legal and institutional arrangements (lia)lia refers to the prevailing legal and institutional...

Legal and Institutional Arrangements (LIA)

Framework GuidebookBangladesh Urban Earthquake Resilience Project

February 2014

Earthquakes and Megacities InitiativePuno Building, 47 Kalayaan Avenue, Diliman, Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines 1101 T/F: +632 9279643; T: +632 4334074www.emi-megacities.org

Legal and Institutional Arrangements (LIA)

Framework Guidebook

Bangladesh Urban Earthquake Resilience ProjectFebruary 2014

Bangladesh Urban Earthquake Resilience Project 54 LIA Framework Guidebook

Contributors

Practice LeadersAtty. Violeta Somera-Seva, Legal and Institutional Arrangements Practice LeaderBarrister M.D. Nuruzzaman, Legal and Institutional ArrangementsLocal Government Institutions Expert

EMI Project Management TeamDr. Engr. Fouad Bendimerad, Team Leader Dr. Jamilur Choudhury, Senior Technical AdvisorDr. Mehedi Ansary, Deputy Team LeaderMr. Jerome Zayas, Project ManagerDr. Ahmadul Hassan, Local Project CoordinatorEnP. Joyce Lyn Salunat-Molina, Project CoordinatorMr. Jose Mari Daclan, Technical WriterMr. Moses Kent Borinaga, Emergency Management SpecialistMs. Ishtar Padao, Research AssistantMr. Zikrul Fahad, Local Research AssistantMs. Marivic Barba, Research Assistant for DRRMr. Lluis Pino, Research InternMr. Leo Bourcart, Research InternMs Tanya Mia Hisanan, Layout Artist

World Bank-South AsiaMr. Marc Forni, Senior Disaster Risk Management SpecialistMs. Swarna Kazi, Disaster Risk Management SpecialistMd. Faruk Hossain, Operations Assistant

Copyright © 2014 World Bank and EMI

This document is jointly owned by World Bank and Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative. Permission to use this document is granted provided that the use of the document or parts thereof are for educational, informational, non-commercial, and personal use only. WB and EMI must be acknowledged in all cases as the source when reproducing or using any part of this publication.

Bangladesh Urban Earthquake Resilience Project 5

LIA Focus Group Members

Netai Dey Sarker, AD (GIS), DDMAbdul Latif Helaly, Executive Engineer, RAJUKMd. Abdus Salam, Senior Research Engr.,HBRIMd. Sirajul Islam, Chief Town Planner, DSCCMd. Rezaul Islam, Cantonment Executive Officer, Dhaka Cantonment BoardAbdullah AL-Mamun, Asst. Chief Architect, Dept. of ArchitectDr. Abdur Razzak, Executive Engineer, DNCCDr. KZ Hussain Taufiq, Director (Planning), RAJUKMs. Syeda Rezwana Hasan, Chief Executive, BELAMd. AfzalusRahman, Deputy Secretary, Bangladesh Bar CouncilMd. Shamsul Azam, Deputy Conservator of Forest, Forest DepartmentMd. Quamrul Hasan, Deputy Secretary, MoDMRDr. Mahbuba Nasrin, Board Member, BAPAEngr. Anisuzzaman Bhuiyan Rana, Secretary General, REHABSheikh Hafizur Rahman (Karzon), Associate Prof., Department of Law, DUMr. Md. Abdur Rakib, Deputy Chief, Ministry of LandNaren Das, Deputy Secretary, Ministry of LawK.F.M Jasmeen Akhter, Deputy Secretary (Development),MoLGRDMr.Quzi Munirul Islam, Deputy Chief, Ministry of Environment


Executive Summary

Mainstreaming risk to build resilient cities

By putting processes and practices in place that integrate urban disaster risk reduction (DRR) in key governance functions such as land use and urban development planning, construction and building licensing, environmental management, social welfare, and other services that they provide and regulate, local authorities can provide the framework for building the resilience of their cities. This process of incorporating risk management in the governance and operations of public and private institutions, referred to as mainstreaming, can be facilitated by developing and modifying laws, policies, institutional arrangements, plans, programs and projects.

Mainstreaming provides the framework for building resilience against disasters because it helps to provide a common vision for city stakeholders, lays out a uniform road map, and facilitates the mobilization of collective resources. Mainstreaming DRR requires decentralizing political power and devolving administrative functions from national agencies/ ministries to city corporations. This gives more responsibilities to the local governments, but it also provides them with the opportunity to implement DRR programs based on their needs. This approach to disaster risk management is based on the premise that effective local action is critical to success in the implementation of government DRR policies and program. Local authorities and local communities are the primary resource to implement and support the disaster reduction strategies defined by policymakers. Some of the benefits of decentralization include: more active participation of the local government in developing and implementing local DRR policies and programs, the potential for stronger accountability since decision-makers and service providers are more accessible to the people, and

stronger alignment of the interests of politicians and citizens because they are exposed to the same disaster risks.

LIA analysis: First step to mainstreaming

LIA investigation is undertaken as a first step towards helping city officials and personnel understand the features of the legal and institutional environment that support and hinder urban DRM. This basic understanding, achieved through a highly participatory process, is a prerequisite to effectively and efficiently address disaster risks at the local level. LIA analysis, as a component of a holistic disaster risk management planning process, has been undertaken in megacities such as Mumbai, Kathmandu, Amman, Aqaba, and Metro Manila.

Methodology

LIA refers to the prevailing legal and institutional arrangements in a particular DRM system, from national legislation and platforms, to local ordinances and committees, to community- based protocols and organizations. In general, LIA analysis involves two tasks: (1) identifying all relevant DRM actors and their respective mandates; and (2) examining how these actors are legally mandated to interact and how they actually interact in relation to performing their DRM duties and responsibilities.

Understanding what laws are in place to support DRM, which institutions are concerned with DRM, what their mandates are, and how these institutions relate with one another, particularly the nature of their relationships and how information is exchanged between them, are important aspects in the analysis of the effectiveness of a country or a city’s existing disaster risk management practice. The legal aspect of the analysis is focused on examining the policy environment, as characterized by


laws, regulations and other written policies, which provide the legal basis for national and local-level DRM activities. The institutional aspect looks into the administrative and operational capabilities of the different organizations involved in DRM, across various functions such as risk identification, information dissemination, planning, policy formulation and enforcement, and inter-organizational and cross-sectoral coordination.

The LIA investigation process carried out in Dhaka makes use of a three-pronged approach that triangulates the findings and analyses from these key methods: (1) Desk research, (2) Use of analytical tools (organizational mapping, DRM functional mapping, network analysis, Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Challenges (SWOC) analysis and gaps analysis), and (3) Field work (key informant interviews, focus group discussions, workshops, surveys, and others). Because many aspects of the LIA analysis are contextual and not fully understood and documented, a process for the validation of findings and analyses with the stakeholders must also be undertaken at each stage. All of the activities conducted in the course of the LIA investigation are designed to engage all relevant stakeholders, especially the concerned officials and personnel of local authorities. This participatory process does not only guarantee that it is inclusive and that all sides are heard, it also ensures that all LIA outputs are thoroughly vetted and validated.

LIA analysis process

The investigation process is composed of five phases, with the outputs of each phase contributing to the accomplishment of the objectives of the succeeding phases.

Preparation

Initial scoping is conducted to gain a preliminary understanding of the current enabling

environment for DRM in Bangladesh, as well as to identify the relevant key institutional stakeholders. This is accomplished through the review of secondary sources of information and consultations with local experts. Representatives from the identified organizations are then invited to form part of the LIA Focus Group. The schedule of investigation activities is also developed and finalized at this time.

Data collection

In-depth interviews with focal officials of key DRM-related offices are conducted, making use of guide questions developed based on the data gathered from desk research. These interviews are supplemented by the FG meetings, where issues relevant to the LIA investigation are explored in detail. Several tools are also used, such as organizational static mapping and DRM functional mapping, network analysis and the gaps analysis.

Through the use of these tools, the key institutions involved in DRM and their mandates are identified, these mandates are categorized according to function, and insights are gathered from stakeholders on prevailing issues that affect different DRM elements (disaster mitigation, prevention, response, recovery and rehabilitation). These issues are then analyzed using different parameters such as legal mandate, funding and manpower, skills and competencies, and inter-institutional coordination, among others.

Analysis and diagnosis

The information collected from the data gathering is consolidated in order to characterize


the existing legal and institutional framework for DRM at the national and city levels. Current DRM practice is compared against international agreements and standards, existing national and local DRR statutes and policies, and the requirements of mainstreaming in order to further identify gaps and possible remedial actions.

Through the Organizational Static Mapping, DRM Functional Mapping and Network Analysis Workshop, a stakeholder-validated identification of key agencies involved in DRM in Bangladesh is carried out, with the agency roles, responsibilities and mandates outlined by the participants. The existence and nature of linkages among actors at various levels in terms of hierarchy, coordination and informational flows is also determined. The workshop also makes use of a tool to analyse institutional gaps in order to map significant legal and organizational issues and the means to address them.

Based on the results of the analysis and diagnosis, the LIA team is able to develop a clear and more precise understanding of the situation prevailing in the legal and institutional environment for DRM in Dhaka, including issues in the implementation of laws and interactions among institutions. In order to address the identified gaps, a set of policy recommendations is proposed. These are intended to serve as a guide for executing specific strategies to enhance the enabling environment for DRM.

The organizational map, network analysis and summary of major gaps and recommendations are presented to the different stakeholder groups such as the Advisory Committee and LIA FG for validation. The comments of selected experts and key institutions may also be solicited for specific concerns regarding the data and analysis.

The validation consists of multiple iterations, as the results of initial reviews are updated and presented to stakeholders again for confirmation. The validated information is used to develop a narrative report that will serve as input to

the functional and policy interventions to be contained in the final DRMMP document.

LIA analysis findings

The next part discusses the identified legal and institutional gaps and functional overlaps. The areas covered by this section may include: (1) Need for decentralized DRM operations and establishment of mainstreaming mechanisms; (2) Funding mechanisms for DRR; (3) Dedicated focal agencies for DRM; (4) Inter-institutional coordination; (5) DRM plans; (6) Stakeholder awareness of earthquake risks and risk reduction; and (7) Monitoring and evaluation mechanisms for monitoring progress in DRM. The following legal and institutional gaps and functional overlaps were identified in the course of the LIA investigation:

Gap 1: The act creating the city corporations does not explicitly provide for clear mandates for mainstreaming of DRR. Similarly, the DM Act 2012 does not provide strong decentralized powers to the city corporations. Implicitly, the city corporations can pursue DRM initiatives, but it would be better if there is a strong legal foundation for DRM expressly stated in an amendatory provision of existing laws.

Gap 2: While there are existing mechanisms at the national level to provide funding for disaster and climate change-related initiatives, there are limited provisions for DRM funding at the local level.

Gap 3: There is no focal office at the city level that oversees disaster risk management planning, coordination, preparedness, response, relief and recovery. As DRM is a complex process that requires specific skills, expertise and resources, a dedicated unit is necessary to plan, coordinate and push the mainstreaming of DRR in the local government agenda.Gap 4: Effective DRM at the city level is hampered by the lack of a permanent platform for systematic inter-institutional coordination.

Gap 5: Although the DM Act of 2012 requires


local authorities to formulate their local disaster management plans based on their own areas and local hazards, the DCCs have not yet developed comprehensive disaster risk management plans that embrace pro-active risk reduction and sector mainstreaming approaches.

Gap 6: The technical staff of national and local agencies such as engineers and planners are not well versed and knowledgeable about the concepts, principles and tools for mainstreaming DRM into their day to day functions. Enhancements are needed specifically for the institutional capacity of RAJUK, the DCCs, MoLGRD and related agencies with respect to their technical capabilities and their ability to formulate policy and enforce regulations.

Gap 7: Currently, there is no system in place for monitoring local level progress in mainstreaming DRR in governance and development functions.

Recommendations

In order to address the identified gaps in the legal and institutional framework for DRM, a set of policy recommendations is proposed. The recommendations are intended to serve as a guide for implementing a series of actions to enhance the enabling environment for DRM.

In the BUERP, seven specific policy recommendations are proposed to address the gaps identified in the course of the LIA investigation. These are:

Recommendation 1: Introduce structural reforms where decentralized jurisdictional mandates and authorities, planning processes, budget and accountability of local agencies are explicitly provided.

Recommendation 2: Ensure that DRM programs and activities are adequately funded particularly at the local level.

Recommendation 3: Create a permanent DRM Office with broad authority over disaster risk management planning, coordination,

preparedness, response, relief and recovery.

Recommendation 4: Strengthen mechanisms for systematic inter-institutional coordination at the Dhaka City level by activating the CCDM Councils, supported by the permanent DRM Offices.

Recommendation 5: Immediately formulate the Dhaka City DRM plan based on hazards, vulnerability and risk assessment, legal and institutional arrangements, risk-sensitive land use planning practice, and other relevant sectors and core services.

Recommendation 6: Develop and implement a capacity building program for DRM to build disaster resilience of communities in Dhaka.

Recommendation 7: Develop an M&E system to monitor progress of DCCs in DRM.

The policy recommendations provide a starting point for addressing the more significant gaps in the legal and institutional environment for DRM in Dhaka. However, the implementation of these recommendations will require additional efforts from the national and city-level DRM focal agencies in terms of lobbying with the executive and legislative departments, as well as other public stakeholders, for the adoption of the proposed policy changes and the allocation of funding and other resource requirements.

Formal adoption of these recommended policies should also be supplemented by initiatives aimed at orienting relevant agencies and personnel regarding their new mandates and roles to strengthen ownership for these institutional changes. A continuing review of legal and institutional arrangements for DRM will be useful in mitigating issues that may arise in the implementation of the policy recommendations, as well as propose solutions to other gaps which may be identified in the future.


Acronyms

AC Advisory Committee

AFD Armed Forces Division

AS/NZ Australia/New Zealand Standards

BELA Bangladesh Environmental Lawyers Association

BMD Bangladesh Meteorological Department

BNBC Bangladesh National Building Code

BTCL Bangladesh Telecommunication Company Limited

BUERP Bangladesh Urban Earthquake Resilience Project

BUET Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology

BWDB Bangladesh Water Development Board

CCDMC City Corporation Disaster Management Committee

CCDR Cabinet Committee for Disaster Response

CCDRCG City Corporation Disaster Response Coordination Group

CDMP Comprehensive Disaster Management Programme

CEGIS Centre for Environmental and Geographic Information Services

CPP Cyclone Preparedness Program

CPPIB Cyclone Preparedness Program Implementation Board

CRA Community Risk Assessment

CSDDWS Committee for Speedy Dissemination of Disaster Related Warning/Signals

DCC Dhaka City Corporation

DESCO Dhaka Electric Supply Company Limited

DDM Department of Disaster Management

DDMC District Disaster Management Committee

DDRCG District Disaster Response Coordination Group

DNCC Dhaka North City Corporation

DPDC Dhaka Power Distribution Company Limited

DSCC Dhaka South City Corporation

DIMT Disaster Incident Management Team

DMC Disaster Management Committee

DMIC Disaster Management Information Centre

DMP Dhaka Metropolitan Police

DMTATF Disaster Management Training and Public Awareness Building Taskforce

DoE Department of Environment

DRM Disaster Risk Management

DRRM Disaster Risk Reduction and Management

DRMMP Disaster Risk Management Master Plan

EMAP Emergency Management Accreditation Program

EMI Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative

EOC Emergency Operation Centre


EPAC Earthquake Preparedness Advisory Committee

FG Focus Group

FGD Focus Group Discussion

FSCD Fire Service and Civil Defense

GOB Government of Bangladesh

GSB Geological Survey of Bangladesh

HBRI Housing and Building Research Institute

HED Health Engineering Department

HFA Hyogo Framework for Action

IMDMCC Inter-Ministerial Disaster Management Co-ordination Committee

IEC Information, Education and Communication

ISO International Organization for Standardization

LDRCG Local Disaster Response Coordination Group

LIA Legal and Institutional Arrangements

MoD Ministry of Defence

MoEF Ministry of Environment and Forest

MoDMR Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief

MoH&FW Ministry of Health and Family Welfare

MoHA Ministry of Home Affairs

MoHPW Ministry of Housing and Public Works

MoLGRD Ministry of Local Government, Rural Development and Co-operatives

MoPE&MR Ministry of Power, Energy and Mineral Resources

MoP&T Ministry of Post and Tele-communications

NDMC National Disaster Management Council

NDMAC National Disaster Response Coordination Group

NDRCG National Disaster Response Coordination Group

NPDRR National Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction

PMO Prime Minister’s Office

PWD Public Works Department

RAJUK Rajdhani Unnayan Katripakhaya

REHAB Real Estate and Housing Association of Bangladesh

SAARC South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation

SC Scientific Consortium

SOD Standing Orders on Disaster

TCB Training and Capacity Building

URR Urban Risk Reduction

UzDMC Upazila Disaster Management Committee

UzDMP Upazila Disaster Management Plan

WASA Water Supply and Sewerage Authority


Contents

Figures and TablesFigure 1. Framework for Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction.............................................................. 16

