DISASTER RISK REDUCTION OF MEGACITIES AND COMPLEX URBAN METROPOLISES PREPARATORY ASSISTANCE PHASE

Transcription

1 DISASTER RISK REDUCTION OF MEGACITIES AND COMPLEX URBAN METROPOLISES PREPARATORY ASSISTANCE PHASE Summary of Activities and Accomplishments Final Report Submitted to UNDP/BCPR 30 June 2007

2 SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS The preparatory Assistance (PA) phase of the Disaster Risk Reduction of Megacities and Complex Urban Metropolises project was structured along three components aimed at developing tools and methods for the management of urban risk, for testing and validating these tools with city planners and managers, for demonstrating the value of disaster risk reduction (DRR) in pilot cities, and for developing an impetus for urban disaster risk reduction on a global and regional basis. The project was structured along three components: Global, Regional, and Local. The activities associated with each of these components are indicated in Table 1 below. This project constituted a contribution to EMI s 3cd Program and Cluster Cities Project (CCP), which are undertaken with several other partners, including PDC, ProVention Consortium, World Bank Institute, Kobe University and EdM/Team 4. Thus, UNDP/BCPR financial participation in these projects enabled a scaling up of its value and contribution to the global urban DRR efforts. More information on the 3cd Program and CCP can be found on EMI website ( The project agreement concluded between the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the ProVention Consortium and the Earthquakes Megacities Initiative (EMI) divides the work plan of activities into two sets. The first set of activities relates to the UNDP portion of the project and encompasses output 1.1 through output 3.2. The second set relates to the ProVention portion and focuses on outputs 3.3 and 3.4. This report is a summary of all UNDPsponsored activities undertaken in this preparatory assistance phase of the project. However, the accomplishments and work products such as tools, reports and other related technical documentation mentioned in the report represent the collective contribution of al the partners in the project. Table 1: Project Components and Outputs Component 1 GLOBAL AGENDA Spearheading an effort to establish a global Forum for urban and megacities disaster risk reduction Output Establish a global platform for urban and megacities disaster risk reduction Output Policy paper and agenda for the Global Forum Output e-learning and other tools supporting the global forum Component 2 Component 3 REGIONAL AGENDA - Strengthening and consolidation of regional megacities networks LOCAL AGENDA Mainstreaming disaster risk management in megacities Output 2.1 Coalition building, partnerships and networking. Output 2.2 Increased local capacity for risk reduction. Output 2.3 Synthesize and report Output 3.1 DRMMP schedule and strategy for Manila, Katmandu and Mumbai Output 3.2 Diagnosis and documentation of current practices Output 3.3 Development of urban risk indicators Output 3.4 Development of risk-sensitive land-use planning e-learning course and pilot testing. Megacities DRR EMI Final Report (30 June 2007) 2 P age

3 Activities Undertaken by the Project Table 2 summarizes the activities undertaken by the project from October 2005 to June 2007 under each of the project outputs. Table 2: Summary of Activities Undertaken by the Project Date Activity Output October 06-08, 2005 Bogota, Americas Cluster Cities Meeting 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 Nov 29-Dec 05, 05 Metro Manila Fieldtrip/Workshop No , 3.3, 3.4 November, 2005 Megacities Sound Practice Knowledge Base 1.3, 3.2 Prototype Completion April, 2006 Megacities Sound Practice Knowledge Base 1.3, 3.2 Update I May 22-26, 2006 Metro Manila Fieldtrip/Workshop No , 3.3, 3.4 Oct May 2007 Policy/Advocacy Paper for Global Forum June 08-09, 2006 Quito, Americas Cluster Cities Meeting 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 July 03-07, 2006 Katmandu Fieldtrip/Workshop No , 3.1, 3.2 July, 2006 Megacities Sound Practice Knowledge Base 1.3, 3.2 Update II August 29, 2006 International Conference on Disaster Reduction Davos, Switzerland October 11-17, 2006 Metro Manila Fieldtrip/Workshop No , 3.3, 3.4 November 3-4, 2006 Asia Megacities Forum Kobe, Japan 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 November 14, 2006 Katmandu Fieldtrip/Workshop No , 3.1, 3.2 April 12-13,2007 Global Forum Organizational Meeting, Kobe, Japan 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 June 6, 2007 Side Event, Global Platform on DRR, Geneva, Switzerland 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 Tools Produced by the Project An e-learning platform MEGA-Learn and related four original tools specific to the management of disaster risk in megacities and major urban metropolises were developed during the course of the project: MEGA-Learn: Prototype e-learning platform ( MEGA-Plan: an e-learning training package for risk-sensitive urban planning that was developed with the input of planners, and local officials from Metro Manila ( MEGA-Index: a series of indicators to benchmark and measure progress in disaster risk reduction in megacities, which was developed in cooperation with the National University of Colombia. MEGA-View: a web-based map viewer technology which was developed in partnership with PDC (Pacific Disaster Center) and was completed in Metro Manila together with training of more than 100 professionals ( - password protected) Megacities DRR EMI Final Report (30 June 2007) 3 P age

