareness on disaster reduction.

 4.  We should work together with all levels of teachers and educators to incorporate appropriate curricular materials for classroom instruction or extracurricular activities. In addition we should also conduct short courses or workshops for specific groups of people to be better informed about disaster reduction. The potential of the Internet for enhancing public awareness on disaster reduction in Taiwan is grossly underutilized, considering that Taiwan now has one of the highest percentages of population in the world on the Internet. Obviously, all of these cannot substitute the fundamental functions of school education.

 
Topic A.5: Improving Business Contingency and Business Recovery Planning: This Blueprint for change provides general guidelines for business enterprises throughout the world to develop and improve business continuity and recovery programs both internally to the business enterprises and externally to them within their communities.

       Recommendations for Overcoming Barriers to Implementation:

·      United States: Marsha Bacsko, Mary Carrido, and Walter Hays

On the basis of past experience and the urgent need to protect the business enterprise, the economic engines of every community in every Nation, we recommend implementation of the actions outlined below to reduce enterprise vulnerability:

1.    Formation of a unique new Alliance (i.e., an epistemic community on business continuity and    recovery).  The goal is to enlist many diverse partners from the public and private sectors who have knowledge on business continuity and recovery.  Priority will be given to those who have already shown that they can work together to meet the needs of business enterprises located in disaster-prone nations for information on hazard-vulnerability-risk assessment and risk management.  As illustrations of the opportunities that would come from working together, consider an Alliance involving all businesses of a specific type (e.g., computers, utility companies, specific services etc.). 

 2.  Members of the Alliance should develop  “blueprints for change for businesses," focusing on ways to improve the current state-of-practice in risk assessment and risk management.  The objective of the blueprints is for businesses, large and small, to become more adept at controlling the controllable, pre-empting the unthinkable, and preparing more effectively for the inevitable. 

 3.  Members of the Alliance should develop information and resource databases for sustainable development, giving priority to the kinds of information needed to implement each Blueprint for change. Each blueprint should address: 1) information on the location, severity, and frequency of the natural hazards (i.e., characteristics of the hazard environment), 2) the locations and vulnerabilities of buildings and infrastructure (i.e., characteristics of the built environment), and 3) the options, incentives and networks of co-operating organizations to implement public policies on risk management (i.e., characteristics of the policy environment).  The goal is for the partners in the Alliance to work together to develop information that is directly related to three broad strategies: 1) living with natural disasters, 2) building for natural disasters, and 3) learning from natural disasters.

 4.   Implement the blueprints, and the information, and resource databases in one or more projects.  The objective is to develop projects or demonstration studies that can be used to refine the first two steps and to develop success stories.  These projects can be undertaken in any country, but the need is greatest in developing countries. 

 5.  Create “Centers of Excellence for Business Disaster Technical Assistance.”   Each center of excellence, which would be created through a self- and peer-certification process, would be expected to have access to resident and non-resident experts on all aspects of hazard-vulnerability-risk assessment and risk management.   

Topic A.6: Improving Emergency Management: This Blueprint for Change will provide guidance for improving the professional practice of emergency management throughout the world. Improvement is urgently needed because disasters over time are becoming more frequent, more devastating, and more complex than in the past.

Recommendations for Overcoming Barriers to Implementation:

·         United States: John Peabody

·         Algeria: Djillali Benouar and Ahcene Mimi

We recommend the following actions on the basis of our recognition of the permanent threat to major investments and the population of Algeria as a result of major natural and environmental catastrophes: 

      1.   The government, through the various ministries and organizations, should multiply its efforts to
      continue the studies and analysis of the diverse natural and environmental calamities that are likely
      to occur in Algeria with the aim of mitigating their negative consequences.

2.  The government will contribute, together with all the institutions and organisms concerned, to the
     formulation of an economic and social development strategy which includes the establishment of an
     appropriate policy of land management for a sustainable development and a national disaster
     management policy.

3.   All local governments, especially those having a history of being disaster-prone, should be
      encouraged and helped to establish institutional mechanism within their administration, from the
      highest level down to the village-level.  Each should take responsibility for preparedness planning
      as well as for the implementation of basic protective measures. At the minimum, this action will
      ensure a prompt and effective relief operation when disaster strikes. Countries, which are exposed
      to similar types of disasters and belong to the same geographical region, must share among
      themselves evaluations of their own counter-disaster measures.