Figure 2. LIA Analytical Process............................................................................................................................... 21

Figure 3. LIA Investigation Process........................................................................................................................ 28

Figure 4. Initial LIA Investigation Timeline......................................................................................................... 29

Figure 5. Organogram of Bangladesh DRM System......................................................................................... 37

Figure 6. Network Representation Indicating Relationship of DRM Stakeholders in Dhaka........... 41

Figure 7. Network Representation of Department of Disaster Management........................................ 43

Figure 8. Network Representation of RAJUK...................................................................................................... 44

Figure 9. Network Representation of Dhaka City Corporation .................................................................. 45

Figure 10. Organizational Chart of the ASEZ DRR Directorate..................................................................... 68

Figure 11. Organizational Chart of Disaster Management Section........................................................... 70

Figure 12. Relationship of DMS To Other Kathmandu Metropolitan City............................................... 71

Figure 13. Disaster Risk Management Department Organizational Chart............................................. 72

Figure 14. Bogota’s District System for Emergency Prevention and Attention..................................... 73

Figure 15. Organizational structure of the Metropolitan Office for Community Safety.................... 74

Figure 16. Afet Koordinasyon Merkezi (AKOM) Organizational Chart..................................................... 75

Figure 17. Makati DRRM Institutional Arrangement........................................................................................ 76

Figure 18. Makati DRRM Council............................................................................................................................. 76

Figure 19. Makati DRRM Office................................................................................................................................ 77

Table 1. Functional Roles in DRR of Bangladesh Stakeholders by Element............................................ 38

Executive Summary..................................................................................................................................................... 6About the Document..................................................................................................................................................... 131. Introduction.................................................................................................................................................................. 14 1.1. What is a resilient city?......................................................................................................................... 14 1.2. What is mainstreaming and how can it help build resilience in Dhaka?........................... 15 1.3. What is the project approach for mainstreaming DRR?........................................................... 17 1.4. How does LIA analysis support the DRMMP model?............................................................ 182. Methodology................................................................................................................................................................. 20 2.1. What is LIA analysis?............................................................................................................................. 20 2.2. Why is LIA analysis important in DRM?.......................................................................................... 20 2.3. What approaches are used in LIA analysis?.................................................................................. 203. LIA Investigation Process......................................................................................................................................... 28 3.1. What are the stages in the LIA investigation process?........................................................ 284. LIA Findings................................................................................................................................................................... 36 4.1. How are the findings of the LIA investigation presented?.................................................... 365. Recommendations..................................................................................................................................................... 496. Annexes.......................................................................................................................................................................... 54 Annex 1: Focus Group Members.............................................................................................................. 54 Annex 2: Key Informants............................................................................................................................. 54 Annex 3: General Guide Questions for Key Informants.................................................................. 55 Annex 4: DRM-related Laws....................................................................................................................... 56 Annex 5: LIA Survey Forms 1 and 2......................................................................................................... 58 Annex 6: LIA Form 3...................................................................................................................................... 64 Annex 7: Organization of Functions within the ASEZA DRRM Directorate............................... 68 Annex 8: Examples of National DRM Laws/Provisions from Other Countries........................ 69 Annex 9: Organizational Structures of Selected DRM Offices/Systems.................................... 70 Annex 10: Examples of Monitoring and Evaluation Tools............................................................... 787. References..................................................................................................................................................................... 81


This document is submitted in compliance with EMI’s contractual obligations to the World Bank for the Bangladesh Urban Earthquake Resilience Project. The Guidebook provides information on the process undertaken to review the policy, legal and regulatory framework for disaster risk management in Dhaka. Together with the Dhaka Earthquake Risk Guidebook and the Dhaka Risk-sensitive Land Use Planning Guidebook, the LIA Guidebook contributes to the achievement of the third project objective, the development of the elements for the Dhaka Earthquake Resiliency Plan.

The analysis contained here aims to provide a general understanding of the legal and institutional arrangements for disaster risk management in Dhaka. The Guidebook does not go into detail about the policy and institutional environment prevailing in other areas of DRM that are also the concern of the Bangladesh Urban Earthquake Resilience Project, such as geographic information systems and information technology (GIS-ICT), and land use and urban development planning. What is the purpose of the Guidebook?

This Guidebook highlights the significance of and need for understanding legal and institutional arrangements (LIA) in the context of urban disaster risk management (DRM). It is intended to serve as a reference that explains the relevance, methodology, process, findings and recommendations of the LIA investigations conducted for the Bangladesh Urban Earthquake Resilience Project (BUERP). The Guidebook also provides real-life examples based on project experiences in Dhaka and other cities like Mumbai in India, Amman in Jordan, Quezon and Pasig in the Philippines of how to document, analyze

About the Document

and make use of the inter-related legal and institutional functions for reducing disaster risks in megacities and large urban areas. The framework it describes can be used for LIA investigations in other cities in Bangladesh.

Who should read the Guidebook?

The primary audience of the Guidebook are experts and specialists investigating the legal and institutional contexts of Disaster Risk Management (DRM), practitioners and researchers in DRM and related fields, government officials, private sector and community representatives involved in and concerned with urban DRM in Dhaka, particularly the Focus Groups (FG), Advisory Committee and Scientific Consortium of the BUERP.

How will the Guidebook benefit the reader?

The Guidebook focuses primarily on explaining the role of LIA in mainstreaming DRM in local functions and services to build resiliency in Dhaka. It contains practical information that could aid the reader in responding to the following questions:• What is the relevance of LIA in DRM? • How is an LIA investigation undertaken? • How can the results of the LIA analysis build

resiliency in Dhaka?• What is the LIA context of DRM in selected

cities?• What issues affect the LIA aspects of DRM

and how can be these be addressed?


1. Introduction

1.1. What is a resilient city?

Resilience is the ability of a community to bounce back from the negative impacts of a natural hazard, such as an earthquake, in a timely and efficient manner. That ability is often measured in terms of how significantly critical services and essential functions are disrupted and how quickly they can be restored. Thus resilience is a function of both the amount of resources that a community has committed and the level of organization it has put in place to prepare for and respond to the impacts of natural hazards1.

To be considered resilient to disasters, a city should have the following characteristics2:

• Disasters are minimized because the population lives in homes and neighborhoods with organized services and infrastructure that adhere to sensible building codes; without informal settlements built on flood plains or steep slopes because no other land is available.

• The local government is inclusive, competent and accountable, concerned about sustainable urbanization, and willing to commit the necessary resources to develop capacities to manage and organize itself before, during and after a natural hazard event.

• Local authorities and the population understand their risks and develop a shared, local information base on disaster losses,

1 Terminology. (2009). Retrieved Oct. 6, 2013, from http://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/terminology#letter-r 2 UNISDR. (2012). How to make cities more resilient: A handbook for local government leaders

When is an event considered a disaster?

A disaster occurs when the daily life within a community is seriously disrupted because its members are unable to cope with the human, material, and economic or environmental losses and impacts brought about by a natural or man-made hazard.

Disaster impacts may include loss of life, injury, disease, damage to property, destruction of assets, loss of essential services, social and economic disruption and environmental degradation.

(Source: UNISDR Terminology, 2009)

Significance of Mainstreaming In DRM

Mainstreaming is a critical element of the management of disaster risk because it ultimately assigns clear roles and responsibilities. This builds efficiency and accountability, which are the core ingredients to disaster risk reduction. The extent to which risk reduction has been incorporated into development planning and processes, and aligned with the existing context of local community needs and resources, has a direct influence on the resilience of cities and their residents to the impacts of natural disasters.


hazards and risks, including who is exposed and who is vulnerable.

• People are empowered to participate, decide and plan their city together with local authorities and value local and indigenous knowledge, capacities and resources.

• Local authorities and the population have taken steps to anticipate and mitigate the impact of disasters and are able to minimize physical and social losses arising from extreme weather events, earthquakes or other natural or human-induced hazards.

• The local government and the population are able to respond, implement immediate recovery strategies and quickly restore basic services to resume social, institutional and economic activity after such an event.

1.2. What is mainstreaming and how can it help build resilience in Dhaka?

In the DRM context, mainstreaming refers to the process of incorporating the practice of risk management within the governance and operations of public and private institutions by developing and modifying laws, policies, institutional arrangements, plans, programs and projects. For city governments and local authorities, this translates to having processes and practices in place that integrate urban DRR in the key functions that they undertake, such as land use and urban development planning, construction and building licensing, environmental management, social welfare, and other services that they provide and regulate. Mainstreaming is an essential process for building resilience against disasters because it provides a common vision for city stakeholders, lays out a uniform road map and facilitates the mobilization of collective resources.

LIA Workshop on April 27, 2013 held at Jamuna Hall, World Bank Dhaka.


Figure 1. Framework for Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction

Central Coordination + Local Implementation + Participation

Mainstreaming DRR can be effective if political power is decentralized and administrative functions are devolved from national agencies/ministries to city corporations. This would give more responsibilities to the local governments and subsequently a venue for initiatives thus giving them impetus to implement DRR programs based on their needs. The arguments posed as theoretical benefits of decentralization include: more active participation of the local government in developing and implementing local DRR policies and programs, the potential for stronger accountability in local settings where decisionmakers and service providers are closer and more accountable to the population, stronger alignment of the interests of politicians and citizens who are exposed to the same disaster risks. However, there are problems that may be encountered in the decentralization process such as capacity constraints at the local level capacity, coordination problems between levels of government (horizontal and vertical), financing difficulties, and low levels of citizen participation.31

3 Scott Z. and Tarazona (2011). A Study on Decentralization and DRR, Global Assessment Report 2011.

It is precisely for these reasons that there is a necessity to decentralize authority for DRM from central to local levels. In order to capacitate local authorities, there must be clear legislative mandates and financial decentralization. Valuable lessons of decentralization can lead to improved service delivery provided that fiscal decentralization must first take place.42

The success of disaster risk management programs and initiatives depends to a great extent on the success of their implementation at the local level. In fact the Hyogo Framework for Action explicitly recognizes the role of local authorities in reducing disaster risk. Successful local level DRM implementation requires not only robust risk assessment and management, but also mechanisms for policy formulation, strategy development, action planning, awareness and preparedness, and capacity development. This approach to disaster risk management is based on the premise that effective local action is critical to success in the implementation of government DRR policies and program. Local authorities and local communities are the primary resource to

4 Meherun and Iqbal. (2012). Disasters and Decentralization.


implement and support the disaster reduction strategies defined by policymakers.

In megacities where EMI has actual on the ground experience, there is empirical evidence to prove that the the creation of strong nodal institutions on DRR within local governments improved the level of awareness and knowledge amongst decisionmakers and the citizenry at large, leading to concrete investments in DRR. A case in point is the Philippines, where new legislation was passed mandating the creation of permanent DRRM offices at the city and municipal government levels to support multisectoral interdisciplinary committees tasked with planning and implementing risk reduction activities. Republic Act 10121 likewise prescribed that 5% of the income of the local government shall be dedicated as funds for disaster risk reduction and management.

1.3. What is the project approach for mainstreaming DRR?

The BUERP seeks to promote the mainstreaming of DRR in Dhaka by analyzing the city’s risk profile, the systems of development into which these risks should be integrated, and the legal and institutional arrangements that govern the city’s functions, livelihoods, and living conditions, in order to identify entry points where risk reduction can be integrated in the governance and operations of relevant institutions.

This approach follows the Disaster Risk Management Master Plan (DRMMP) model developed by EMI and tested in different megacities around the world such as Istanbul, Metro Manila, Kathmandu, and Mumbai. The DRMMP is an analytical process that guides stakeholders in the development of strategies, policies, actions and processes for mainstreaming disaster risk reduction at the local level through a series of participatory planning activities. It enables city officials and other key stakeholders to:

UNDERSTAND their vulnerabilities to hazards;

EVALUATE the physical and socio-economic impacts of these hazards;

ACQUIRE the competency to plan for and effectively manage emergencies;

DETERMINE a series of options to reduce the risk given their priorities and implementation processes; and

DEVELOP a coherent approach to managing the overall risk.

The DRMMP is guided by the following principles:

1. The process must be participatory to ensure that the stakeholders are primarily responsible for the development of project outputs and exercise ownership over the project.

2. A rational division of authority and responsibility must be recognized by all the stakeholders, as explained in the following rules:

a. Implementation should take place at the local level; i.e., the greater the decentralization process, the more gain in efficiency.

b. The authority for policy, regulation, control, resource allocation and oversight rest with the central government.

c. Government (central and local) must open the door to the participation of civil society, which collectively groups all the active agents of society.

3. Policies, decisions and actions must be scientifically based, meaning that the sound understanding of the disaster risks through scientific information that is validated, communicated, and translated into parameters is what will guide policy and inform decisions and actions.


Disaster Risk Reduction in Greater Mumbai

LIA analysis supported the project objective of setting up a competent internal structure for emergency and crisis management in Mumbai under the leadership of the Greater Mumbai Disaster Management Authority by helping stakeholders to understand the significance of building the appropriate legal and institutional context for mainstreaming DRM at the level of the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, and examining current DRM practice and providing policy recommendations to improve inter-institutional coordination and operations across all the thematic areas of disaster risk reduction.

Pasig City Resilience to Earthquakes and Floods

By facilitating a stakeholder-led process that identified and clarified department roles, responsibilities and line of authority for DRM within the City Government of Pasig, Philippines, LIA analysis was able to characterize current DRR/DRM practice, determine policy and operational gaps, and provide a set of recommendations that would improve resilience by strengthening the legal foundation and institutional arrangements for DRM planning and risk reduction activities in the city.

1.4. How does LIA analysis support the DRMMP model?

DRM is a relatively new practice for many local authorities. Therefore, in the context of the DRMMP, the LIA investigation is undertaken as a first step towards helping city officials and personnel understand the features of the legal and institutional environment that support and hinder urban DRM. This basic understanding, achieved through a highly participatory process, is a prerequisite to effectively and efficiently address disaster risks at the local level.

LIA analysis, as a component of the DRMMP, has been undertaken in megacities such as Mumbai, Kathmandu, Amman, Aqaba, and Metro Manila.


Building A Disaster Resilient Quezon City, Philippines

Making use of a desk review of relevant laws, ordinances, executive orders, and project reports, complemented by stakeholder workshops and key informant interviews, LIA assessment was able to help city stakeholders understand the relevance of legal and institutional arrangements in effective DRM by:• Describing the current institutional arrangements for DRM

in the city;• Identifying and analysing gaps in the legal, policy,

institutional and regulatory frameworks; and• Generating conclusions and preliminary recommendations

to strengthen both institutional support and internal capacity for DRM.

Disaster Risk Management Master Plan for Amman

A key accomplishment of the project was the assessment of the city’s institutional and organizational arrangements for disaster risk management through a diagnostic of Greater Amman Municipality’s (GAM) current disaster risk reduction and management status and the development of the Amman City Disaster Risk Profile. This was made possible through the analysis of laws, policies and institutional context for DRM in GAM, as well as interviews and discussions with key experts, such as those from UNDP and the General Directorate of Civil Defence.