4 MEGA-View: a web-based Knowledge Base of city profiles, sound practices and a library dedicated to megacities disaster risk reduction and also developed in partnership with PDC ( More information on these products is provided later in this report. Documentation related to each of these products is posted on EMI website. Reports and Documents Produced by the Project Several documents such as reports, proceedings, etc. were developed during the course of this project from the collective contribution of all the partners. They are available for download online from EMI website ( The most relevant documents include: Urban and Megacities Disaster Risk Reduction Manual of Sound Practices, Companion Manual to MEGA-Know, EMI Topical Report TR-07-02, 2007, 84 pages. Application of Indicators in Urban and Megacities Disaster Risk Management A Case Study of Metro Manila, EMI Topical Report TR-07-01, 2006, 30 pages. Disaster Risk Reduction in Mega-Urban Regions, Proceedings of the Asia Megacities Forum 2006, EMI Report and CD PR-06-03, 2007, 36 pages. Stakeholders Evaluation of the 3cd Program in Metro Manila, Philippines, Phase , EMI Report PR-07-01, 2007, 36 pages. Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction through Land Use Planning and Enhancing Risk Management Practices, EMI Report PR-06-01, 2006, 94 pages. Enhancing Local Partnership and Stakeholders Ownership: Implementation of Disaster Risk Management Master Plan in Metro Manila, EMI Report PR-06-02, 2006, 54 pages 3cd Cross Cutting Capacity Development Program, EMI Brochure. MEGA-Plan is published online at Many of these documents represent unique contributions to the field. For example, the Manual of Sound Practices (TR-07-02) and its companion product MEGA-Know represent the first combined e-learning Tool-Manual combination available on the application of disaster risk reduction to urban metropolises. Output 1.1: Global Forum for Urban and Megacities Risk Reduction COMPONENT 1 ACTIVITIES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS Through a sustained effort of advocacy and consultation, the Global Forum for Urban Risk Reduction was endorsed by a wide range of stakeholders as a thematic cluster of the United Nations Global Platform for Disaster Reduction during its first meeting on 5-7 June Consultation and Advocacy Process The Global Forum was proposed initially by UNDP/BCPR and EMI in early An advocacy and consultation phase was undertaken with a broad set of stakeholders including OECD, the World Bank, the Secretariat of the ISDR, UN-Habitat, OCHA, ProVention Consortium, IFRC, the Government of Japan, METROPOLIS, ICLEI, CityNet, and other concerned organizations. Side discussions also took place during the May 2006 meeting of the UN-IATF, and during several other international forums. Early in the consultation process, it was suggested to hold a High Level Meeting (HLM) at the OECD headquarters in Paris. Later on, it became apparent that a Megacities DRR EMI Final Report (30 June 2007) 4 P age