·         Australia: Gaye Cameron and J. P. Maies

We recommend:

1. The creation and establishment of a working group/s to proceed with the detailed development of the Disaster Mitigation Strategy;

2. The creation and establishment of parallel local/regional/state/national mitigation committees to manage disaster-mitigation strategies in each local/regional/state/national area;

3. The creation and establishment of national (and possibly state/regional) level expert groups to develop mitigation strategies including the development of best practice guidelines and associated activities.

4. Based on Australia’s model, which works well, a template can be developed for use by local and state bodies needing specific advise on prevention and mitigation measures across a range of hazards, and ultimately transferred to other countries facing similar threats.

·         Israel: Avi Shapira et al

We recommend implementation of the following actions:

1.   Lacking experience of our own and basic data, we should continue to investigate the possibility of relying on some of the existing developments such as the HAZUS system that was developed by FEMA for the USA and the EXTREMUM system that was developed by the Ministry for Disaster Management in Russia. The main barrier in Israel is quantifying the vulnerability of typical buildings.  Israel is very fortunate for not having statistics of building damages and casualties due to earthquakes. Despite the thousands of years of documented macro seismic information about destructive earthquakes, not much, if at all, can be implemented when considering the current inventory of existing buildings in Israel. Similarly, it is very complicated to use statistics developed in other regions of the world where the similarity between the engineering characteristics of buildings there and in Israel are questionable.

 2.  One possible approach to resolving the "similarity" question is adopting analytical approaches for
       estimating the behavior of typical buildings under expected seismic loads.

 ·         Russia: Boris Porfiriev

We recommend:

1. Rethinking the existing paradigms of both the environmental crisis concept and environmental disaster policy.  There are two reasons. First, because of inefficiency of the existing environmental policy precipitated to a substantial extent by the underlying normative approach and ALAPA principle focused on formal environmental quality rather than environmental and human health issues. Second, given that the existing models of environmental crisis management focus on instant or fast-burning emergencies rather than creeping or slow-burning crises (‘t Hart and Boin, 2001).

2. Improve proactive approaches. Many simulations, field exercises and contingency planning revolve around different scenarios of development of expected events and suggest a set of in-advance measures to either prevent or mitigate the future disaster. Intended as an answer to “what if?” questions, such models comply with the classical anticipation concept of disaster management and are naturally always proactive in their essence. Of course, there is good reason for a proactive attitude given that prevention tends to be more efficient than response measures. However, creeping or slow-burning crises, such as a national environmental crisis in Russia should be viewed as an actual or ongoing process, which failed to be forecasted or prepared for beforehand.

3. Practitioners should consider the reality of both slow-burning and fast burning situations or their combination as a compound crisis (Porfiriev, 2001).  This implies that the validity of the anticipation model should be evaluated in terms of the question of whether one must switch to a propitious crisis concept and the accompanying resilience model of disaster management, which, in turn, involves another type of decision making for handling “standing-in-the-middle-of-the-road” situations with the relevant measures lacking in existing emergency plans. The abovementioned does not automatically mean that a set of disaster management measures and contingency plans used to prepare for and handle instant emergencies are no longer valid for preparation for creeping crises. 

4. Examine the current planning and management strategy for a creeping and/or slow-burning crisis (and compound crisis as well) in terms of whether it should be both proactive and aimed at coping. We should consider pre-, trans-disaster events and coming disasters, thus marrying in-advance preparedness and emergency response, typical for instant/fast-burning crises, with alleviation and mitigation measures needed co cope with creeping and/or slow-burning crises.

5. An integrated approach, which combines risk assessment and the ALARA principle as an advanced technique with traditional normative policy based on maximum permissible limits (MPL) characteristics, might serve as an efficient tool for decision support in transitional societies. This can help decision-makers set environmental policy priorities and developing a fitting disaster and/or emergency management strategy (see Porfiriev, 1999). 

6. Decision-maker should be encouraged to piece together the so-called explicit and implicit risk assessments, while applying the integrated approach to disaster management. The former focuses on measurements of and judgements on the level of pollution and severity of its impact on human health impact carried out by specialists (environmental health, occupational and safety health experts and so forth) while the latter reveals public perceptions of risk (both by different social groups and communities as a whole). 