2. Methodology

2.1. What is LIA analysis?

LIA refers to the prevailing legal and institutional arrangements in a particular DRM system. It cuts across all levels of governance - from national legislation and platforms to local ordinances and committees to community-based protocols and organizations. Thus, an LIA analysis is both expansive and intensive in nature: first, it casts a wide net to capture all relevant DRM actors and their respective mandates; then, it takes an in-depth look at how these actors legally and actually interact among themselves in relation to performing their DRM duties and responsibilities.51

2.2. Why is LIA analysis important in DRM?

The responsibility for carrying out the activities and tasks necessary for effective city-level DRM does not fall under one single institution. DRM cuts across the mandates and functions of various government, private, academic, and other non-government organizations. In most cases, the implementation of these activities by different actors requires establishing appropriate legal frameworks and coordination mechanisms in order to ensure that actions are coherent and resources are optimized.

Therefore, understanding what laws are in place to support DRM, which institutions are concerned with DRM, what their mandates are, and how these institutions relate with one another, particularly the nature of their relationships and how information is exchanged between them, are important aspects in the

5 Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative. (2013). Understanding Legal and Institutional Arrangements in Disaster Risk Management.

analysis of the effectiveness of a country or a city’s existing disaster risk management practice.

The legal aspect of the analysis is focused on examining the policy environment, as characterized by laws, regulations and other written policies, which provide the legal basis for national and local-level DRM activities. The institutional aspect looks into the administrative and operational capabilities of the different organizations involved in DRM, across various functions such as risk identification, information dissemination, planning, policy formulation and enforcement, and inter-organizational and cross-sectoral coordination.

2.3. What approaches are used in LIA analysis?

The LIA investigation process carried out in Dhaka makes use of a three-pronged approach that triangulates the findings and analyses from these key methods: (1) Desk research, (2) Use of analytical tools (organizational mapping, DRM functional mapping, network analysis, Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Challenges (SWOC) analysis and gaps analysis), and (3) Field work (key informant interviews, focus group discussions, workshops, surveys, and others). Because many aspects of the LIA analysis are contextual and not fully understood and documented, a process for the validation of findings and analyses with the stakeholders must also be undertaken at each stage. Collective agreement and understanding of the legal and institutional arrangements for DRM will provide for a more effective environment for DRM, and lay the ground for mainstreaming. A fundamentally participatory process is thus required. All of the activities conducted in the course of the LIA investigation are designed to engage all relevant stakeholders, especially


the concerned officials and personnel of local authorities. This participatory process does not only guarantee that it is inclusive and that all sides are heard, it also ensures that all LIA outputs are thoroughly vetted and validated.

As noted above, the LIA investigation looks into both the legal and institutional dimensions of a city’s framework for DRM. Both these elements make use of their own sets of expertise, methodologies, and processes. How the three methods used in the investigation process contribute to an understanding of the legal and institutional aspects are described in detail below.

Desk Research

Field Work Analytical Tools

Figure 2. LIA Analytical Process

LIAInvestigation

Outputs

2.3.1. Desk Research

Legal

The legal aspect focuses primarily on characterizing the legal environment for DRM in Dhaka and relies on the desk review of relevant documentation (laws and related statutes, regulations, policies, legislative briefs and judicial interpretations) drafted by national and local government agencies to develop an understanding

of the scope of existing legal documents and their relevance in defining mandates and in supporting the implementation of effective DRM.

Recognizing the multi-sectoral nature of DRM, the desk review does not focus solely on documentation specific to risk reduction and management, but also considers those which come from fields that may have direct or indirect impact on mitigation, prevention, preparedness, response, recovery and rehabilitation for urban risk. The following are examples of types of legal documents typically reviewed:

• International and regional agreements/commitments on DRR/DRM

• National constitution• National laws, executive orders, ministry

issuances, regional/local-level enabling laws, program/project reports and studies on:

¨ Disaster risk management: » Risk identification and assessment » Awareness » Preparedness and mitigation » Rescue and relief operations » Recovery and rehabilitation » Risk financing » Climate change adaptation and

mitigation ¨ Civil defence and civil protection ¨ Land use planning and urban

development: » Survey and demarcation of land » Protection of parks and open spaces » Development, improvement and

expansion of urban areas » Construction codes and building

standards » Restrictions on buildings

¨ Maintenance of utilities and critical infrastructure/services: » Supply and use of electricity, water,

fuel » Maintenance of roads, regulation of

motor vehicles » Operation of telecommunications

facilities


Institutional

The institutional aspect of the LIA investigation is concerned with identifying which organizations have responsibilities and functions relevant to DRM, and the formal and informal mechanisms through which they interact and communicate with one another. This component also utilizes desk research in its initial scoping of the city’s current DRM practice, making use of the same documentation reviewed for the legal component. For the legal aspect, the aim at the initial stage is to inventory and classify national and local laws and regulations relevant to DRM. On the other hand, the institutional component uses the available secondary sources of information to preliminarily assess the institutional environment to achieve the following objectives: (1) To summarize the lines of enforcement and responsibility for institutional mandates and regulations, both at the national and city-level; (2) To identify the status of key institutional stakeholders at the national and city levels, and to define their roles in DRM; and (3) To define the relationships and information flow between the relevant stakeholders.

The following types of organizations are included in the analysis conducted for the institutional aspect of the LIA investigation:

• National government ministries/departments with responsibilities for activities related to the following DRM/CCA functions: » Risk identification and assessment » Awareness » Preparedness and mitigation » Rescue and relief operations » Recovery and rehabilitation » Risk financing » Climate change adaptation and

mitigation » Education, health, welfare, and public

safety

» Operation of railway stations, ports and airports

» Food supply and regulation of prices of basic goods

» Sanitation, drainage and sewerage ¨ Public health and health emergencies ¨ Environmental protection and pollution

control ¨ Insurance

» Life insurance » Insurance of property » Compensation for damages » Public liability

¨ Regulation of industrial activities ¨ Restrictions on regulated/hazardous

substances: » Weapons of mass destruction » Explosives » Flammable substances » Hazardous waste/chemicals » Poisons » Biomedical waste » Drugs and cosmetics

• Enabling mandates of non-government and international organizations, and private sector groups with responsibilities in disaster risk management

The information generated from the desk research is used to determine the adherence of laws and related legal instruments, particularly the Disaster Management (DM) Act of 2012, which is the main DRM law, to international agreements such as the Hyogo Framework for Action and SAARC, and international standards and practice like AS/NZ 31000 and EMAP. It also facilitates the identification of provisions of the DM Act which overlap with other relevant laws such as the National Building Code, Environmental Code, and Local Government Act of 2009. Together with the results of the key informant interviews (KII) and workshops, the desk review also supports the process of examining enforcement mechanisms and highlighting issues related to their interpretation and implementation.


• Cabinet committees on disaster risk management

• Other national, regional, and local-level committees on disaster early warning/preparedness/response

• National and regional planning and development agencies

• City corporations, pourashavas, districts, upazilas and unions

• Armed forces, police, fire services and civil defence

• Scientific and academic institutions conducting research or capacity building activities related to DRM/CCA functions

• Transport, public utility and telecommunications providers, planners and regulators

• Airport, port and railway operators• Non-government organizations and private

sector organizations involved in or concerned with DRM

• Associations representing professions with competencies relevant to DRM

• Donors and development partners • Humanitarian agencies

A mapping exercise is undertaken to identify the relevant public and private organizations involved in or concerned with DRM. Their roles, activities and engagement level should be understood. Each organization must participate process to ensure that the institutional context is broadly and comprehensively represented. 2.3.2. Analytical Tools for Legal and Institutional Analysis

Aside from the desk review, several tools are employed in order to characterize the legal environment for DRM in Dhaka. Stakeholders’ insights on issues pertaining to the legal mandates of organizations involved in disaster mitigation, prevention, response, recovery and rehabilitation are gathered through the use of a gaps analysis tool. To identify initial inconsistencies between existing DRM practice in Dhaka and accepted standards, the collected information is compared

against the local and national indicators62for priority action in integrating DRR in city governance contained in the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA), as well as the details of other relevant international agreements and standards (SAARC, ISO 31000:2009, AS/NZ 31000:2009, Emergency Management Accreditation Program (EMAP), and existing national and local DRR statutes and policies Disaster Management Act of 2012, the Standing Orders on Disaster Management, the National Disaster Plan).

The approach used for understanding institutional relationships and interactions in the context of DRM relies primarily on organizational mapping7,3as well as gaps analysis. The analytical tools employed under organizational mapping includes: a) Organizational Static Mapping, b) DRM Functional Mapping and c) Network Analysis. These tools are used to understand the organizational structure and functioning of systems; organizational behaviour, inter-organizational relations, and social support; the flow of information, knowledge, and resources; and potential impacts of policy changes or implementation on institutional relationships. It identifies organizational linkages and characterizes the nature and strength of interactions between institutions.

The approach used in the project has five steps:

a. Organizational Static Mapping, consisting of identifying the key institutions and other stakeholders involved in DRM, including their mandates

b. DRM Functional Mapping, which identifies how each institution and stakeholder relates to particular DRM function either as provider, regulator, user, or supporter

6 UNISDR. (2009). A Guide for Implementing the Hyogo Framework for Action by Local Stakeholders7 As adapted and modified from Holland, Jeremy. (2007). Tools for Institutional, Political, and Social Analysis of Policy Reform: A Sourcebook for Development Practitioners.


c. Network Analysis, which indicates the linkages and relationships between the various institutions and stakeholders

d. Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Challenges (SWOC) Analysis, which identifies significant internal and external elements that may affect the attainment of mainstreaming objectives.

e. Gaps Analysis, to identify gaps, issues or other difficulties in implementation, as well as initial recommendations for addressing key issues.

Organizational Static Mapping relies on the information collected from desk research and stakeholders’ inputs to determine the DRM roles and functions of particular organizations, and

illustrate the hierarchical relationships existing between these institutions.

The DRM Functional Mapping is undertaken through outputs from desk review and stakeholders’ consultations and workshops. Typically these can be analysed relative to six core DRR functions, which are: (1) Risk identification and assessment, (2) Prevention and Mitigation, (3) Preparedness, (4) Response, Rescue, and Relief, (5) Rehabilitation/Recovery, and (6) Risk Transfer and Insurance.

The roles of each organization are described by the following functions (note that a particular organization typically has more than one function):

PROVIDERIndicates a role and responsibility to plan, develop and disseminate or provide resources, information or knowledge

CONTROLIndicates a role and/or responsibility as a regulator, supervisor, or provider of public safety and security

USERIndicates a role or a position requiring a need for resources or information either before, during and/or after a disaster

SUPPORTIndicates a role for supporting other organizations and institutions either before, during and/or after a disaster

Network Analysis indicates the linkages and relationships between the various institutions and stakeholders. Similar to the organizational/functional mapping, the network analysis is undertaken based on the outcome of desk review and stakeholders’ consultations and workshops. The final outcome must be reviewed and validated with the stakeholders in a workshop environment.

The characterization of the relationship between the institutions is classified into five types:

• Indicates a mandatory institutional relationship;• Either through a lateral or vertical reporting process, or through

functional supervisory and/or control requirements

Hierarchical


• Lowest level of relationship; • Communication and consultation are truly informal; • Takes place under social or political structures that advance social

promotion or social cohesion.

Informal Information Sharing

• Serves as a nodal agency for the processing, transfer and sharing of information. Nodal agencies relates to various other agencies and thus have an important role in DRM.

Nodal

• Indicates a formal mechanism;• Either through a procedure or a practice to regularly check or

communicate facts and information related to an action or decision;• Example: Coordination with the Fire Department when a public event is

planned.

Coordination

SWOC Analysis is a variation of the traditional SWOT methodology, where instead of looking at external hindering factors as “threats,” these are labeled as “challenges.” It is a structured planning method that can be used to identify the key internal and external elements that may affect the attainment of a particular objective. Figure 6 shows a 2x2 matrix summarizing the basic SWOC elements. These are defined as follows:

• Strengths (S) – Internal characteristics of an organization that gives it a competitive advantage over others. It can be in the form of expertise, resources and mandate, among others

• Weaknesses (W) – Internal features that put the organization at a disadvantage. Examples may include weak leadership, insufficient

funding, unclear mandate, etc.• Opportunities (O) – External factors that

can positively contribute to the realization of a particular objective. These include those elements that can be explored, seized, and maximized to effectively plan for and implement a plan or strategy.

• Challenges (C) – External forces that may hinder the achievement of an objective. These are typically out of control of the organization such as changes in political support at the national level, realignment of national funding, and so on.

In the LIA investigation process, SWOC is applied in two instances. It is first carried out as one of the major activities in Step 3: Diagnosis and Analysis to identify and explore the

• Indicates a general practice to occasionally “inform” or “consult” a particular stakeholder about a particular action;

• Example: Government may want to inform private enterprises about road closures or power outages. This may or may not be part of a procedure. In some cases, it may be required.

Formal InformationSharing


strengths, gaps and needs of local authorities in DRM (i.e. situational assessment). Another round of SWOC analysis is undertaken in Step 3: Framework Development to determine potential roadblocks and facilitating factors in the implementation of policy recommendations and strategies.

Gaps Analysis draws primarily upon information gathered from stakeholders through KIIs, focus group discussions, and workshops to identify operational gaps and other difficulties in implementation, as well as initial recommendations for addressing key issues. The analysis focuses on four thematic areas in DRR/DRM, namely Prevention and Mitigation, Preparedness, Response, and Rehabilitation and Recovery. The issues affecting performance in each of these areas are evaluated using seven parameters:

• Legal mandate• Funding, Manpower• Competencies and skills• Physical resources• Inter- and intra-institutional relationships• Monitoring and evaluation • Crosscutting concerns

2.3.3. Stakeholders’ Participation and Field Work

The information needed to support the LIA analysis in Dhaka is collected through various qualitative methods, such as key informant interviews, focus group discussions, and stakeholder workshops. The primary mechanism for stakeholders’ participation in these activities of the investigation process is the LIA Focus Group (FG). The group is composed of representatives from key national and local organizations in Dhaka with responsibilities and functions relevant to DRM, which have been identified in the preliminary scoping activities and consultations. Representing their institutions and organizations, the FG members support the LIA analysis through data collection,

DRMMP Concept of Mainstreaming

The Disaster Risk Management Master Plan (DRMMP) supports the institutionalization of DRR at the local level by helping cities in establishing an analytical framework that facilitates the development of strategies, policies, actions and processes to enable city officials and other key stakeholders to:

UNDERSTAND their vulnerabilities to hazards;

EVALUATE the physical and socio-economic impacts of these hazards;

ACQUIRE the competency to plan for and effectively manage emergencies;

DETERMINE a series of options to reduce the risk given their priorities and implementation processes;

DEVELOP a coherent approach to managing the overall risk.

The core characteristics of the DRMMP process (participatory approach, locally developed and owned, science-based, comprehensive, sustainable) facilitate the successful integration of URR into city-level development planning and functions. Complementary to this emphasis on local implementation of disaster risk reduction, this approach to mainstreaming also recognizes the significant role of national-level agencies, acknowledging that authority for policy, regulation, control, resource allocation and oversight rests with the central government. The DRMMP also highlights the importance of national and local government engagement with civil society.


analysis and validation. In addition, the group provides the forum to stimulate discussion, develop a common understanding, build consensus and validate the assumptions, findings and recommendations of the LIA investigation. At the same time, the group provides the opportunity for stakeholders to enhance their core competencies throughout and ensure sustainability of DRM practice in the long run.

In addition to the Focus Group, two other bodies ensure collective contribution and teamwork among the project team and stakeholders:

The Advisory Committee (AC) is comprised of policy and decision-makers from various government and non-government institutions in Dhaka. Designated by their respective institutions, the AC members provide overall guidance and oversight, and their meetings serve as a forum for policy-level consultation and engagement consistent with the project’s mainstreaming goals.

The Scientific Consortium (SC) is a small group of renowned local experts in the fields addressed by the project, mainly earthquake engineering, geology/geophysics, land use and regional planning, disaster risk management, law and business administration, environmental management, and other closely related fields. The members of the SC are selected on the basis of their credentials and focus their activities on advising on scientific and technical matters.

Several meetings, workshops, one-on-one consultations and surveys are undertaken during project implementation to accomplish the goals of the participatory process as explained above. While the process is guided by the experts, the outcome is controlled by the input and the level of engagement and contribution from the stakeholders. Thus, the validity of the LIA investigation relies, to a great extent, on the success of the participatory process.