5 HLM was too premature, instead during a consultative meeting held in Geneva in September 2006, it was agreed to hold an Organizational Meeting of a broadly representative group of stakeholders to further discuss the Why, What and How of the Global Forum. Kobe Organizational Meeting On November 2006, the Government of Japan gave its agreement to participate and endorse the Organizational Meeting. EMI s partner, Kobe University hosted the Organizational Meeting in Kobe, Japan on April The Organizational Meeting constituted the opportunities for the organizing agencies (i.e., UNDP, ISDR and EMI) to further explain the goals and agenda of the GF, and to collect input from representatives of governments, cities, local government organizations, other UN agencies, and civil society organizations. The participants endorsed the creation of the (GF) with the objectives 1) promote and support disaster risk reduction in cities through advocacy, knowledge and tools development, knowledge sharing, at the local level; 2) mobilize resources; and 3) serve as an avenue for the implementation of the HFA at the local level. Participants agreed that the GF vision, agenda and activities should be city-focused, practical, and experience-based; they should add value to the sustainable development of cities. They recognized that a localized HFA specifically addressing cities and local institutions will benefit the mission of the GF. Additional partners should be identified (including private sector, academia, media and others) to help provide sustainability to the GF. Existing resources and initiatives should be mapped to provide an initial knowledge base for local action, avoid duplication of efforts and sharpen strategy. Linkages with major forums such as WUF, the UCLG congress, Metropolis congress and other similar events should be established as mechanisms to reach local government policy makers and decision makers and other relevant local institutions. The participants recommended that the GF should be integrated within the ISDR system; however, its structure should gradually and progressively move towards being an independent legal entity in order to avoid influence from any particular organization and preserve and enhance its mission of serving cities. The governing structure of the Global Forum should have representation from a broad set of stakeholders who have a stake in urban issues, including local government representatives Geneva Side Event Following the recommendations from the participants of the Kobe meeting, a side event was organized on 6 June 2007 as part of the activities of the e ISDR s Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction (GP/DRR). It was organized by METROPOLIS with the cooperation of UN-Habitat, UNDP, and the Secretariat of the ISDR, EMI, ICLEI and UCLG. During the side event, input was received from various constituencies in terms of role and agenda of the Global Forum as well as its priorities and governing structure. Overall, the participants endorsed the creation of the GF, and provided a clear indication to move forward with its structuring and organization. A report from the Side Event was filed as part of the official transcripts of the GP/DRR and can be obtained from the ISDR Secretariat. Output 1.2: Development of a policy/position Paper An initial Concept Paper was developed to facilitate the consultations, and successively modified and improved based on the input received. The paper was circulated broadly, and feedback incorporated. Input obtained during the Kobe Meeting and related discussion provided additional input to improve the Concept Paper. On this basis a final Concept/Policy Megacities DRR EMI Final Report (30 June 2007) 5 P age