7. Develop a more informed opinion about the hierarchy of environmental risks to human health and the respective priorities of disaster prevention and/or coping strategies through risk communication policy. The combination of these two kinds of assessments provides for one more dimension of the integrated approach.  This is worth stressing given the objective limits and uncertainty of explicit or “professional” risk assessment, which often involves uncertainty precipitated by a limited or even minimal scientific knowledge about new, poorly understood subjects which are difficult to comprehend (see Lagadec, 1997). 

8. One should not overlook the fact that using explicit risk assessment in relative terms, for comparing rather than weighing of risks, really facilitates more advanced and substantiated setting of crisis policy priorities.  Given the complexity and cost of collecting and processing the ‘dose-response’ data, a decision maker quite rarely obtains quantitative risk assessment ready for use in advance, which makes efficient disaster preparation more problematic. This is an overwhelming issue for managing creeping and/or slow-burning disasters as well as compound or systemic crises, in particular those in the area of environment and public health. At the same time,

·         Taiwan: Liang-Chun Chen

We recommend the actions described below in order to build upon the major improvement and enhancement of hazard identification and risk mitigation in Taiwan during the past 2-3 years. Taiwan has made a big step toward the right direction in hazard mitigation.  Even though there are still problems, they are small when comparing with those during the days without the elaboration of “Hazard Mitigation Act” and the establishment of NAPHM, or without the accumulation of emergency management and response experiences from the Chi-Chi Earthquake, We are building upon the elaboration of laws and regulations by administrative agencies, the establishment of organizations and system, the formation and enhancement of civilian and community organizations, and the assistance of hazard mitigation tasks through research in science and technology.

1.   The sub-ordinances and relating regulated of “Hazard Mitigation Act” have not yet been elaborated or revised.

 2.   Many “Local hazards mitigation plans” at the County/City and Township/Shiang levels need to be
       revised in a short time. 

 3.   There are still large numbers of hazard mitigation related science and technology research waiting to
 be done, especially on the issues of socio-economic and cultural aspects.  The database of hazard
 mitigation research and practice is not yet established. 

 4.   Although there are some communities and civilian groups thinking highly of and participating in hazard 
 mitigation tasks, yet the number is still relatively small.

 5.   Many people don’t know much about the idea of hazard mitigation and sustainable development, even
       some of the administrative officials responsible for decision-making lack correct concept and sufficient
       knowledge about disaster prevention and response. 

6.    It is extremely important for the administrative agencies and the academic organizations to precisely understand the characteristics and mechanisms of large-scale disasters, which have happened before, and to communicate within Taiwan and with other countries having rich hazard mitigation and response experiences as a means to accelerate the development of in order to develop improved policies and strategies suitable for Taiwan’s native conditions, and, most importantly, to provide a safe and sustainable living environment for the people of Taiwan.

Topic A.7: Improving Real Time and Near Real Time Communications: This Blueprint for Change will provide guidance that will assist communities throughout the world in improve their capability for adopting and using real time communicating systems for the benefit of all sectors of the community.

Recommendations for Overcoming Barriers to Implementation:

·         United States: John Filson et al

We recommend the implementation of five integrated actions outlined below as a means to improve earthquake rapid response systems, which can be upgraded into early warning and alarm systems.  These recommendations are based on the growing consensus that earthquake early warning and alarm systems are low-cost solutions for the reduction of the seismic risk. The technology for such systems is available now.  The applications include: large cities, which are exposed to earthquakes occurring at known faults, important and critical infrastructure such as high speed trains, nuclear power plants, pipelines, etc., highly industrialized areas, and urban areas of all sizes.

1.        Urban seismic monitoring capable of recording strong ground shaking and the response of buildings and
           other structures during moderate and large earthquakes,

2.        Regional seismic monitoring of active geologic sources, such as earthquake-producing faults and
           volcanic activity,

3.        National seismic monitoring to ensure a recording capability down to a uniform magnitude level
           nationwide, and serve as the national monitoring backbone and backup to regional systems,

4.        Portable seismograph arrays that can be deployed rapidly following an earthquake to record the ground
           motion of aftershocks in areas of significant damage, and

5.        Regional and national data centers with the capability to collect and process data in real time, to rapidly
           disseminate notifications of earthquake occurrence and impact, and to provide other information
           products and services on earthquakes in general and on specific earthquake loss reduction practices.

·         United States: Louise K. Comfort

We recommend that the actions outline below be implemented in the year prior to the World Congress scheduled for 2002.  Completion by the time of the World Congress would ensure that they results have the greatest impact everywhere. 

