LDR   06557nam^^22004333a^4500
001        FI13042469_00001
005        20130801101705.0
006        m^^^^^o^^d^^^^^^^^
007        cr^^n^---ma^mp
008        130502n^^^^^^^^xx^||||^o^^^^^|||^0^eng^d
024 8    |a FI13042469
245 00 |a Local governments and disaster risk reduction |h [electronic resource] |b good practices and lessons learned.
260        |a Geneva, Switzerland : |b United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR) ; |a [S.l.] : |b International Training Centre ITC ; |a [S.l.] : |b United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), |c 2010-03.
506        |a © United Nations, 2010 - All rights reserved. Any part of this text may be reproduced without permission provided that it is reproduced accurately and not in a misleading context and the source of the material is clearly acknowledged. The wide dissemination, reproduction and use of the document are encouraged. If any reproductions, translations or quotations are generated, a copy of the document or quotation is requested to be forwarded to the UNISDR secretariat.
510        |a (2010). Local governments and disaster risk reduction: good practices and lessons learned. United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR), International Training Centre (ITC), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).
520 3    |a This document serves as a compilation of various good practices and lessons learned by local governments while implementing DRR measures. These cases display the central role that local bodies play in mitigating disaster risk, while highlighting the limitations to sustaining and scaling-up these efforts to the national level. According to the report, there are four major roles that local governments play in DRR. First, they are essential in the maintenance of multi-level frameworks necessary for implementing comprehensive DRR measures over the long term by sustaining political pressure on external stakeholders to remain committed once the immediacy of disaster dissipates. Secondly, as the most immediate service providers, local governments have a unique vantage point to engage local communities and citizens in DRR awareness and training. Thirdly, local governments can be crucial in sustaining development once external support has been withdrawn by institutionalizing practical DRR initiatives in their day-to-day operations. Lastly, their small scale and flexibility allow them to serve as laboratories for experimentation in innovative tools and techniques that could potentially be replicated in other local settings or exported to the national level. The document identifies five challenges that face local governments in implementing DRR measures. Two interrelated factors are weak governance capacities and lack of knowledge about the disaster risks and vulnerabilities facing their communities. Support from national governments, NGOs, and UN agencies are instrumental in these regards. Another limitation of local governments is that though they are essential to maintaining vital local infrastructures, they often lack the ability to invest in making them resilient to disasters. Capital investment planning can be implemented to deal with this problem. Though DRR management is a long-term venture, it is often subject to the constant shifts within local governments and corresponding fluctuations in interests about DRR. This is where establishing independent institutionalized DRR offices with permanent staffs play a major role in maintaining continuity and commitment to DRR. This ties into the problem that focus is often concentrated on short-term recovery after a disaster. Taking a concerted look at local governments and communities can play a major role in moving towards establishing strategic long-term DRR initiatives.
520 0    |a General Disaster Risk Reduction
520 2    |a Acknowledgements p. IV; Foreword p. V; Executive summary p. VIII; The case studies p. IX; Bangladesh: The Comprehensive Disaster Management Programme: Empowering local governments. Ministry of Food and Disaster Management, Government of Bangladesh p. 1; Canada: The Ontario Provincial Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment. Government of Ontario p. 7; El Salvador: Strengthening connections between communities and local government. Oxfam America p. 10; Fiji: Beyond early warning and response: Risk-sensitive local development. UNDP Pacific Centre p. 14; France: Memo’Risks: Students survey community risk knowledge. EP Loire p. 18; Indonesia: Many partners, one system: An integrated Flood Early Warning System (FEWS) for Jakarta. Asian Disaster Preparedness Center, Bandung Institute of Technology & Jakarta Provincial Government p. 21; Indonesia: The joint management of Merapi Volcano. The National Agency for Disaster Management, Indonesia p. 27; Japan: Watch and learn: Children and communities study mountain and urban risks. Saijo City Government p. 29; Nepal: Community-based poverty reduction for disaster risk reduction. Practical Action Nepal p. 34; Pakistan: Institution-building and capacity building for local governments. Earthquake Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Authority of Pakistan (ERRA) p. 39; Peru: Empowering local government as leaders in disaster reduction and recovery. UNDP Peru and Municipal Governments of Chincha, Pisco, Cañete and Ica p. 44; Philippines: A permanent provincial coordinating office for disaster risk reduction. Provincial Government of Albay p. 48; South Africa: Developing and managing water resources. Overstrand Municipality p. 52; Viet Nam: Building local capacity and creating a local government network for cyclone risk. Development Workshop France & Commune Local Governments of Thua Thien Hue p. 57; Incheon Declaration p. 62
533        |a Electronic reproduction. |c Florida International University, |d 2013. |f (dpSobek) |n Mode of access: World Wide Web. |n System requirements: Internet connectivity; Web browser software.
650    1 |a Risk management.
650    1 |a Hazard mitigation.
662        |a South Africa. |2 tgn
662        |a Bangladesh. |2 tgn
662        |a Indonesia. |2 tgn
662        |a Japan. |2 tgn
662        |a Pakistan. |2 tgn
662        |a Philippines. |2 tgn
662        |a Vietnam. |2 LCSH
662        |a France. |2 tgn
662        |a Canada. |2 tgn
662        |a El Salvador. |2 tgn
662        |a Fiji. |2 tgn
662        |a Peru. |2 tgn
710 2    |a United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR).
710 2    |a Disaster Risk Reduction Program, Florida International University (DRR/FIU), |e summary contributor.
830    0 |a dpSobek.
852        |a dpSobek
856 40 |u http://dpanther.fiu.edu/dpService/dpPurlService/purl/FI13042469/00001 |y Click here for full text
992 04 |a http://dpanther.fiu.edu/sobek/content/FI/13/04/24/69/00001/FI13042469thm.jpg


The record above was auto-generated from the METS file.