6 paper was developed and submitted to UNDP as part of this project deliverables on 30 May Finally, excerpts from this report were used to develop a Concept Note for the Side Event. Output 1.3: Tools for the Implementation of Sound Practices The strategy of the 3cd Program implementation agenda is based on the development of tools that are specific to the management of disaster risk in cities and that are developed with the direct involvement of local practitioners and city managers, and which are tested in a city-level environment. Training material is web-based to enable reaching a maximum number of practitioners and to lower the cost of distribution. EMI goal is to serve as a test bed for the development of knowledge and the testing of the practices. However, the dissemination and distribution of the tools should be undertaken through local government organizations, by which hundreds of cities and local government institutions can be reached, potentially training thousands of professionals and practitioners in the long term. With the support of UNDP and other partners including ProVention Consortium, PDC, the World Bank Institute, Kobe University, EdM/Team 4 and the EMI partner cities, EMI developed several tools and products. Among them is an e-learning platform named MEGA-Learn ( to serve as the key training and capacity building tool for the implementation of sound practices in urban and megacities DRR as well as four related tools as indicated below. A beta version of MEGA- Learn was developed and tested. MEGA-Plan: an e-learning training package for risk-sensitive urban planning that was developed with the input of planners, and local officials from Metro Manila MEGA-Index: a series of indicators to benchmark and measure progress in disaster risk reduction in megacities, which was developed in cooperation with the National University of Colombia. MEGA-View: a web-based map viewer technology which was developed in partnership with PDC (Pacific Disaster Center) and was completed in Metro Manila together with training of more than 100 professionals ( MEGA-View: a web-based Knowledge Base of city profiles, sound practices and a library dedicated to megacities disaster risk reduction and also developed in partnership with PDC ( Reports and documentation related to each of these products is posted on EMI website. The reports were also disseminating widely and provided in international forums including the Global Platform for Disaster Reduction and others. Copies were provided to UNDP and other sponsors and partners of the project. COMPONENT 2 ACTIVITIES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS This component included three outputs that complemented each other. Output 2.1 Coalition building, partnerships and networking Output 2.2 Increased local capacity for risk reduction. Output 2.3 Synthesize and report These outputs were accomplished through the undertaking of three regional meetings, two in the Americas (Bogota and Quito) and one in Asia (Kobe). Further, the project team participated in several international forums including organizing a special session on Megacities Disaster Risk Reduction at the International Conference on Disaster Reduction (Davos, August 2006), and the 100-Year Anniversary Conference in San Francisco. Posters and brochures were Megacities DRR EMI Final Report (30 June 2007) 6 P age

7 produced during these events and distributed. Consultations were also undertaken with partners and other stakeholders as an integral effort for coalition building, partnerships and networking activities. A summary of the three regional activities is provided below. Complete reports and proceedings are available for each of these meetings from the EMI website. Bogota, Americas Cluster Cities Meeting, October 06-08, 2005 The objective of the meeting was to enhance knowledge sharing mechanisms between the partners cities, and to identify both the impediments to, and the mechanisms for, the implementation of the disaster risk reduction (DRR) measures in each the cities. Another theme that was discussed related to planning, recovery and reconstruction after a major urban disaster. The meeting was also an opportunity for EMI to report on the progress of EMI s 3cd Program and to advance its core relationship with the Americas Cluster Cities Program (CCP). The following key factors for disaster risk reduction were collected from the meeting: 1. Digital and accurate documentation on the geographical distribution of the hazards in the city, including knowledge of soil data, topographic data and urban zoning and land-use data is important in planning for recovery and reconstruction after a major disaster 2. Involvement of local experts and participation of the local community are essential components in planning a sustainable reconstruction; 3. Legal, social, and technical issues related to the reconstruction could be very complex, developing good information on housing, including number of occupants and number of families living in each dwelling could simplify the process of compensation; further urban tissue of neighborhoods need to be preserved in the reconstruction process. 4. Public information strategies and dialog with survivors are essential component of effective recovery and reconstruction planning. 5. Continuing training and practice of the city s emergency plan among by responsible agencies are fundamental for building capacity for effective post-disaster action. 6. ICT represents a major investment by cities as they develop their DRR strategies 7. Financial support from international organizations helps overcome the financial limitations experienced by cities and help them implement a comprehensive program of DRR that incorporates ICT as a core component. Current EMI Megacities Knowledge Base could serve as a platform for information sharing between the cities as well as a resource. 8. As cities mature in their proficiency in using ICT, they build cumulative knowledge bases regarding disaster risk that inform their priorities and action plans 9. Informed DRR actions at the city level attracts attention and support from national level policy makers 10. Cities can draw significant expert resources from their local universities and integrate local knowledge efficiently in their DMM practices by building collaborative agendas with their local universities and research institutions as demonstrated by the Cluster Cities Project. 11. Multiple methods of communicating risk are essential for effective public education in cities with populations that have varying levels of economic capacity, social organization, and education. 12. Developing collaborative relations among megacities in the conduct of DRR programs can extend the practices of DRR and DRM to wider regions of risk. Megacities DRR EMI Final Report (30 June 2007) 7 P age