1.   Identify a set of five cities in regions exposed to risk that would be willing participants in a trial demonstration project for improving their capacity for near and real time communication.

 2.  Within each city, identify a group of responsible leaders who would participate in a work group to
      design and implement an effective information structure for the city, adapted to its level of risk and
      resources.

       3.  At the international level, identify a group of experienced professionals, researchers and managers who
            have relevant knowledge for the specific risks and hazards that characterize each demonstration city.

       4.  Develop a strategy for funding the demonstration projects that would include a mix of local,
            state/provincial, national and international sources, and an estimated budget.

       5.  Develop a work plan with specification of tasks to be performed at each level, but with primary focus on
            the local level, to develop an information infrastructure for each city.

       6.  Present the set of five plans, with a design for interactive communication, information sharing and
            feedback among the five cities, at the World Congress in 2002.

·         Japan: Kuniaki Uehara

We recommend implementation of the actions outlined below in terms of four types of telecommunication systems that were demonstrated to be very important after the January 17, 1995 Kobe earthquake.  This earthquake left 6,400 dead and an estimated  $100 billion in damage. 

        1. During the earliest moments of a disaster, it is important to establish telecommunication links between the disaster-stricken area and the rest of the world, including the regional authorities and the relief organizations.  Such a system is required to gather information about the disaster-stricken area and to estimate the damage.  Furthermore, the system should support early decision-making that will facilitate coordination of rescue operations.

        2.  The telecommunication system has also proven itself to be a powerful and indispensable tool in
             disaster mitigation. Telecommunication applications, from Global Positioning System (GPS) to the
             Internet and Personal Digital Assistant (PDA), may be used in reporting hazards, assessing damage,
             and keeping authorities informed about location-specific and location-aware applications. 

         3.   We must support the handicapped people for providing disaster information.  For example,
               hearing-impaired people need text-based communication tools, instead of sound (voice)-based
               communication tools.

         4.   We must develop real-time supporting system for the disaster situation.  During the earliest moments
               of a disaster, rescue tasks may be complex and dynamic, and rescue staffs may be strangers to the
               disaster-stricken area.  Real-time supporting systems should provide rescue staffs with critically
               important information and knowledge

·         Switzerland: Martin Wieland

We recommend the actions outlined below to save lives and protect property.  The recommendations are based on the growing consensus that the optimum earthquake safety for buildings and infrastructure can be achieved by a combination of seismic design and early warning measures.  The underpinning technology exists now for applications that include: urban areas; high speed trains; highways; gas distribution systems; nuclear power plants; offshore platforms and facilities of petrochemical industry; pipelines; industrial facilities (robots, chip factories); commando centers, radio stations and rescue units; telecommunication centers; power generation facilities, etc.

1.    Apply the following kinds of measures several years before an earthquake strikes: seismic design and strengthening of buildings and installations; preparation of emergency plans, to conduct programs for earthquake preparedness of population, installation of earthquake early warning, seismic alarm and earthquake rapid response systems. Note: practically all people and buildings or facilities can be covered. 

       2.  Pre-plan and imp0lement seismic safety measures for maximum benefit during the seconds just before
            an earthquake strikes: earthquake early warning systems; warning provided by earthquake early
            warning system with pre-warning times of zero to maximum 90 seconds: evacuation of buildings;
            shut-down of critical systems (nuclear and chemical reactors); stop high-speed trains. Note: very few
            people can be evacuated for pre-warning times of less than 30 seconds; however, critical facilities can
            be put into a safer position.

       3.  Pre-plan and implement seismic safety measures for maximum benefit during an earthquake:  seismic
           alarm systems; alarm released by a seismic alarm (or early warning) system will provide signal for
           shut-down of critical systems (nuclear and chemical reactors); alarm signals can be used to initiate
           emergency stop of high-speed trains and vulnerable machines and industrial robots. Note: critical
           facilities can be put into a safer position. 

4.   Immediately after an earthquake: Safety system: earthquake rapid response systems; information provided by an earthquake rapid response system: within seconds after an earthquake damage maps based on the spectrum intensity can be made available, which show the damaged areas and form the basis for efficient rescue operations. Note: injured people trapped in damaged buildings may be rescued in time.

Topic A.8: Reducing the Impact of Disasters on Public Health: This Blueprint for Change will provide guidance to communities throughout the world that are seeking cost-effective ways to reduce the potential impacts of natural and environmental disasters on public health.