| What
lessons can be learnt from this exercise? |
| 1 |
Early
warning system would have prevented loss of life and
property |
| 2 |
That
could have been supported with an evacuation plan where
evacuation routes and evacuation centers are identified |
| 3 |
Those
evacuation centers would have been provided with necessary
logistics to cater for a calamity of this nature |
| 4 |
Those
centers would have been supported with a relief plan
and a management system where the refugees also given
responsibility for managing those centres and necessary
resources to execute the plan until the temporary shelters
are built for the refugees |
| 5 |
Permanent
shelter takes a long time to build as there are associated
issues such as land, preplanning of townships and infrastructure
etc. and therefore it is necessary to provide decent
temporary shelter for people, probably within the lands
identified for resettlement, with materials which can
be reused in permanent construction later. |
| |
|
What
had we done as SLUMDMP with regards to the general disaster
situation
What SLUMDMP had done can be categorized under
four major areas |
| 1 |
National
Intervention |
| 2 |
Intervention
in five districts that get affected by different hazards |
| 3 |
Training
Solutions to improve disaster management |
| 4 |
Provision
of on demand training for disaster management |
| |
|
| National
Intervention |
| 1 |
Incorporating
disaster management in the school curricula and facilitating
students to take up disaster as a theme in their AL
project activties; Consultations with Teachers and AL
students in Rathnapura, Kegalla, Kandy, Matale and Nuwara
Eliya areas) |
| 2 |
Incorporating
disaster management a subject in certain streams of
the University Education |
| 3 |
Drafting
and publishing Guidelines for construction in disaster
prone areas
(Cyclone, Floods, Landslides, Lightening) |
| |
|
| Intervention
in five districts |
| 1 |
Hazard mapping (Rathnapura District, Kandy MC and Navalapitiya
UC) |
| 2 |
Awareness creation |
| |
| a |
Leaflets
on different disasters, TV programs, Video clips |
| b |
School
programs (Seminars, Essay and Poster competition,
etc.) |
| c |
Public
awareness campaigns (Disaster safety days at Rathnapura) |
|
| 3 |
Assisting in preparation of Emergency Management and
Response Plans |
| |
| a |
Rathnapura,
Kandy, Local Authorities along Kelani River |
|
| 4 |
Mitigation
activities |
| |
| a |
Model
houses for landslide and flood prone areas in
Rathnapura |
| b |
Structural
mitigation in landslide prone areas (Soyza Kelle,
Nawalapitiya) in collaboration with ITDG |
|
| |
|
| Training
Solutions and provision of on demand training |
| 1 |
Relief
Operations including safety and rescue operations |
| 2 |
Mitigation
(including mitigation through proper land use planning) |
| 3 |
Reconstruction
and Rehabilitation |
| |
|
| Training
had been offered and executed for |
| |
–
Political heads of Local Authorities |
| |
–
Technical personal who approve building plans |
| |
–
Planning officers and Planning Assistants of UDA |
| |
–
Administrative personal who are responsible for disaster
relief operations |
| |
–
Volunteer organizations who support the administrative
mechanism in relief operations |
| |
–
Journalists |
| |
|
Some
of these programs were carried out and also offered
in collaboration with various organizations such as
SLRC, St John’s Ambulance Service, etc.
Experiences of the project
In carrying out the project we have experienced
following that needs particular attention of disaster
managers. |
| |
People
are not keen in preparing or following Emergency Management
and Response Plans
Even when the plans exist, no updating is done or not
used (one reason for this above being the absence of
legal or statutory obligation)
Cost of mitigation is considered a burden though cost
of relief is accommodated
Land use planning is restricted to paper and violated
by the authorities themselves |
| |
|
| These
happens probably because of the paradigms people have |
| |
We
will see when it comes
– (Reactive than proactive)
|
| |
Allegiance
is towards persons and not for systems |
| |
No one has the ultimate responsibility
– Buck is passed from down to top or at times
even top to down under
– Buck is readily grabbed from the top and passed
further upward
– Some times it again come back
– Buck stops at different levels for different
areas for different reasons
|
| |
No
system exist (even when there is a shade of a system
it is violated on the whims and fancies of the powerful
individuals in the system or outsiders |
| |
|
| What
we have done to improve the post tsunami situation |
| 1 |
Sent
proposals for streamlining the relief work |
| 2 |
Sent
proposals for providing decent shelter for people |
| 3 |
Sent
proposals for broader strategies for reconstruction
|
| 4 |
Sent
proposals and active participation in drafting proposals
for an “All Hazard Warning System”, initiative
undertaken by Lirneasia and Vanguard Foundation |
| 5 |
Provide
affordable housing solutions in reconstruction and support
reconstruction program |
| |
| a |
Houston
Buddhist Vihara Project (Ambalantota) |
| b |
Mallika
Home Project (Hikkaduwa) |
| c |
International
Buddhist Viahra Project (Lunawa) |
|
| |
|
These
are in addition to the activities initiated by the ministry.
What is to be done in the future?
There could be another disaster in the country,
some times, encompassing the already affected areas
(just after the tsunami Ampara was again devastated
by a flood). Next could be a major flood or a cyclone.
At least we should have emergency response plans ready
to face such a calamity, possibly with an effective
warning system and other essentials associated with
such a system. We also need to find out how the basic
paradigms could be changed so that these systems we
create would function when a calamity occurs. |