2.3.4. Validation

The mechanisms for stakeholder participation described above are also the primary venues for validating the results of the data collection and analysis, as well as the recommendations meant to address identified legal and institutional gaps in the existing enabling environment for DRM. The main responsibility for most of the validation process lies with the LIA FG, although the AC also plays a significant role through its review of the regular reports on project activities submitted to the committee. Consultations with specific experts and key organizations also support the vetting of results and recommendations by stakeholders. The engagement of stakeholders in reviewing and finalizing the outputs of the LIA investigation is meant to generate consensus and further promote ownership of the stakeholders over the needed legal and institutional reforms, increasing local commitment to their successful implementation over the long-term.


3. LIA Investigation Process

3.1. What are the stages in the LIA investigation process?

The investigation process is composed of five phases, with the outputs of each phase contributing to the accomplishment of the objectives of the succeeding phases. The process is illustrated in Figure 3. The different phases are discussed in more detail in the succeeding sections.

Figure 3. LIA Investigation Process

Preparation

Data Collection

Analysis and Diagnosis

Stakeholders’ Validation

Identification of key agencies at the national and city levels through review of secondary

sources and local consultations.

Creation of LIA Focus Group Development of investigation work plan

and timeline

Consolidation and analysis of collected data

Comparison of existing DRM practice with international

standards, and local mandates/policies

Identification of legal and institutional issues

and gaps, formulation of recommendations

Summary of organizational mapping, network analysis, major gaps and

recommendations

Validation of findings with stakeholders

Summary of lines of enforcement

and responsibility for institutional

mandates

Definition of roles of different

stakeholders

In-depth interviews with focal officials

of key DRM-related organizations

Organizational mapping, network analysis and gap

analysis workshops

Deployment of self-administered tools

Findings and Recommendations


Preparation

In the Preparation phase, initial scoping is conducted to gain a preliminary understanding of the prevailing enabling environment for DRM in Bangladesh, as well as to identify the relevant key institutional stakeholders. This is accomplished through the review of secondary sources of information and consultations with local experts. Representatives from the identified organizations are, then, invited to form part of the LIA Focus Group. The sectors represented in the LIA FG are varied, comprised of members from national government agencies, regional bodies, city corporations, academe, and business, professional and citizens’ organizations (see Annex 1). The schedule of investigation activities is also developed and finalized at this time.

The key outputs of the Preparation Phase are:• Identification of key agencies at the national

and city levels through review of secondary

Focus Group LIA Meeting on November 20, 2012 held at Jamuna Hall, World Bank Dhaka

Figure 4. Initial LIA Investigation Timeline

sources and local consultations • Creation of LIA Focus Group• Development of investigation work plan and

timeline


Examples of Preparatory Phase Activities in Dhaka

1. Initial Project Implementation Team Meeting and Scanning of LIA in DRM in Bangladesh

During the first field investigation, the LIA EMI Practice Leader together with the LIA Local Investigator presented the Terms of Reference. The initial references that were identified were shared, namely: laws, rules, plans, reports and other documents to be jointly reviewed with the Local Investigator.

These are:i. Disaster Management Act - for translation to Englishii. Standing Orders on Disaster 1999 and 2010 iii. Draft National Policy on DM Cabinet Ministry - Order activating the Ministry of Disaster

Management and appointment of a new Minister apart from the Ministry of Foodiv. Bangladesh Country Report 2011 re: HFA Monitorv. CDMP Reportsvi. Environmental Laws Compilationvii. Town Planning Actviii. Organogram of MODMix. Dhaka City Corporation Actx. Legal instrument creating Dhaka North and Dhaka South City Corporationsxi. Rules of Business creating Ministriesxii. National Building Codexiii. Act creating RAJUK (Capital City Development Authority)xiv. National Earthquake Contingency Plan xv. Dhaka City Earthquake Contingency Planxvi. Others still to be indentified

2. First LIA Focus Group Discussion (FGD) - Orientation and Formal Introduction of the Project to LIA FG

The first activity served as one of the venues for the formal introduction of the project to stakeholders. The approach and methodology for the LIA investigation were presented, together with the relevant project requirements, deliverables and timeframe. The orientation also provided an opportunity for open discussion and the collection of feedback and inputs from stakeholders. This dialogue was one of several modes of stakeholder engagement meant to promote commitment and support from local partners, and ensure successful project implementation.

During this FGD, the participants raised their initial impressions on the current institutional strengths of key organizations involved in urban development in Dhaka, as well as the challenges they face. Key issues were identified by the discussion participants pertaining to implementation of existing laws, certification of professionals, building insurance, the functions of planning and regulatory agencies, and the need for capacity building in legal concerns and disaster risk management.

These activities had the following key results:

• Consensus on approach, methodology and timeline of project implementation• Initial understanding of national and local administrative structure in Bangladesh• Identification of potential LIA FG members


Data Collection

The Data Collection phase is focused on the accumulation of relevant information that will inform the analysis of the existing enabling environment for DRM at the national and local levels.

The desk review of laws and regulations, plans, reports, and studies from secondary sources that was started in the Preparatory phase helps to support this effort by providing team members with information to develop a preliminary summary of the lines of enforcement and responsibility for institutional mandates and regulations at both the national and Dhaka City Corporation levels, as well as to define the roles of different stakeholders. The results of this desk work will provide insights that can be used in the succeeding investigation activities, such as the key informant interviews and workshops.

In-depth interviews with focal officials of key DRM-related offices are, then, conducted, making use of guide questions (see Annex 3) developed based on the data gathered from desk research. These interviews are supplemented by the FG meetings, which serve as venues for moderated discussions where issues relevant to the LIA investigation are explored in detail.

Several tools are used such as organizational static mapping and DRM functional mapping, network analysis and the gaps analysis. LIA forms were developed to facilitate data gathering (See Annex 5for LIA Form 1 and Form 2).

The organizational static mapping merely identifies the key institutions involved and their mandates. DRM functional mapping, on the other hand, categorizes such mandates into DRM functions either as provider, regulator, user or supporter.

The gaps analysis tool is used to gather insights from stakeholders on issues on the different elements of DRM pertaining to disaster mitigation (Enforcement of Building Code, Risk-sensitive Land Use Plan and Zoning Ordinance, Risk

Assessment, Risk Financing, Retrofitting of Hospitals and Schools, Relocation), prevention, response, recovery and rehabilitation. These issues are, then, analyzed using different parameters such as legal mandate, funding, and manpower, skills and competencies, inter-institutional coordination, among others.

The key outputs of the Data Collection phase are:• Stakeholders are oriented on the salient

features of Act No. 34 and DRM Institutional Arrangements in Bangladesh

• DRR roles, responsibilities and resources of various institutions at different levels in the performance of an inter-institutional mandate or function in DRM identified

• Nature and existence of institutional linkages among the National Disaster Management Council members, Department of Disaster Management, Dhaka City Corporations - North and South, and external partners in terms of hierarchy, coordination, information-sharing and logistical support among the key stakeholders are identified

• The identified DRR roles, responsibilities of various stakeholders, the connections and relationships of the institutions in the network and the way they relate and communicate with each other are validated

• Significant legal and organizational gaps that impact on DRM and measures to address these gaps are identified

Key informant interview with Fire Service and Civil Defence Director and staff on March 25, 2013.


Examples of Data Collection Activities in Dhaka

1. LIA Workshop - Organizational Mapping and Gaps Analysis Exercise

This activity was the first LIA workshop where the organizational mapping and gaps analysis tools were administered to the participants. Gaps, issues and concerns relevant to earthquake risks management were identified. Some of these include: (1) availability of funds, (2) no incident Command System in place; (3) lack of enforcement of Building Construction Act, Building Construction Rules and National Building Code, (4) overlapping functions between RAJUK, City Corporation, PWD, Department of Architecture, (5) lack of skilled manpower; (6) lack of political commitment; (7) lack of good governance; (8) no focal unit within the concerned offices; (9) no internal training program on earthquake preparedness; (10) CDMP data has not been disseminated or shared with other agencies; (11) no clear guidelines to mainstream DRR in programs and projects of agencies.

2. Workshop on Institutional Activities on Earthquake Risk Reduction

This activity gathered representatives from various government institutions and stakeholder organizations in order to identify which of these have participatory roles in DRM and to discuss the current status of their activities on earthquake risk reduction. The workshop also focused on reviewing the existing DRRM-related laws.

3. Key Informant Interviews

Separate interviews were conducted with key officials from the following organizations: Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief, Fire Service and Civil Defence Directorate, Dhaka North City Corporation, Dhaka South City Corporation, Department of Disaster Management, Rajdhani Unnayan Katripakhaya, Dhaka Water Supply and Sewerage Authority, and Titas Gas. The KIIs were intended to provide additional information about the functions and responsibilities of these organizations, as well as the coordination mechanisms existing between them. Institutional gaps and needs, together with corresponding policy recommendations, were also identified with the assistance of these stakeholders. The list of key informants is available in Annex 2.

LIA Workshop held on November 26, 2012 at Jamuna Hall, World Bank Dhaka.

Workshop on Institutional Activities on Earthquake Risk Reduction at World Bank Dhaka on February 13, 2013.

Key informant interview with Dhaka South City Corporation Town Planner held during Field Investigation No. 2.


Analysis and Diagnosis

The information collected from the data gathering activities is consolidated in order to characterize the existing legal and institutional framework for DRM at the national and city levels. Current DRM practice is compared against international agreements and standards (Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA), ISO 31000:2009, AS/NZ 31000:2009, Emergency Management Accreditation Program (EMAP), existing national and local DRR statutes and policies (Disaster Management Act of 2012, the Standing Orders on Disaster, the National Disaster Plan), and the requirements of mainstreaming in order to further identify gaps and possible remedial actions.

An important activity for this phase is the Organizational Static Mapping, DRM Functional Mapping and Network Analysis Workshop. The mapping component of this activity, entails a stakeholder-validated identification of key agencies involved in DRM in Bangladesh, with their roles, responsibilities and mandates outlined by the participants. DRM Functional Mapping is a tool that identifies the role of institutions in DRM either as provider, regulator user or supporter.

Providers have roles and responsibilities for planning, developing and disseminating or providing resources, information or knowledge. The roles and responsibilities of regulators entail regulating, supervising, or providing public safety and security. On the other hand, users occupy roles or positions requiring resources or information either before, during and/or after a disaster. Supporters take on roles that provide assistance to other organizations and institutions either before, during and/or after a disaster. Typically, an organization assumes more than one function or role.

Network analysis involves determining the existence and nature of linkages among actors at various levels in terms of hierarchy, coordination and informational flows. The workshop also makes use of a tool to analyse institutional gaps in order

Example of Analysis and Diagnosis Activities in Dhaka

The Workshop on Legal and Institutional Arrangements was conducted on April 27, 2013. The objectives of the workshop were: (1) Review the Disaster Management Act, with a view towards identifying the gaps in the law and providing policy recommendations; (2) Identify the particular roles and responsibilities of each participating organization; and (3) Identify the relationships of the agencies and organizations present, and other stakeholders through an organizational mapping and gaps analysis session.

Validation of information gathered during data collection, such as:

• Roles and functions of key DRM-related organizations

• Identification of relationships and information flows between key organizations

• Existing inter-organizational coordination mechanisms

Identification of prevailing institutional gaps, operational issues and stakeholder recommendations.



to map significant legal and organizational issues and the means to address them (see Annex 5 for examples of the tools used).

The responses to the actual functional mapping exercise in Dhaka revealed that the various DRM actors have a limited understanding of each other’s roles, particularly the DCCs. While the revised Standing Orders on Disaster (SOD) enumerate the functions of the City Corporation Disaster Management Committee, it is apparent that these are not followed to the letter. DCCs understand their roles in disaster prevention, mitigation, relief and rehabilitation but not in risk identification, risk assessment and risk transfer. The participation of RAJUK in various aspects of DRM is evident except for risk transfer mechanisms. In the same manner, the DDM did not identify risk insurance as an important aspect of its work.

The key outputs of the Analysis and Diagnosis phase are:

• Consolidation and analysis of collected data• Comparison of existing DRM practice with

international and regional agreements, international standards and practice, and national laws, framework, policies and guidelines from central authorities

• Identification of legal and institutional issues and gaps, formulation of recommendations

Findings and Recommendations

Based on the results of the analysis and diagnosis, the LIA team is able to develop a clear and more precise understanding of the situation prevailing in the legal and institutional environment for DRM in Dhaka, including issues in the implementation of laws and interactions among institutions. In order to address the identified gaps, a set of policy recommendations is proposed. These recommendations are formulated as part of the DRM master planning framework for the city.

The recommendations are intended to serve

as a guide for implementing a series of actions to enhance the enabling environment for DRM. Like the previous phases, this step is highly participatory. It is aimed at building knowledge and capacity among representatives of government agencies in Dhaka and other stakeholders, as well as creating ownership among them.

The output at the end of this phase is a set of policy recommendations with corresponding strategies and specific actions to address identified issues in different aspects of LIA. Examples of the actual findings and recommendations of the BUERP are provided in the succeeding chapters.

Stakeholders’ Validation

The consolidated data, comprised of the organizational map, network analysis and summary of major gaps and recommendations, is presented to the different stakeholder groups such as the Advisory Committee and LIA FG for validation. The comments of selected experts and key institutions may also be solicited for specific concerns regarding the data and analysis.

It is important to note that the validation is not a single activity, but consists of multiple iterations, as the results of initial reviews are updated and presented to stakeholders again for confirmation. The validated information is used to develop a narrative report that will serve as input to the functional and policy interventions to be contained in the final DRMMP document.

The key outputs of the Stakeholder’s Validation are:

• Summary of organizational mapping, network analysis, major gaps and recommendations are presented and validated

• Inputs from stakeholders collated for consideration in the preparation of the final report


Example of Stakeholders’ Validation Activity in Dhaka

A workshop on Validation of Initial LIA Findings and Recommendations was held on September 7, 2013. The objectives of the workshop were to present the initial findings and recommendations of the LIA component which will be incorporated in the Legal and Institutional Framework Guidebook for the BUERP to the local stakeholders, and to generate further inputs from the LIA FG members on the implementation and operationalization of LIA recommendations.

The activity validated the initial LIA findings and recommendations, which are discussed in detail in the succeeding chapters. The participants of the validation were divided into two groups, where each group was assigned identified LIA gaps and related recommendations and implementing strategies. Each group was tasked to validate these initial findings and recommendations, and provide their inputs on the particular strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and challenges relevant to their assigned LIA strategies (See Annex 6).

Excerpts from the Record of Proceedings of the LIA Validation Workshop held on September 7, 2013 at Jamuna Hall, World Bank Dhaka

“Strategy 1: Amend the DM Act by clearly mandating the powers and functions of DCCs on DRM. Develop briefs and legislative background studies and papers in support of the amendment. Expand the LIA Focus Group and continue its work to undertake the advocacy agenda and to develop the necessary background documentation. Study experiences from other countries which have experience in mainstreaming and decentralization. Review relevance and operational effectiveness of current committees. While legislative process is being worked out, create the dynamics for local planning and action as indicated in the remaining policy recommendations.During the presentation, the stakeholders have highlighted Disaster Management Act of 2012 and Local Government (City Corporation)

Act 2009 as strengths to implement the Bangladesh Urban Earthquake Resilience Project.

But they also mentioned the weakness that the manpower is not included in the organogram and also funding is not mentioned.

The opportunity is that DCC has service network up to the household level and this can be used in disaster management induced by earthquake.