8 13. The concept of Disaster Risk Management Master Plan (or DRMMP) used by the 3cd Program can serve as a method of setting priorities and developing a comprehensive disaster risk reduction for the city. Quito, Americas Cluster Cities Meeting, June 08-09, 2006 The Quito meeting continued on the themes and objectives of the Bogota meeting, which is to serve as a forum for experience and information exchange between the cities, and to support the cities in implementing sound disaster risk management practices. Two special themes were also incorporated: 1) Organizational and institutional arrangements for disaster risk management; and 2) Building coalitions and mobilizing resources for disaster risk reduction. The following key factors for disaster risk reduction were collected from the meeting: 1. Introducing models for disaster risk management from other cities broadens the perspectives and show realistic options for sound operational and organizational structures; however, each city needs to tailor the organization of its institutions according to its own local realities and risk profile. 2. There is a gap between those who generate the knowledge and those who implement and design instruments for risk reduction. 3. The private sector is a key player who needs to be brought to the table. This is a partnership that, if well conducted, will report clear benefits to all involved parties. 4. The need to promote systematic processes of documentation of both technical and social programs and projects that cities are undertaking is crucial to favor information sharing and data collection (important to continue EMI s local internship program). 5. Mechanisms for a more active exchange among the cities in the EMI Americas Cluster need to be devised. Quarterly progress reports, hosted by member cities in turn, would provide continuity between the annual meetings. These reports could be posted under the News section of the EMI web-site. Each quarter one city would prepare the report and contact the other member cities for updated information. This iterative exchange would make the learning process of risk reduction more dynamic. 6. Putting together different local, regional and international initiatives was a valuable exercise for local officials who often feel an overwhelming pressure to work simultaneously with different groups. This was an excellent opportunity for knowledge exchange and resources sharing. Asia Megacities Forum 2006, Kobe, Japan, November 3-4, 2006 This meeting grouped 12 cities from Asia as well as several regional and international multi-lateral organizations. It was organized along two one day workshops: Workshop 1: How to implement competent DRM in a megacity: Model, Process, Technology and Training. In this first workshop, participants learn how EMI s city partners participating in the 3cd Program are implementing the Disaster Risk Management Master Plan (DRMMP) model; and how the DRMMP model can be used by their own cities to put in place competent strategies and action plans to manage and reduce disaster risk. The participants hear from experts as well as from representatives of cities where the DRMMP model is being applied such as Metro Manila and Kathmandu. Megacities DRR EMI Final Report (30 June 2007) 8 P age

