Conference on the Role of NGOs in Disaster Mitigation, Disaster Management Centre, Oxford Polytechnic, 24-25 October, 1989

On the eve of the International Decade For Natural Disaster Reduction, this meeting of the International Hazards Panel was an appropriate launch for Andrew Maskrey’s book, Disaster Mitigation: A community-based approach (published by Oxfam, hardback f19.95 paperback f4.95). The Disaster Management Centre took the opportunity to convene a 2-day meeting reviewing current mitigation initiatives.

Besides Andrew Maskrey‘s keynote address there were a number of lively and interesting contributions representing a wide field of mitigation initiatives. Among these, Ruth McLeod, Director of Homeless International, illustrated the self-help mitigation measures of squatters on a hillside outside Kingston. One spectacular innovation was to re-use scrap tyres to stabilise the hillside. But few squatters’ buildings were able to survive the fury of Hurricane Gilbert. Two of the incidental effects of the hurricane were a most valuable redistribution of roofing sheets from commercial buildings and a step up from scrap wood to cement block reconstruction by the squatters in the aftermath. But have they traded a home resistant to wind and rain for one more vulnerable to slippage by its extra weight?

Paul Thompson of the Flood Hazards Research Centre at Middlesex Polytechnic and Alison Barrett, an engineer turned development administrator, now with Oxfam, looked at different aspects of the

1988 Bangladesh floods. Paul Thompson guided the meeting through simplified appraisal and evaluation methods that NGOs could use for different options in flood mitigation. For Oxfam, and many other agencies, the frequency of serious floods and their repeated involvement in relief has raised serious questions about whether anything can be done to eliminate causes of flooding. In the debate whether scarce resources are better used to try to prevent flooding or to help people to learn to live with it, the latter seems the more appropriate. But this need not exclude NGOs from critically evaluating govern- ment and other flood mitigation proposals from the point of view of the affected population, sharing information, lobbying and networking on these issues.

Graham Eale of the Food Studies Group at Queen Elizabeth House, Oxford, reviewed the opportunities and constraints for NGOs in the mitigation of the effects of drought when alerted through early warning indicators. Olivia Graham and Ced Hesse from Oxfam’s (Sahelian) Arid Lands Unit illustrated some project options including cereal banks, water harvesting, destocking and restocking pastoralists as strategies for people living in permanently arid lands to reduce their vulnerability to severe drought.

In his paper ‘Doing Without Learning . . . ’ Dr Krisno Nimpuno of the Disaster and Emergency Reference Centre, Delft, took

DISASTERS VOLUME 14 NUMBER 1

76 Marcus Thompson

NGOs to task for their lack of accountability either to their beneficiaries or to their contributors. With ’closed working and funding circuits they are not under much pressure to consider the quality of their services‘. He argued that effective disaster prevention must be based on experience and collective memory for which recording and evaluation are essential - and at present are sadly lacking.

Andrew Maskrey’s keynote paper sum- marised the conclusions of his book and of his experience in the Rimac valley of Peru.

The media has convinced us that mitigation is synonymous with highly technified programmes . . . No-one takes into account the actions of people and local organisations before, during and after the numerous small disasters that take place. People are not passive when their homes and livelihoods are threatened. They respond often in an organised way to mitigate the hazards.

People and their organisations are in fact the principal actors in disaster mitigation and NGOs (particularly local NGOs, rather than international agencies) are in the best position to make governments and agencies participate in people’s own mitigation programmes. Maskrey’s observations and experience give the lie to the often-heard rationalisation that mitigation work is so expensive and so capital-intensive that it is appropriate only to governments and the United Nations. He concludes his book with 12 action points for NGOs in implementing community-based mitigation measures.

The range of subjects covered in the meeting was very wide - ‘a basinful of bits and pieces’ as Ian Davis, the meeting convenor, let slip towards the end of the second day. In summarising the implica- tions for NGOs arising from the presenta-

tions one participant concluded that they have opportunities:

- to spread expertise in mitigation, the multiplier effect

- to articulate community demands and lobby for community-based mitigation

- to mediate between government and communities

- to be a catalyst for community self-help - to analyse and critically review govern-

ment mitigation plans.

The meeting did not pass formal resolutions but suggestions for an NGO agenda for the IDNDR included:

- enabling and advising community- based organisations in the implementa- tion of mitigation programmes

- pursuing mitigation by increasing the capacity of communities to cope with disasters, including the transfer of relevant technology

- promoting the sharing of mitigation experience by prioritising documenta- tion, publication, networking and meetings

- integrating mitigation with other development projects.

It is planned to publish a selection of papers from the Conference in the journal of the Intermediate Technology Group.

Marcus Thompson Emergencies Coordinator Oxfam 274 Banbury Road Oxford OX2 7DZ UK

DISASTERS VOLUME 14 NUMBER 7