The challenge is to change or modify any laws, because it takes a long time to amend any legal instruments, for example: if DDM wants to modify or amend the DM ACT 2012, DDM has to submit the amendment to the MoDMR, and then the MoDMR will examine the amendment proposed by DDM and send it to the cabinet for approval. If the cabinet approves the amendment then it goes to the Ministry of Law for vetting. There after the proposed amendment is sent to the parliament for final approval. This procedure takes usually long time. But, if the government wants a legal instrument to be amended quickly then the procedure mentioned above is completed faster than the usual time. The coordination between DDM and DCC is also a great challenge for this strategy. During the discussion/presentation the participants wanted clarifications regarding the recommendation as to the amendment of DM Act and DCC’s Act. “



4. LIA Findings

4.1. How are the findings of the LIA investigation presented?

The results of the LIA investigation are presented in three parts. The first part focuses on the policy, legal and institutional framework for DRM at both the national and city levels. The discussion in this section examines the following elements:

• Adherence to international agreements on DRM and participation in regional initiatives on risk reduction

• Existing national laws and policies on DRM and related areas• Institutional framework and coordination mechanisms for DRM at the national level• DRM systems at subnational levels, with a particular focus on the city level

Sample findings for policy, legal and institutional framework for DRM in Dhaka

International DRM agreements and regional initiatives

• Bangladesh is committed to implementing the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA)

• Bangladesh is an active member state of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC)

• Bangladesh contributed to the formulation and adoption of the Comprehensive Framework on Early Warning, Disaster Management and Disaster Prevention in 2007

Existing national laws and policies relevant to DRM

• Disaster Management Act of 2012, SODs and other DRM-related laws and codes constitute the core of Bangladesh national disaster management regulatory framework

• Disaster Management Act of 2012 provides the legal basis for DRM mandates of government agencies and non-government actors

• Standing Orders on Disaster (SOD) and related Guidelines facilitate monitoring of disaster management activities and guide

individual officials and institutions at the national and subnational levels on their responsibilities in disaster management.

• 67 DRM-related laws identified as significant legislation relevant to disaster risk reduction and emergency management (see Annex 4).

• National Disaster Management Policy (draft) includes identification of likely disaster impacts, assessment of available resources to cope with disasters, enhancement of existing institutional capacity for disaster response and recovery, addresses socioeconomic aspects contributing to exposure to disaster threats, and reduction of risk to acceptable levels.

National-level DRM institutional framework and coordination mechanisms

• Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief (MoDMR) is the main national agency for disaster risk management, and its focal office for DRM is the Department of Disaster Management (DDM).

• MoDMR works with other ministries that have DRM-related mandates and functions through various committees (see Figure 5).

• DDM works with local government bodies through the city corporations and disaster management committees (see Figure 5).


City-level DRM systems

• City Corporation Disaster Management Committee (CCDMC) is responsible for risk reduction, emergency management, and recovery activities, such as: » Hazard, vulnerability and risk analysis » Contingency plan preparation » Coordination with utilities and other

service providers » Identification of high risk communities » Capacity building and vulnerability

reduction » Warning, rescue and relief » Allocation of resources for rehabilitation

• Local Disaster Response Coordination Group is responsible for establishing a Local Emergency Operation Centre and liaising with higher authorities.

• Local Disaster Incident Managers in each local government body are responsible for organizing Disaster Incident Management Teams and leading the development of emergency operations plans. During crisis situations, they also establish Disaster Incident Management points and assess the situation in order to coordinate appropriate local-level actions.

The Bangladesh DRM system is depicted below:

Figure 5. Organogram of Bangladesh DRM System (Source: EMI, 2013).


The second part provides the findings from the organizational mapping, DRM functional mapping and network analysis, specifically the identification of roles of agencies in relation to the elements of DRM, and the identification of functional roles of the key institutional actors as provider, regulator, user or supporter. Table 1 shows the functional roles of stakeholders, categorized according to the elements of DRM, mainly, (1) risk identification and assessment, (2) prevention and mitigation, (3) awareness and preparedness, (4) response, rescue and relief, and (5) rehabilitation and construction, as identified and perceived by the stakeholders.

The role of each organization can either be as provider, user, controller, and supporter. As provider, it indicates a role and responsibility to plan, develop and disseminate or provide reference, information, and knowledge. For control, it indicates a role and/or responsibility as a regulator, supervision and provider of public safety and security. As a user, it indicates a role or a position requiring a need for resources or information either before, during and/or after a disaster. Finally, for support, it indicates a role for supporting other organizations, institutions either before, during and/or after a disaster. Typically an organization has more than one function and assumes various roles.

Sample findings for organizational mapping and network analysis of DRM-related institutions in Dhaka

Table 1. Functional Roles in DRR of Bangladesh Stakeholders, by Element (Source: EMI, 2013)

Element Provider Controller/Regulator

User Support

Risk Identification and Assessment

DDMRAJUKDPDCBWDBLGEDPioneer InsuranceDWASAUDDBUETDU

DDMRAJUKDPDCLGEDPioneer InsuranceDWASAUDD

DDMRAJUKDPDCBWDBPioneer Insurance

DDMRAJUKDESCODPDCBWDBADPCMin. of LandPioneer InsuranceDWASAUDDBUETDU

Prevention and Mitigation

DDMRAJUKDSCCForest Dept.TITASDPDCBWDBDept. of EnvironmentLGEDDWASABUETDU

MoDMRRAJUKDSCCDept. of EnvironmentDPDC

RAJUKHBRIDPDCBWDBDept. of Environment

DDMRAJUKHBRIForest Dept.TITASDESCODPDCBWDBADPCDept. of EnviDWASABUETDU


Element Provider Controller/Regulator

User Support

Awareness and Preparedness

DDMRAJUKDSCCHBRIForest Dept.TITASDPDCBWDBDept. of EnvironmentLGEDBMDDWASABUETDU

MoDMRRAJUKDept. of EnvironmentDPDCBMDUDD

DDMRAJUKDSCCDPDCBWDBDept. of Environment

RAJUKDSCCHBRIForest Dept.TITASDESCODept. of EnvironmentDPDCBWDBADPCMin. of LandDWASAUDDBUETDU

Response, Rescue, Relief

DDMRAJUKDSCCTITASDPDCBWDBLGEDDWASABUETDU

MoDMRRAJUKDPDC

RAJUKHBRIDPDCBWDB

RAJUKHBRIForest Dept.DESCODPDCBWDBADPCDWASABUETDU

Rehabilitation and Reconstruction

DDMRAJUKDSCCDPDCBWDBLGEDBUETDU

MoDMRRAJUKDPDC

DDMRAJUKHBRITITASDESCODPDCBWDB

RAJUKDSCCHBRIForest Dept.DESCODPDCBWDBADPCBUETDU

Risk Transfer and Insurance

BUETDU

DESCODWASABUETDU

The responses to the functional mapping exercise clearly reveal limited understanding of the role of the various actors particularly the DCCs with respect to DRM. The revised SOD spells out the responsibilities of the City Corporation Disaster Management Committees in risk reduction. emergency response, and post disaster period. However, it is gleaned that insofar as the DCCs are concerned, they perceive their role to be limited to prevention and mitigation, rescue and relief but not in risk identification and risk assessment and risk transfer. RAJUKs involvement in DRM is evident except in risk transfer and insurance. This shows limited appreciation of the importance of risk transfer in DRM. The DDM likewise did not identify risk transfer as an aspect of its work. The FSCD is a major provider for response and relief. Unfortunately, they


General Impression on the DRM Institutional Relationship among the Key Stakeholders for Dhaka

The network analysis tool defines the relationship of key nodal agencies and classifies the relationships as hierarchical or coordinative, and information flows as formal or informal. The succeeding figures (Figures 6, 7, 8 and 9) illustrate the relative locations and functional relationships of DRM-related institutions in Bangladesh and Dhaka.

Figure 6 represents the network of organizations that play major roles in disaster risk management in Bangladesh, and more particularly in Dhaka. There are nine (9) major actors or “focus nodes” in the figure: (1) Prime Minister’s Office, (2) Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief (MoDMR), (3) Department of Disaster Management (DDM), (4) Ministry of Local Government, Rural Development and Co-operatives (MoLGRD), (5) Dhaka City Corporations (DCCs), (6) Armed Forces of Bangladesh (AFD), (7) Fire Service and Civil Defence (FSCD), (8) RAJUK, and (9) Dhaka Metropolitan Police. Horizontally, the chart is divided into three parts: national, district, and local level. Although not shown in the figure, each entity is placed vertically under its corresponding ministry. Hierarchical ties in the network are represented by red arrows and coordination ties are shown in blue arrows.

As these nine focal agencies are critical to DRM in Dhaka, the network analysis highlights the need for a more formal structure to connect these organizations and make them work together more effectively. The analysis provides inputs for specific policy and operational recommendations that can be made to improve the effectiveness of the current DRM system. These findings draw certain parallels to the

LIA analysis conducted for the Aqaba Special Economic Zone Authority (ASEZA) in 2011, which identified the existing institutional arrangements and led to the appropriate placement, in terms of level of authority, of the proposed ASEZA Directorate for Disaster Risk Reduction and Management. An explanation of the ASEZA DRRM Directorate can be found in Annex 7.

A. Weak Coordination among Key Institutions

The recurrent issue expressed by the stakeholders, is the lack of coordination and communication among the different institutions; particularly between the national and local offices. Taking the cue from the Urban Development Directorate (UDD)representatives, they described the current set-up as “lack of understanding of who is doing what”. This confusion is a building block in the implementation of DRM programs that have a wider scope and requiring the involvement of more institutions.

Although meeting schedules are clearly stated in the SOD, the Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief representatives claimed the lack of frequent coordination meetings not only between the institutions but also among internal departments of a ministry. Also, the representatives observed that there is lack of coordination between the MoDMR (the key ministry for disaster plans) and the AFD (the key organization for disaster response). Protocol dictates that the MoDMR has to go through the Prime Minister’s Office in order to request AFD for disaster responses. In disaster situations, where every moment counts, a faster approach should be considered.

In the SOD, the City Corporation Disaster Management Committee should meet every two months during normal times. However, since the committee was formed in 2010, only one meeting was held and the minutes of the meeting were not found.

were not present during the LIA workshops. These findings indicate the necessity of engaging key stakeholders in identifying and understanding their roles and functions.


Figu

re 6

. Net

wor

k Re

pres

enta

tion

Indi

catin

g Re

latio

nshi

p of

DRM

Sta

keho

lder

s in

Dha

ka (S

ourc

e: E

MI 2

013)

.

AFD

A

rmed

For

ces

Div

isio

nBM

D

Bang

lade

sh M

eteo

rolo

gica

l Dep

artm

ent

BTCL

Ba

ngla

desh

Tel

ecom

mun

icat

ion

Co

mpa

ny L

imite

dCC

DRC

G

City

Cor

pora

tion

Dis

aste

r

Resp

onse

Coo

rdin

atio

n G

roup

CCD

MC

Ci

ty C

orpo

ratio

n D

isas

ter

M

anag

emen

t Com

mitt

eeCD

MP

Com

preh

ensi

ve D

isas

ter M

anag

emen

t

Prog

ram

me

CPPI

B

Cycl

one

Prep

ared

ness

Pro

gram

Impl

emen

tatio

n Bo

ard

DD

M

Dep

artm

ent o

f Dis

aste

r Man

agem

ent

DD

MC

Dis

tric

t Dis

aste

r Man

agem

ent C

omm

ittee

DD

RCG

D

istr

ict D

isas

ter R

espo

nse

Coor

dina

tion

G

roup

DES

CO

Dha

ka E

lect

ric

Supp

ly C

ompa

ny

Li

mite

dD

GH

S D

irect

orat

e G

ener

al o

f Hea

lth S

ervi

ces

DN

CC

Dha

ka N

orth

Cit

y Co

rpor

atio

nD

PDC

D

haka

Pow

er D

istr

ibut

ion

Co

mpa

ny L

imite

dD

SCC

D

haka

Sou

th C

ity

Corp

orat

ion

DW

ASA

D

haka

Wat

er S

uppl

y an

d

Sew

erag

e A

utho

rity

EPA

C Ea

rthq

uake

Pre

pare

dnes

s A

dvis

ory

Co

mm

ittee

FSCD

Fi

re S

ervi

ce a

nd C

ivil

Def

ense

HED

H

ealth

Eng

inee

ring

Dep

artm

ent

IMD

MCC

In

ter-

Min

iste

rial

Dis

aste

r Man

agem

ent

Co

ordi

natio

n Co

mm

ittee

MoD

M

inis

try

of D

efen

ceM

oDM

R

Min

istr

y of

Dis

aste

r Man

agem

ent

an

d Re

lief

MoH

A

Min

istr

y of

Hom

e A

ffai

rsM

oH&

FW

Min

istr

y of

Hea

lth a

nd F

amily

Wel

fare

MoH

PW

Min

istr

y of

Hou

sing

and

Pub

lic

W

orks

MoL

GRD

M

inis

try

of L

ocal

Gov

ernm

ent,

Ru

ral D

evel

opm

ent a

nd

Co

-ope

rativ

esM

oPE&

MR

Min

istr

y of

Pow

er, E

nerg

y an

d

Min

eral

Res

ourc

esM

oP&

T

Min

istr

y of

Pos

t and

Tele

com

mun

icat

ions

ND

MC

Nat

iona

l Dis

aste

r Man

agem

ent C

ounc

ilN

DRC

G

Nat

iona

l Dis

aste

r Res

pons

e Co

ordi

natio

n

Gro

upN

PDRR

N

atio

nal P

latf

orm

for D

isas

ter R

isk

Redu

ctio

nPM

O

Prim

e M

inis

ter’s

OFfi

cePr

o. O

rg

Prof

essi

onal

Org

aniz

atio

nsPW

D

Publ

ic W

orks

Dep

artm

ent

RAJU

K

Rajd

hani

Unn

ayan

Kat

ripa

khay

aSo

B Su

rvey

of B

angl

ades

hU

DD

U

rban

Dire

ctor

ate

Dep

artm

ent


Directorate General of Health Services (DGHS), the Geological Survey of Bangladesh (GSB), the Fire Service and Civil Defense (FSCD), the Survey of Bangladesh (SoB), the Public Works Department (PWD), the Bangladesh Meteorological Department (BMD), RAJUK, District Administrations, Dhaka City Corporations (DNCC and DSCC) and DPDC/DESCO (power distribution companies).

Under the Ministry of Home Affairs, FSCD and the Metropolitan Police play important roles. FSCD coordinates with the AFD, DDM, RAJUK and SoB.

Under the Ministry of Housing and Public Works is RAJUK. RAJUK’s network is shown in Figure 8. It shows coordination ties withAFD, DDM, FSCD, NGOs, Dhaka Metropolitan Police, DCCs, DWASA, Public Works Department (PWD) and professional organizations such as the Institute of Engineers Bangladesh (IEB), Institute of Architects Bangladesh (IAB), Bangladesh Earthquake Society (BES), Real Estate & Housing Association of Bangladesh (REHAB). Dhaka City Corporations, as shown in Figure 9, are under the authority of the Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development (MoLGRD), and have authority over the zones and wards. In relation to local government responsibilities in DRM, the MoLGRD plays a vital role in risk reduction during normal times, as well as in emergency response, during the disaster and rehabilitation stages. Dhaka City Corporations coordinate with the DDM, Dhaka Metropolitan Police, AFD, RAJUK, DWASA, and the Bangladesh Telecommunication Company Limited (BTCL).

B. Lack of Participation in the Existing Set-up

Apart from the weak coordination, the existing set-up is also not conducive for a participatory process. Representatives from RAJUK expressed its lack of involvement into the CMDP Phase I initiative, and the absence of coordination of its activity with DCCs especially in preparing the master plan (DAP) for Dhaka City, which leads to unproductive overlapping. DNCC cited the lack of involvement of DCCs in the formulation of the ward based contingency plans under CDMP II. This task was assigned by DDM to ADPC without involving DCCs or doing any consultation.81

The UDD representatives also claimed the lack of involvement of skilled planners and engineers who could provide expertise in disaster risk reduction. TITAS Gas representatives said that there is more vertical and less horizontal coordination amongst the institutions, which restrains their own capacity to take disaster risk reduction measures.

As seen in Figure 6, the Prime Minister’s Office is the head office of the ministries. The network shows a hierarchical tie depicting the Armed Forces Division under the Prime Minister’s Office. In times of disaster, AFD plays the main role and commands UDD and DWASA. In times of disaster, AFD coordinates with the FSCD, RAJUK, DCCs and the Metro Police. The MoDMR coordinates its actions with the Ministries of Health, Power, Home Affairs, Housing and Public Works, Local Government and Regional Development, Defense, and Telecommunication. The Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief is also under the PMO. Under the MoDMR, DDM was established to implement the objectives of the Disaster Management Act of 2012.

DDM, as the implementing body, is shown (Figure 7) to coordinate its actions with the

8 Reply of DNCC representative to supplementary questionnaire


Figu

re 7

. Net

wor

k Re

pres

enta

tion

of D

isas

ter M

anag

emen

t and

Rel

ief/

Dep

artm

ent o

f Dis

aste

r Man

agem

ent (

Sour

ce:

EMI 2

013)

.

BMD

Ba

ngla

desh

Met

eoro

logi

cal

D

epar

tmen

tCD

MP

Co

mpr

ehen

sive

Dis

aste

r

M

anag

emen

t Pro

gram

me

CPPI

B

Cycl

one

Prep

ared

ness

Pro

gram

Impl

emen

tatio

n Bo

ard

DD

M

Dep

artm

ent o

f Dis

aste

r

Man

agem

ent

DES

CO

Dha

ka E

lect

ric S

uppl

y Co

mpa

ny

Li

mite

d D

GH

S

Dire

ctor

ate

Gen

eral

of

H

ealth

Ser

vice

sD

NCC

D

haka

Nor

th C

ity C

orpo

ratio

n D

PDC

D

haka

Pow

er D

istr

ibut

ion

Co

mpa

ny L

imite

dD

SCC

D

haka

Sou

th C

ity C

orpo

ratio

nFS

CD

Fire

Ser

vice

and

Civ

il D

efen

ce

GSB

G

eolo

gica

l Sur

vey

of

Ban

glad

esh

HED

H

ealth

Eng

inee

ring

Dep

artm

ent

MoD

MR

Min

istr

y of

Dis

aste

r

Man

agem

ent a

nd R

elie

f N

PDRR

N

atio

nal P

latf

orm

for D

isas

ter

Ri

sk R

educ

tion

PMO

Pr

ime

Min

iste

r’s O

ffice

PWD

Pu

blic

Wor

ks D

epar

tmen

t RA

JUK

Ra

jdha

ni U

nnay

an K

atrip

akha

yaSo

B

Surv

ey o

f Ban

glad

esh

UD

D

Urb

an D

evel

opm

ent D

irect

orat

e


Figu

re 8

. Net

wor

k Re

pres

enta

tion

of R

AJU

K (S

ourc

e: E

MI 2

013)

.

AFD

A

rmed

For

ces

Div

isio

nD

DM

D

epar

tmen

t of D

isas

ter

Man

agem

ent

DES

CO

Dha

ka E

lect

ric S

uppl

y

Com

pany

Lim

ited

DN

CC

Dha

ka N

orth

City

Cor

pora

tion

DPD

C

Dha

ka P

ower

Dis

trib

utio

n

Com

pany

Lim

ited

DSC

C

Dha

ka S

outh

City

Cor

pora

tion

DW

ASA

D

haka

Wat

er S

uppl

y an

d

Sew

erag

e Au

thor

ity

FSCD

Fi

re S

ervi

ce a

nd C

ivil

Def

ense

MoD

MR

Min

istr

y of

Dis

aste

r

Man

agem

ent a

nd R

elie

fM

oHA

M

inis

try

of H

ome

Affa

irsM

oHPW

Min

istr

y of

Hou

sing

and

Pub

lic

W

orks

MoL

GRD

Min

istr

y of

Loc

al G

over

nmen

t,

Rura

l Dev

elop

men

t and

Co-o

pera

tives

MoP

E&M

R M

inis

try

of P

ower

, Ene

rgy

an

d M

iner

al R

esou

rces

PMO

Pr

ime

Min

iste

r’s O

Ffice

Pro.

Org

Pro

fess

iona

l Org

aniz

atio

nsPW

D

Publ

ic W

orks

Dep

artm

ent

RAJU

K

Rajd

hani

Unn

ayan

Kat

ripak

haya


Figu

re 9

. Net

wor

k Re

pres

enta

tion

of D

haka

City

Cor

pora

tions

(Sou

rce:

EM

I 201

3).

AFD

A

rmed

For

ces

Div

isio

nBT

CL

Bang

lade

sh Te

leco

mm

unic

atio

n

Com

pany

Lim

ited

CCD

RCG

City

Cor

pora

tion

Dis

aste

r

Resp

onse

Coo

rdin

atio

n G

roup

CCD

MC

City

Cor

pora

tion

Dis

aste

r

Man

agem

ent C

omm

ittee

DD

M

Dep

artm

ent o

f Dis

aste

r

M

anag

emen

tD

ESCO

D

haka

Ele

ctric

Sup

ply

Com

pany

Lim

ited

DN

CC

Dha

ka N

orth

City

Cor

pora

tion

DPD

C

Dha

ka P

ower

Dis

trib

utio

n

Com

pany

Lim

ited

DSC

C

Dha

ka S

outh

City

Cor

pora

tion

DW

ASA

D

haka

Wat

er S

uppl

y an

d

Sew

erag

e Au

thor

ity

FSCD

Fi

re S

ervi

ce a

nd C

ivil

Def

ense

MoD

MR

Min

istr

y of

Dis

aste

r Man

agem

ent

an

d Re

lief

MoH

A

Min

istr

y of

Hom

e A

ffairs

MoH

PW M

inis

try

of H

ousi

ng a

nd P

ublic

Wor

ksM

oLG

RD M

inis

try

of L

ocal

Gov

ernm

ent,

Ru

ral D

evel

opm

ent a

nd

Co

-ope

rativ

esM

oPE&

MR

Min

istr

y of

Pow

er, E

nerg

y an

d

Min

eral

Res

ourc

esM

oP&

T

Min

istr

y of

Pos

t and

Tele

com

mun

icat

ions

PMO

Pr

ime

Min

iste

r’s O

Ffice

Pro.

Org

Pro

fess

iona

l Org

aniz

atio

nsPW

D

Publ

ic W

orks

Dep

artm

ent

RAJU

K

Rajd

hani

Unn

ayan

Kat

ripak

haya


The third and last part discusses the identified legal and institutional gaps and functional overlaps. The areas covered by this section may include: (1) Need for decentralized DRM operations and establishment of mainstreaming mechanisms; (2) Funding mechanisms for DRR; (3) Dedicated focal agencies for DRM; (4) Inter-institutional coordination; (5) DRM plans; (6) Stakeholder awareness of earthquake risks and risk reduction; and (7) Monitoring and evaluation mechanisms for monitoring progress in DRM.

Sample of Findings for Gap Analysis of DRM-related institutions in Dhaka

The stakeholder responses to the LIA Gaps Analysis Tool and information collected from other field investigation activities were analyzed in line with the requirements of the Disaster Management Act of 2012, the Standing Orders on Disaster, the National Disaster Plan, the HFA, relevant international DRM standards (AS/NZ 31000, EMAP) and practice, and the requirements of mainstreaming, resulting in the identification of seven main legal and institutional gaps in the DRM system in Dhaka.

Gap #1. Lack of operational decentralization and mainstreaming mechanisms create ineffectiveness in the current DRM system of Bangladesh which remains top heavy and response-oriented. Local institutions, such as the DCC’s and other local governments and agencies lack the authority, accountability, and funding obligations for mainstreaming DRR by national legislation.

Under the existing laws specifically the DM Act of 2012 and Local Government Act of 2009), Local governments have an unclear mandate/authority for disaster risk reduction responsibilities. The current mechanism for implementation is lodged with the CCDMCs, which presupposes that the institutions represented shall on their own undertake risk reduction and emergency response and post-disaster activities. Unfortunately, this is not given serious attention. In so far as city corporations are concerned, the CCDMC is supposed to carry out all activities pertaining to prevention, mitigation, preparedness, response and relief. Membership of the CCDMC is enumerated in SOD 3.1.1. Involvement of ward level institutions is merely optional. SOD 3.1.3 provides that “the chairman of the committee can co-opt a maximum of 3 more members and form groups and sub-groups or form ward committees considering the local situation and special circumstances”.

Other legislations such as the Building Construction Act, Building Code, Building Construction Rules and Town Improvement Act among other existing laws support DRR implementation. However, these laws are not enforced to the letter. There are seeming conflicts and overlaps. Permitting for building construction is done by RAJUK, DCCs and Pourushavas and Union Parishads. RAJUK is not clearly mentioned in the Building Construction Act as a responsible authority to enforce the National Building Code. RAJUKS jurisdiction is beyond the DCCs and extends to Savar, Narayangj,Gazipur and Tongi. This runs in conflict with the Local Government Act of 2009.

The division of Dhaka City into two DCCs is seen as a potential impediment to any initiative for DRR at the city scale. The LIA survey results showed a huge disparity between the roles and responsibilities stated in the SOD and the actual practice on ground; whereas precisely described by the SOD, certain committees and departments have in reality no concrete existence. This lack of coherence can lead to a great confusion in understanding the disaster risk management system not only in Dhaka but in the whole country.

This observation is admitted by the institutions themselves. RAJUK representatives have hence claimed a certain disconnection between the legal arrangements and the reality on the ground: the Town Improvement Act of 1953, the Building Rules of 2008, District Disaster Management Plan and Detailed Area Plan are available but not properly implemented. The Pioneer Insurance Company Limited representative noticed that the 2010 Insurance Act is not effective. The Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief (MoDMR) representatives claimed the lack of implementation of the Disaster Management Act 2012. Additionally, the Urban Development Directorate claimed the absence of an Urban and Regional Planning Act.


The implementing rules of the Disaster Management Act is yet to be drafted and finalized. DDM, as the implementing body for DRR in the country, is not a member of the National Disaster Management Council. FSCD, as first responders to fire and disasters is also not a member. Although training and research are provisioned in the DM Act through the establishment of National Disaster Management Research and Training Institute, no steps have been taken yet to consider this.

Gap #2. Lack of dedicated funding mechanisms for DRR resulting to insufficient funds for DRM programs at the national and local levels.

DRM initiatives are marginalized in the priorities of the DCCs due to competing interests. There is a need to identify a steady source of funds for DRM at the DCC level to ensure sustainability of initiatives. International practice examples are: (1) the Philippines where 5% of the local income is set aside for DRM and allocated to prevention, mitigation and preparedness in the annual budget of the local government (75%) and quick response fund for rescue and relief operations (25%); (2) Bogota, Colombia where the Fund for Emergency Prevention and Attention comes from 0.5% of local tax collections. Other sources of funds can be obtained from a portion of the building permit fees, Calamity Fund and others.

Significant funding for certain aspects of DRM has already been provided through the technical assistance from CDMP. However, to ensure the sustainability of DRM programs there should be continuing fund allocations for this purpose at both the national and local government levels.

Gap #3. Lack of a focal point or dedicated office for DRM at the DCC level.

Institutional support for DRM in Dhaka is weak due to the absence of a permanent Disaster Management Office that has a clear mandate over the core DRM function within DCC. There is likewise no operating state-of-the art Emergency Operations Center at the DCC level. The trend internationally is to have dedicated DRM staff, a pool of DRM-informed managers, planners, coordinators, responders, and equipped with command control and communication systems with corresponding

GIS database system. A megacity such as Dhaka with its high vulnerability, rapid growth and urban challenges for safety and security of the citizens cannot remain without such a capability. Models from around the world show that even medium-sized cities have found it necessary to acquire such capability.

The existing DCC Disaster Management Committees are currently not functional. In the meantime, there are no dedicated DRM offices within the DCCs attending to the important tasks of the Committees and member institutions as spelled out in the Standing Orders on Disaster. Without these DRM offices, there is also no focal unit overseeing interdepartmental and external coordination on risk reduction and management concerns, which is essential for effective mainstreaming.

Gap #4. Weak inter-institutional coordination amongst key nodal agencies and other stakeholders in Dhaka.

Government agencies responsible for various aspects of DRM are under the authority of different ministries. Although there is an existing CCDMC in Dhaka, there is no dedicated manpower within the DCCs to perform the coordinating functions mandated in the Standing Orders for Disasters. Thus, there is a need to amend the City Corporation Act of 2009 to enable the intent of the SOD.

In the absence of clearly defined mandates of the DCC insofar as DRM is concerned, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to attain seamless coordination amongst the various actors of DRM in Dhaka. Currently, there is very limited opportunity for interaction amongst stakeholders except in activities that are supported by donor agencies such as the CDMP or rather in an ad-hoc in the case of a major incident or disaster. There is no incentive at all for the agencies to coordinate with each other, more specifically with the DCCs.

Inter-institutional coordination is also hindered by the lack of a common platform for sharing geo-spatial data on disaster impacts among relevant agencies.

Gap #5. Lack of an inclusive DRM plan of Dhaka City that is based on scientific assessment of


hazards, vulnerabilities and risks and incorporates the concerns of the most vulnerable sectors of society.

A comprehensive Disaster Management Plan derived from a participatory process, supported with scientific studies, is yet to be formulated by the DCCs. More importantly, DRR is supposed to be mainstreamed into the development processes of the city corporations but unless there are clear guidelines and technical assistance from higher authorities or external technical partners, it would be extremely difficult for city staff to mainstream DRR. The mandates within the SOD specifying the development plans should be linked to risk assessments is not being complied with/by the relevant agencies.

Gap #6. Lack of knowledge and understanding of earthquake risks and risk reduction by the DCC officials and staff, and other stakeholders; lack of resources –human and material

The major stakeholders admitted insufficient knowledge of earthquakes risks and risk reductions measures. Scientific studies undertaken are not widely disseminated. The Department of Disaster Management representatives claimed the lack of modern search and rescue equipments. RAJUK representatives the lack of proper equipment for hazard assessment, for training and for the safety building inspections. HBRI cited the lack of data to identify the different building construction types, the building material types, the height of buildings, the different geological hazards, and the building stock volume.

The Urban Development Directorate (UDD) representatives claimed the absence of a GIS lab and training center, and the lack of rescue instrument and logistics. ADPC representatives claimed the lack of skills in disaster risk reduction among responsible public authorities. The Urban Development Directorate claimed the absence of manual for Risk Assessment and RSLUP procedures. To date, the Training and Research Institute contemplated in the DM Act has not been established by the MoDMR.

Gap #7. Lack of a monitoring and evaluation system to monitor the progress of DRM initiatives.

Another important gap shared among stakeholders is the lack of evaluation and self-evaluation capacities in disaster preparedness. The MoDMR representatives admitted the lack of monitoring and evaluation system within their ministry.


5. Recommendations

Recommendations to Address Legal and Institutional Gaps in DRM in Dhaka

Policy Recommendation #1. Introduce structural reforms where decentralized jurisdictional mandates and authorities, planning processes, budget and accountability of DCCs, RAJUK and other local agencies are explicitly provided.

Rationale: Decentralized planning and decision making are necessary to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of local authorities to address disaster risk reduction. Local governments can act locally and progressively make a difference if empowered and capacitated to introduce realistic and science based interventions embedded in their regular functions and processes . They should be armed with the necessary legal mandate and funding. The act creating the city corporations does not explicitly provide for clear mandates for mainstreaming of DRR. In the same vein, the DM Act 2012 does not provide strong decentralized powers to the city corporations. Implicitly, the city corporations can pursue DRM initiatives but it would be better if there is strong legal foundation for DRM expressly stated in an amendatory provision of existing laws.

In-depth research and analysis of relevant policies should be conducted in succeeding studies to identify specific laws that need to be amended, and appropriate recommendations made accordingly.

Implementation Strategy: Amend the DM Act and the Local Government (City Corporation) Act of 2009 by clearly mandating decentralized powers and functions of DCCs on DRM. Specifically, the DM Act and the Local Government Act should authorize the creation of a disaster management wing in the organizational structure of the DCCs. (Examples

of relevant DRM provisions/acts from other countries are provided in Annex 8.)

Implementation Requirements:• MoLGRD and MoDMR/DDM to draft the

proposed amendments to the DM Act and the Local Government (City Corporation) Act of 2009 for approval of higher authorities.

• Create an independent authority free from political bias to implement the Bangladesh National Building Code and Dhaka Mahanagar BC Act 2008 for building construction.

• LIA Focus Group to continue with its activities, in particular, the development of legislative briefs and position papers to support the proposed amendments.

• Specific research to be undertaken on decentralized DRM systems, mainstreaming and defining the role of central authorities.

• Study experiences from other countries

which have experience in mainstreaming and decentralization. Undertake consultations with concerned committees such as NDMC, IMDMCC, NDMAC, EPAC.

• Undertake consultations to collect stakeholders’ inputs and to reach consensus.

Concerned Agencies: MoDMR/DDM, MoLGRD, DCC’s, RAJUK and other key local agencies

Note: While the structural reforms are being designed and discussed, local dynamics for DRR should be encouraged by reinforcing

In order to address the identified gaps in the legal and institutional framework for DRM, a set of policy recommendations is proposed. The recommendations are intended to serve as a guide for implementing a series of actions to enhance the enabling environment for DRM. Seven Specific policy recommendations are proposed to address the gaps identified in the course of the LIA investigation. The context for undertaking each of the policy changes is also provided, as well as the implementation strategies and requirements, to help policy makers carry out the necessary actions that will improve the legal and institutional environment for DRM in Dhaka.


local structures as indicated in remaining policy recommendations.

Policy Recommendation #2: Ensure that DRM programs and activities are adequately funded particularly at the local level. Set aside a certain percentage of the DCC revenue and explore funding from other sources (e.g., calamity fund, a portion of the building permit fees) to be allocated for DRM at the DCC level and other local institutions. (Examples of local funding mechanisms for DRR can be found in the DRM act samples in Annex 9.)

Rationale: While funds are dedicated at the national level, for example, the climate change trust fund, there is limited provision for funding for DRM at the local level. It may be wise to consider setting aside a certain percent of local income for DRR and CCA similar to that provided under Philippine law of DRRM whereby 5% of the annual income is set aside for DRM, wherein 70% is allocated for disaster prevention and mitigation, preparedness, response, rehabilitation and recovery and 30% for quick response.

Implementation Strategy: Amend the DM Act to incorporate mandatory provisions for a dedicated DRM fund to support disaster risk reduction activities such as, but not limited to prevention and mitigation, pre-disaster preparedness programs including training, purchase of disaster response and rescue equipment, supplies and medicines, for post-disaster activities, and payment of premiums on calamity insurance, response, rehabilitation and recovery.

Implementation Requirements: DDM, together with the MOLGRD and the Ministry of Finance, RAJUK, DCCs to study the introduction of mandatory provisions to the DM Act to effect the apportionment of dedicated funds for DRM at the local level.

As a stop gap measure, other modes or legal instruments to effect creation of dedicated DRM funds should be explored.

Concerned Agencies: MoDMR/DDM, MoLGRD, Ministry of Finance, RAJUK, DCCs

Policy Recommendation #3: Create a permanent DRM Office with broad authority over disaster

risk management planning, coordination, preparedness, response, relief and recovery. The DRM office should have a well-formulated and approved Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan and a fully operational 24/7 Emergency Operations Center. The DRM office will also be the instrument for promoting, facilitating and measuring mainstreaming processes within DCC.(Examples of DRM systems and offices in other countries are provided in Annex 8.)

Rationale: The DRM is a complex process that requires specific skills, expertise and resources A dedicated unit is necessary to plan, coordinate and push the mainstreaming of DRR in the local government agenda.

Implementation Strategy: • Undertake an organizational study to define

the proposed DRM Office, its functions, table of organization, positions, classification and compensation. An example of the minimum positions for a DRM Office in the Philippines includes: a DRM Officer, staff for training, administrative and finance operations and warning and planning and research.

• Develop a comprehensive, science-based, consensus-driven disaster risk management and reduction plan for Dhaka City (Refer to Policy Recommendation 5). Refer to international standards such as EMAP (emergency management accreditation program) and the universal definition of the Incident Command System to define the functions, staffing and operating standards for the DRM Office.

Implementation Requirements: • DCCs to undertake the OD study and

recommend its approval to higher authorities. • DCC in coordination with DDM to complete a

city-wide DRM plan.

Concerned Agencies: DCCs, MODMR/DDM, MoLGRD other supporting agencies and service providers

Policy Recommendation #4. Strengthen mechanisms for systematic inter-institutional coordination at the Dhaka City level by activating the DCC Disaster Management Councils supported


by the permanent Disaster Management Offices.

Rationale: Many stakeholders are involved in DRM requiring constant communication and coordination. A permanent platform is required for them to meet and discuss the DRM agenda on a regular basis.

Implementation Strategy: Activate the DRM Councils as the platform for multi-agency coordination supported by the DRM office. (Examples of multi-agency coordination mechanisms can be found in the DRM act samples in Annex 9.)

Implementation Requirements:• CEO of DCCs to activate the DMCs and LDRCGs;

CEO to assign dedicated staff to support DMCs; develop DMP, and annual work and financial plans.

• The Council should prepare an agenda for the entire year including target accomplishments for each meeting. The agenda should include formulation of the DRM plan with goals, objectives, targets programs, projects, and activities and funds.

• Convene meetings on a regular basis to sustain the momentum and dynamism for DRM implementation.

• Within the DRM Office, establish a 24/7 Emergency Operations Center (EOC) with ESFs (e.g., transportation, infrastructure, Fire Fighting, communications, public health and sanitation) following the EMAP standards.

• To complement the DRM office at the DCC level, RAJUK should have its own permanent DRM unit to support the integration of DRR into land use planning and construction codes and standards enforcement.

• To support the DRM offices at the DCC level, RAJUK, DDM and other governmental agencies, a separate unit should be established that will be responsible for creating and maintaining an open platform for sharing data. The platform will enable relevant stakeholders in Dhaka to access geospatial data to conduct spatial analysis of disaster impacts and support decision making in all phases of DRM and

across various sectors. This will require setting up appropriate organizational frameworks and putting the necessary organizational processes, human resources, and training programs in place.

Concerned Agencies: DNCC, DSCC, MoDMR/DDM, MoHA, MoLGRD and others

Policy Recommendation #5. Immediately formulate the DRM plan for Dhaka City based on hazards, vulnerability and risk assessment, legal and institutional arrangements, risk-sensitive land use planning practice, and other relevant sectors and core services.

Rationale: A comprehensive disaster risk management plan that embraces pro-active risk reduction and sector mainstreaming approaches is yet to be formulated for DCCs. The DM Act of 2012 requires local authorities to formulate their local disaster management plans based on their own areas and local hazards.

Implementation Strategy: Study, understand and apply the recommendations provided by the BUERP, including results of the hazards, vulnerability and risk assessment of Dhaka, LIA, IEC and RSLUP review and recommendations. These elements constitute the foundation of a scientifically-based DRM plan for Dhaka City. Several elements of the CDMP project (e.g., risk assessment, and the Contingency Plan for Dhaka) should be reviewed and incorporated into the plan. Other sectors and other core services should also be considered e.g. emergency management, health, water and sanitation, etc. Formulate the DRM plan based on the HVRA that is aligned with the National Disaster Management Plan and following national guidelines through a participatory process. This strategy could be supported by the implementation of the IEC and Training and Capacity Building (TCB) Action Plans.

In order to ensure that other development plans are in harmony with the DRM plan, RAJUK and the DCCs should also institutionalize the use of HVRA findings and related recommendations in the formulation of land use plans, zoning ordinances and building regulatory controls.

Implementation Requirements:


• DCCs to organize a series of planning workshops to formulate the DRM plan for Dhaka through a participatory process taking into account the concerns of various stakeholders, particularly the needs of the most vulnerable sectors of society like women, children, elderly, disabled and the urban poor.

• RAJUK and the DCCs should adopt a policy mandating a participatory approach at all levels in the planning and implementation of disaster risk management action plans and programs.

Concerned Agencies: DNCC, DSCC, MODMR/DDM, MOLGRD, AFD, FSCD, RAJUK, and other stakeholders

Policy Recommendation #6. Develop and implement a capacity building program for DRM to build the disaster resilience of communities in Dhaka.

Rationale: Skilled manpower in various agencies and DCC departments is wanting. There is a need to develop a capacity building program to educate and arm the existing personnel for them to be able to perform mandated tasks related to DRM. Engineers and planners are not well versed and knowledgeable about the concepts, principles and tools for mainstreaming DRM into their day to day functions. Enhancements are needed specifically for the institutional capacity of RAJUK, the DCCs, MoLGRD and related agencies with respect to their technical capabilities and their ability to formulate policy and enforce regulations.

In the same manner, decision makers, legislators, and the community at large lack the necessary information and knowledge to keep themselves and their assets protected from unnecessary disaster risks, especially the more vulnerable sector of society. Capacity development on resource mobilization is an area worth exploring to widen the base for financial and other technical resources from potential partners.

Implementation Strategy: Adopt and implement the capacity building action plan developed by BUERP. (Refer to the TCB Action Plan)

Implementation Requirements: DCCs to

formally adopt the plan and provide funds for implementation.

Concerned Agencies: DSCC, DNCC, MoDMR/DDM

Policy Recommendation #7. Develop the monitoring and evaluation system to monitor progress of DCCs in DRM.

Rationale: There is a need to introduce a monitoring and evaluation system to monitor progress in DRM both at the local scale. The urban disaster risk indicators (UDRI) developed under BUERP can be used to track and measure progress.

Implementation Strategy: MoDMR/DDM to formulate the Monitoring and Evaluation system for local governments that may also be applicable to the DCCs. The M and E system should be linked to the creation of the DRM Office and the implementation of the DRM plan.

Implementation requirements: DDM to develop the M and E system; review available M and E tools and customize for DCCs. Examples of self-assessment tools are the UNISDR local government self-assessment tool (LGSAT), EMI Disaster Risk Reduction Index (DRRI) and UNISDR Checklist of Ten Essentials for Making Cities Resilient.

Concerned Agencies: MoDMR/DDM, DCCs


The Way Forward

The policy recommendations developed by the LIA experts based on the validated information contributed by the project stakeholders provide a starting point for addressing the more significant gaps in the legal and institutional environment for DRM in Dhaka. However, the implementation of these recommendations will require additional efforts from the national and city-level DRM focal agencies in terms of lobbying with the executive and legislative departments, as well as other public stakeholders, for the adoption of the proposed policy changes and the allocation of funding and other resource requirements.

Formal adoption of these recommended policies should also be supplemented by initiatives aimed at orienting relevant agencies and personnel regarding their new mandates and roles to strengthen ownership for these institutional changes. A continuing review of legal and institutional arrangements for DRM will be useful in mitigating issues that may arise in the implementation of the policy recommendations, as well as propose solutions to other gaps which may be identified in the future.


6. AnnexesNo. Organization

1 Dept. of Civil Engineering, BUET

2 Dept. of Civil Engineering, BUET

3 Dept. of Urban and Regional Planning, BUET

4 CEGIS

5 DDM

6 RAJUK

7 HBRI

8 Dhaka South City Corporation

9 Capital Law Chamber

10 Dhaka Cantonment Board

11 Dept. of Architects, Ministry of Housing and Public Works

12 Dhaka North City Corporation

13 RAJUK

14 BELA

15 Bangladesh Bar Council

16 Forest Department

17 Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief

18 Bangladesh Poribesh Andolon (BAPA)

19 REHAB

20 Dept. of Law, DU

21 Ministry of Land

22 Ministry of Law, Justice & Parliamentary Affairs, Government Paribhaban Pool Bhaban, Dhaka

23 Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development

24 Ministry of Environment and Forest

Annex 1: Focus Group Members

Annex 2: Key Informants

1. MD. Ahasanul Haque Khan, Chief Architect, Department of Architecture, Ministry of Housing and Public Works2. Hasiba Khatun, Assistant Town Planner, Dhaka South City Corporation3. MD Abdul Wazed, Director General, Department of Disaster Management, Ministry of Disaster Management4. Dr. Engr. Tariq Bin Yousuf, Superintendent Engineer, Environment, Climate Change and Disaster Management

Department, Dhaka North City Corporation5. Chandra Nath Basak, MoDMR Joint Secretary6. Mokhali Dhala, DDM Planning and Development Director7. Dr. KZ Hussain Taufique, Director (Planning), RAJUK8. Brig. Ali Ahmed Khan, Director General, Fire Service and Civil Defence


Annex 3: General Guide Questions for Key Informants

A. Mandate in DRM1. What is the legal basis for the existence of (institution)?2. Are there any other legal issuances (laws, ordinances, memorandum circulars, executive orders) that are related to

your mandate?3. What are the past and present programs of (institution) related to DRM?4. What are the individual and collective impacts of these programs?5. What sectors are covered by these programs and activities?

B. Organizational Policies and guidelines on DRM 1. What are the organizational policies and guidelines on DRM that govern your operations?2. Is there a focal person that handles the coordination of DRM functions of (institution)?

C. Organizational Structure and functions of the institution related to Disaster management including disaster risk reduction1. What are the key (institution) departments and offices? 2. What are their specific roles and responsibilities? Are roles clearly defined? 3. What are the functions/roles of these agencies with respect to DRM? Are roles clearly defined? 4. What are the institutional arrangements among these agencies during planning and implementation of programs,

projects and activities?5. Are there any formal / informal working arrangements with other agencies and institutions in the performance of

the functions the (institution)?6. Please describe the technical capacity of (institution) such as staffing and manpower for disaster risk management;

skills and competencies (qualifications, training background and expertise; tools such as data banking, GIS, etc.)7. Do you have DRM Plans at (institution)?

D. Financial Support for Disaster Risk Management1. How much is the annual budget allocation of (institution)? 2. Is there budgetary support from the State and the National authorities for (institution)? If so how much? 3. Are financial resources available to build partnership with civil society for DRR?4. Do you have an inventory of resources related to DRM?

E. Existing Mechanisms for Interagency/organizational Cooperation1. How do you interface with other organizations involved in DRM within Bangladesh?2. How does (institution) encourage participation from the community on DRR activities?3. What are the existing mechanisms used by (institution) for collaborating with other agencies for DRM purposes?

How often do committees on DRM if any meet?4. Describe the decision making processes, vertical and horizontal coordination and collaboration of national and

local institutions and the private sector in undertaking DRM activities.

F. Gaps and Recommended Actions1. What are the issues within the institution that you think hinders it from performing its functions effectively?2. What are identified issues and gaps in the pursuit of DRR related activities and what measures were introduced to

correct them? How effective was the implementation of the measures?3. What are the specific actions or recommended actions you suggest for the identified gaps and issues in DRM?

G. DocumentsPlease provide copy of the following documents (if available):• Organizational Structure/Chart of the (institution)• (institution) Disaster Response / Operational Plan• (institution) Disaster Management Plan • (institution) Budget• Memorandum of Agreements entered into with various stakeholders• Other pertinent information related to your DRM functions


Annex 4: DRM-related Laws

1. The Fatal Accident Act, 18552. The Police Act, 18613. The Explosives Act, 18844. The Evidence Act, 18725. The Government Buildings Act, 18996. The Public Parks Act, 19047. The Explosives Substances Act, 19088. The Electricity Act, 19109. The Agricultural and Sanitary Improvement Act, 192010. The Cantonments Act, 1924 11. The Highways Act, 192512. The Survey Act, 187513. The Places of Public Amusements Act, 193314. The Development Act, 193515. The Industrial Statistics Act, 194216. The Public Health (Emergency Provisions) Act, 194417. The Riot and Civil Commotion (Risk Insurance) Ordinance, 1947 18. The Essential Personnel (Registration) Ordinance, 1948 19. The Development of Industries (Government Control) Act, 1949 20. The Civil Defence Act, 1952 21. The Essential Services (Maintenance) Act, 195222. The Embankment and Drainage Act, 195223. The Building Construction Act, 195224. The Building Construction Rules, 200825. The Building Code, 1996 (The new Building Code is yet to publish)26. The Building Construction Rules, 200427. The Town Improvement Act, 195328. The Bangladesh Environment Protection Act, 199529. The Water Supply and Sewerage Authority Act, 199630. The Housing and Building Research Institute Ordinance, 197731. The Constitution of the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh32. The Disaster Management Act, 201233. The Local Government (City Corporation) Act, 200934. The Real Estate Development and Management Act, 201035. The Fire Control and Prevention Act, 200336. The Climate Change Trust Act, 201037. The Insurance Act, 201038. The National Housing Authority Act, 200039. The Dhaka Power Distribution Company Limited, 200940. The Telecommunication Act, 200141. The Relief and Rehabilitation Surcharge Act, 198842. The Public Corporations (Management Coordination) Ordinance, 198643. The Dhaka Metropolitan Police Ordinance, 197644. The Civil Aviation Authority Ordinance, 198545. The Drugs (Control) Ordinance, 198246. The Drug Act, 194047. The Junior Cadet Corps Act, 195348. The Bangladesh Standards and Testing Institute Ordinance, 198549. The Dhaka Paribahan Coordination Authority Act, 201250. The Dhaka Transport Coordination Board Act, 200151. The Acid Control Act, 200252. The Right to Information Act, 200953. The Local Government (Union Parishad) Act, 2009


54. The Local Government (Pourasava) Act, 200955. The Bangladesh Atomic Energy Control Act, 201256. The Bangladesh Space and Distance Research Institute Act, 199157. The Titas Gas Company Limited58. The Dhaka Electric Supply Company Limited59. The Rules of Business, 197660. The Preservation of Playing Ground, Open Space, Park/Garden and Natural Water Body (Metropolitan City,

Divisional Town, District Town and all Municipalities) Act, 200061. The Law Commission Act, 199662. The Bangladesh Gas Act, 201063. The Army Act, 195264. The Navy Ordinance, 196165. The Air force Act, 195366. The Border Guard Bangladesh Act, 201067. The Boilers Act, 192


Annex 5: LIA Survey Forms 1 and 2

INSTRUCTIONS:

This form will be utilized during the Organizational DRM Function Mapping of Bangladesh.

The form has three parts:

Part 1: General Information - You are asked to write down a capsulized description of your institution or department’s main function (Item 4), and possible functions related to Disaster Risk Reduction Management.

Part 2: Role and Responsibilities - You are asked to check your role and responsibility in DRRM along particular DRR activities.

Part 3: Functional Relationship – You are asked to list other departments, institutions and organizations you relate to functionally (both formally and informally)

Part 4: Functional Chart – Please draw a functional chart that best describes your organization’s legal and institutional arrangements in DRRM. A sample chart is provided. Please frame your response around DRR context only; Use a separate sheet when needed.

Part 1: General Information

1 Name of Institution/Department:

2 Name of Representative:

3 Position:

4 Email/ Mobile number:

5 Description of Institutional Function (Capsulized):

Legal and Institutional Arrangements - Form 1Organizational Mapping and Network Analysis Tool


Part 2. Indicate your role and/or responsibility per activity of DRM as indicated in the Table. You can check ( ) multiple choices and provide a brief description of your role, i.e. Engineering Dept. is a PROVIDER under the MITIGATION activity, their specific function could be: construction of dikes, revetment, infrastructure fund allocation, etc.

Part 2: Functional Role/Responsibility in DRR

Function Provider Control Regulation

User Support Other Pls. describe your specific role under each DRRM activity

Comments/Suggestions

1 Risk Identification and Assessment

2 Awareness and Preparedness

3 Mitigation

4 Response, Rescue and Relief

5 Rehabilitation and

6 Risk Transfer and Insurance

• Provider: Indicates a role and responsibility to plan, develop and disseminate or provide resources, information or knowledge

• Control/Regulation: Indicates a role and/or responsibility as a regulator, supervisor, or provider of public safety and security

• User: Indicates a role or a position requiring a need for resources or information either before, during and/or after a disaster

• Support: Indicates a role for supporting other organizations and institutions either before, during and/or after a disaster

• Other: Includes ancillary support; may also indicate not concerned by that particular activity


Part 3. List the institutions you work with that may have relevance to DRRM. Check the type of relationship. List as many institutions as you can think of.

Part 3: DRR Functional Relationship

Function Hierarchical Coordination Information Informal

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Comments or Additional Information

Hierarchical: Indicates a mandatory institutional relationship either through a lateral or vertical reporting process or through functional supervisory and/or control requirements

Coordination: Indicates a formal mechanism either through a procedure or a practice to regularly check or communicate facts and information related to an action or decision. An example would be to coordinate with the Fire Department when a public event is planned.

Information: Indicates a general practice to occasionally “inform” or “consult” a particular stakeholder about a particular action. For example, government may want to inform private enterprises about road closures or power outages. This may or may not be part of a procedure. In some cases, it may be required

Informal: This is the lowest level of relationship where communication and consultation is truly informal and takes place under social or political structures that advance social promotion or social cohesion.


Part 4. Draw a functional chart that best describes your organization’s legal and institutional arrangements in DRM. Use the sample chart below as your guide.


Legal and Institutional Arrangements - Form 2Gaps Analysis Tool

A. DRRM Thematic Area: Prevention and Mitigation

Suggested Topics for DiscussionEnforcement of Building CodeRisk-Sensitive Land Use Plan and Zoning OrdinanceRisk AssessmentRisk FinancingRetrofitting of Hospitals and SchoolsRelocation

Parameters Gaps/Issues/Difficulties Recommendations

1 Legal Mandate

2 Funding

3 Manpower

4 Competencies, Skills

5 Physical Resources

6 Inter and intra-institutional relationships

7 Monitoring and Evaluation

8 Cross Cutting Concerns

B. DRRM Thematic Area: Preparedness

Suggested Topics for DiscussionTraining and Capacity BuildingAwareness Raising Activities


1 Legal Mandate

2 Funding

3 Manpower







C. DRRM Thematic Area: Response

Suggested Topics for DiscussionCamp ManagementRescue and Relief OperationsEmergency Operation Center Activation


1 Legal Mandate

2 Funding

3 Manpower






D. DRRM Thematic Area: Recovery and Rehabilitation

Suggested Topics for DiscussionDamages, Losses and Needs AssessmentPsychosocial ServicesRebuilding in Safer Sites


1 Legal Mandate

2 Funding

3 Manpower







Annex 6: LIA Form 3Legal and Institutional Arrangements - Form 3SWOC Form

LIA Strategy 1:

Level of Agreement Justification of Agreement

Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Challenges

LIA Strategy 2.1:




LIA Strategy 2.2:



LIA Strategy 3:




LIA Strategy 4:



LIA Strategy 5:




LIA Strategy 6:



LIA Strategy 7:




Annex 7: Organization of Functions within the Aqaba Special Economic Zone Authority (ASEZA) DRRM Directorate (Org Chart)The proposed ASEZA DRRM Directorate is organized into four (4) divisions plus an operations division that incorporates the conventional Legal, Administrative and Finance functions. The four divisions are:

1. Planning, Coordination, Logistics and Monitoring 2. Preparedness, Awareness, Advocacy and Social Mobilization3. Knowledge Management, and DRR Data and Technologies4. Research and Development

These functions are reflected in the organization chart below.

Figure 10. Organizational Chart of the ASEZ DRR Directorate

A. Level of Authority and Decision Making

As one of the Directorates of ASEZA, the DRRM Directorate will have the same level of authority and decision making as other directorates as provided by the ASEZA Statute. The DRRM Directorate will also have a review function to report to the DRRM Committee on the progress of mainstreaming DRR within the ASEZ and beyond. Such review capacity provides it with authority to call for status reports and to ask for meetings from other directorates, as well as from service agencies such as the Water Company, Power Company, Telecommunications Company and others.


Annex 8: Examples of National DRM Laws/Provisions from Other Countries

1. Ecuador National Constitution

Art. 389. The State shall protect persons, collectivities and nature from the negative effects of natural and man-made disasters through risk prevention, disaster mitigation, recovery and improvement of social, economic and environmental conditions, with the purpose of minimizing vulnerability. The National Decentralized Risk Management System is made up of risk management units in all public and private institutions at local, regional and national levels.

Art. 390. Risks shall be managed under the principle of subsidiary decentralization, which shall imply the direct responsibility of institutions within their geographical scope. When their risk management capacities are insufficient, instances of greater territorial scope and greater technical and financial capacity shall provide the required support regarding their authority in the territory, without exempting them from their responsibility.

2. Disaster Management Law, India

The Local Authorities, including the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, are subject to the direction of the District Disaster Management Authorities. Local authorities are tasked to:

• Train employees and officers for disaster risk management;• Ensure that resources allocated for DRM are maintained and readily available to be utilized in case of disasters; • Ensure that all construction projects, within its jurisdiction conform to the standards and specifications of the

national, state, and district Disaster Management Authorities;• Carry out relief, rehabilitation and reconstruction activities in disaster-affected area in accordance with the State

and District Plans.

3. National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act of 2010, Philippines

Relevant provisions:

Sec. 5, National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (NDRRMC)Sec. 6, Powers and Functions of the NDRRMCSec. 10., Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Organization at the Regional LevelSec. 11., Organization at the Local Government LevelSec. 12., Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management OfficeSec. 15, Coordination During EmergenciesSec. 21, Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Fund


Annex 9: Organizational Structures of Selected DRM Offices/Systems

1. Disaster Management Section (Kathmandu Metropolitan City)

Figure 11. Organizational Chart of Disaster Management Section

Under the project Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction in Megacities, a new unit was created, the Disaster Management Section (DMS), as part of the Urban Development Department (UDD) of Kathmandu Metropolitan City. This unit was institutionalized as part of the UDD through a directive from the former Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Dinesh Kumar Thapaliya. The figure below presents the organizational structure of KMC showing the DMS section under the UDD.

The DMS Unit is structured around its core function of Emergency Management, preparing and responding to all types of emergencies (from major disasters to so-called “every-day” risk). It links vertically and horizontally to institutions and communities to advocate and raise awareness as well as to improve preparedness and inter-institutional coordination. It is the focal agency for DRM at the level of Kathmandu Metropolitan City.

The key positions in the DMS are:• Director of the Urban Development Department (Section Chief)• Emergency Management Specialist (Planner)• Operations Officer (Readiness Officer)• Social Mobilization Officer (Ward level Trainer)

The Director of the Urban Development Department also represents the Mayor in the Municipal Authority for Disaster Risk Management (MADRM) as defined in the National Strategy.


Figure 12. Relationship of DMS To Other Kathmandu Metropolitan City


2. Proposed Organizational Structure for the Disaster Risk Management Department (Mumbai, India)

Figure 13. Disaster Risk Management Department Organizational Chart

This structure was proposed to the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) in 2011 as part of EMI’s study on the legal and institutional aspects of the Mumbai Disaster Risk Management Master Plan. The structure combines both DRR and Emergency Management functions into one office. Detailed job descriptions for each position were also provided under the DRR in Greater Mumbai Project.


Figure 14. Bogota’s District System for Emergency Prevention and Attention (Source: Cityriskpedia.com)

The operational details of the SDPAE are integrated into the city’s Emergency Prevention and Attention Plan (PDPAE) as indicated in Figure 3. This long-term action plan is the first of its kind in Colombia, providing a 10-year (2005-2015) risk management policy that identifies: 1) key objectives and performance indicators, 2) responsible institutions/agencies, 3) strategic areas and sectors, and 4) priority programs and projects. The plan uses a systemic approach based on risk scenarios that consider the social and economic relationships of different stakeholder groups, the activities these stakeholders undertake, and the impact of such activities on general living conditions.

3. District System for Emergency Prevention and Attention (Bogota, Colombia)

Disaster risk management (DRM) is institutionalized into the functions and processes of the city of Bogota by Decree 332, a policy that clarifies the responsibilities of relevant stakeholders during emergencies and disasters. Through this decree, the city established the District System for Emergency Prevention and Attention (SDPAE), which provides the institutional mechanisms for the city’s different localities to pursue common strategies that will strengthen overall DRM capacity.

The office in charge of the system is the Directorate for the Prevention and Attention of Emergencies (DPAE), which has primary responsibility over Bogota’s disaster reduction and emergency response operations. The DPAE’s mainstreaming process is supported by its collaboration with 41 government, private, and community-based organizations that carry DRR activities within their specific sectors (health, social services, city planning and development, etc.).

The financial resources for system operations are provided through the Fund for Emergency Prevention and Attention (FOPAE) that is generated from 0.5% of local tax collections. Additional funding can also be obtained through direct city budget allocations. Separate budgets are allocated to other institutional members of the SDPAE to implement specific projects and programs related to DRM, which are usually determined through a planning process.


Figure 15. Organizational structure of the Metropolitan Office for Community Safety

4. Metropolitan Office for Community Safety (Quito, Ecuador)

The Metropolitan Office for Community Safety (MOCS) has several roles that include fire safety, emergency management, family and child safety prevention, community prevention and disaster risk management. It coordinates with several other agencies such as the police and the Metropolitan Council for Safety. It also looks over activities in the decentralized municipal district offices and administrative zones, which have important responsibilities in delivering services to the population and in regulating land use and development planning. The Disaster Risk Management Unit of the MOCS is directly in charge of DRM in the city. Its primary disaster-related mandate is to introduce preventive concepts associated with natural and man-made hazards and risk reduction. The DRM Unit coordinates DRRM activities with several city departments to enable mainstreaming. For example, it works closely with the Special Studies Unit at the Directorate of Land Use and Planning on matters related to land use and urban development, and with different municipal enterprises to ensure that DRRM is integrated within their specific fields of expertise, like the Municipal Public Works or the Municipal Water and Sewerage Enterprises.

The DRM Unit has also primary responsibility for inter-institutional coordination among the multiple stakeholders such as the emergency response and preparedness sector, the universities and research institutes, the municipal enterprises dealing with public works and provision of water and sewerage services. It also acts as an important link with the Land and Territory Office, which is in charge of the urban planning and land use regulations of the city. The unit also has direct contact and communication with relevant national agencies like the Civil Defense, the Armed Forces, various Ministries and the President of the Republic. It is also concerned with the local-level advocacy of the organized communities and NGOs.


5. Disaster Coordination Center (Istanbul, Turkey)

The Afet Koordinasyon Merkezi (AKOM) of the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality (IMM) was established by virtue of the following laws:• No. 7269 (Disaster Law) • No. 586 (Decree Law) • No. 5216 (Metropolitan Municipality Law) • 30.03.1998 / No. 98-403 Main Order of Istanbul Governorship, • 12.12.2000/No. 686 Act of Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality Parliament

The tasks of AKOM include:• To provide coordination and cooperation between the related agencies and the units of the Metropolitan

Municipality to mitigate the effects of any type of damages before, during and after disasters;• To coordinate the assignments of the Metropolitan Municipality through the orders of the Mayor of IMM and

the Crisis Center of the Province; • To organize the well-trained search and rescue teams that will be ready to carry out the relevant tasks under

the responsibility of the Municipality;• To prepare weekly, monthly and annual reports based on the monitoring of global, national and regional

seismic activity;• To digitize precipitation data and prepare graphics of the meteorological regions of Istanbul and to inform

related units of the municipality.

Figure 16. Afet Koordinasyon Merkezi (AKOM) Organizational Chart


6. Disaster Risk Management System (Makati City, Philippines)

Figure 17. Makati DRRM Institutional Arrangement

Figure 18. Makati DRRM Council


Figure 19. Makati DRRM Office


Annex 10: Examples of Monitoring and Evaluation Tools

1. EMI DRRI


2. UNISDR Local Government Self Assessment Tool (LGSAT)


3. UNISDR Ten-point Checklist - Essentials for Making Cities Resilient


7. References

City of Makati. Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council Organizational Structure. 2012.

Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative. (2007). Disaster Risk Reduction in Greater Amman.

Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative. (2010). Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction in Megacities: A Pilot Application in Metro Manila and Kathmandu.

Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative. (2011). Disaster Risk Management Master Plan Handbook.

Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative. (2011). Disaster Risk Reduction in Aqaba Special Economic Zone Authority.

Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative. (2011). Disaster Risk Reduction in Greater Mumbai.

Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative. (2013). Organogram of Bangladesh DRM System.

Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative. Set up of ASEZA Disaster Risk Reduction Unit and Related Competency Training: Final Project Report. July 2011.

Earthquakes and Megacities Initiative. (2013). Understanding Legal and Institutional Arrangements for Disaster Risk Management.

Government of India. Disaster Management Act. 2005.

Holland, Jeremy. (2007). Tools for Institutional, Political, and Social Analysis of Policy Reform: A Sourcebook for Development Practitioners.

Hyogo Framework of Action. Ten-point Checklist – Essentials for Making Cities Resilient.

Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality. PowerPoint Presentation: Studies on Disaster Preparedness. 2007 .

Lorena Alban. Risk Management: Institutionalization Process in Ecuador. 2009.

Meherun and Iqbal. (2012). Disasters and Decentralization.

Republic of the Philippines. National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Law. 2010

Scott Z. and Tarazona (2011). A Study on Decentralization and DRR, Global Assessment Report 2011.