9 Workshop 2: How to advance and improve knowledge and experience sharing among megacities partners. During the second day invited speakers from EMI s Asia Cluster Cities share recent and relevant experience from their cities and more casestudies on megacities disaster risk reduction are presented including projects related to the implementation of the Istanbul Earthquake Master Plan by the Metropolitan Municipality of Istanbul. The theme of recovery from a major urban earthquake is illustrated in a presentation by Kobe City on the city s recovery and reconstruction following the devastating1995 Great Hanshin Earthquake. A structured discussion provided a forum to get input on how EMI s tools, technologies, and training packages can be enhanced to best suit the needs of megacities, and on how knowledge sharing between cities can be improved. Further, a round table discussion informs participants about relevant initiatives and opportunities from EMI s partners such as Kobe University, PDC, UNDP/BCPR, ProVention Consortium, and WBI, and from several disaster risk reduction organizations based in Kobe. A complete set of proceedings and a report are available from the 2006 Kobe Megacities Forum. COMPONENT 3 ACTIVITIES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS Component 3 of the project pertains to the implementation of the 3cd Program in Manila and Kathmandu. Discussions were also undertaken with the Greater Municipality of Mumbai for initiating the implementation of the 3cd Program in that city. An initial workshop was undertaken, but due to the devastating floods of July 2006, the city s institutions were too preoccupied by the recovery from the floods to be able to accommodate the intense activities of the 3cd Program. Instead more effort was invested in Manila and Kathmandu and also in the development of the tools. Metro Manila Disaster Risk Management Master Plan (DRMMP) Three field trips and related workshops were undertaken in Manila: Fieldtrip No. 4, Nov 29-Dec 05, 2005 Fieldtrip No. 5, May 22-26, 2005 Fieldtrip No. 6, October 11-17, 2006 The Metro Manila Disaster Risk Management Master Plan (DRMMP) consisted of five (5) Implementation Work Outputs (IWO) as indicated in Table 3 below. The table also indicates the accomplishments against each of these IWO s. Note that these accomplishments represent the sum of the contributions from all the partners in the project. Detailed reports were developed from each of these field trips and are available on the EMI website ( Progress reports on the implementation of the 3cd Program are also available from the website. Because of the complex nature of the 3cd Program, it is difficult to provide a fair representation of all the activities in this summary report. The reader is encouraged to review the field trip proceedings and the other available documentation on the implementation of the 3cd Program in Metro Manila. The Metro Manila 3cd Program is currently undertaking an evaluation by the stakeholders and the government agencies in Metro Manila to define its structure and its components for a complementary Phase 2 of the program. This evaluation is being undertaken under the auspices of the UNDP country office and is lead by Metro Manila Development Authority Megacities DRR EMI Final Report (30 June 2007) 9 P age

10 (MMDA). Under an on-going Memorandum of Cooperation with MMDA, EMI is provided technical support to the evaluation process. Two planning workshops have already been undertaken; in addition an independent stakeholders evaluation workshop was also undertaken (see report TR-07-01) Kathmandu Disaster Risk Management Master Plan (DRMMP) Two field trips and related workshops were undertaken in Kathmandu: Fieldtrip No. 2, July 03-07, 2006 Fieldtrip No. 3. November 14, 2006 The two field trips in Kathmandu represented an opportunity to understand and document the process and activities related to DRM and DRR in the Kathmandu Valley, to discuss these activities with various agencies and stakeholders and to hold a series of workshops and discussions to define a consensus DRMMP for the city in connection with the Kathmandu Municipal Corporation and NSET (National Society of Earthquake Technology, Nepal), which are EMI s partners in the implementation of the 3cd Program in Kathmandu. Following these discussions, a consensus DRMMP agenda was developed and included the following four Implementation Work Outputs (IWO): IWO No. 1: Incorporation of Risk Reduction elements in the long term urban planning project of the Katmandu Valley IWO No. 2: Options for the Building Code Implementation and incorporation of risk reduction options through land use and planning, IWO No. 3: Strengthening preparedness and response capabilities at the ward level, and IWO No. 4: Development of appropriate risk communication tools consisting of internet accessible map viewers, dissemination of sound practices through DRM knowledge base, and land use and planning e-learning modules among others. These four elements represent a unique strategy for influencing the practice of disaster risk management in the city and the country, and for making substantial reduction of risk in the city in the long term. With a very motivated administration in the city and country, and an exceptionally high state of awareness among the stakeholders and the communities, the KMC DRRM could become a powerful instrument in making long term gains in DRR. Currently, EMI and its partners discussed the continuation of the program with the UNDP Country office, and submitted a draft Concept Note for Phase 2. This proposal is being evaluated by UNDP country office. Megacities DRR EMI Final Report (30 June 2007) 10 P age

11 Table 3. Metro Manila DRMMP and Accomplishment on Each Implementation Work Output (IWO) (IWO) Description Accomplishments IWO No. 1 IWO No. 2 IWO No. 3 IWO No. 4 IWO No. 5 Develop and Institutionalize technologies for Risk Communication and Preparedness Incorporate risk reduction criteria in land-use and urban planning Training Needs Assessment and Capacity Building for DRM Mobilizing Resources among NGO's, Professional Organizations and Private Sector in DRM Agenda Improving Legal and Institutional Arrangements for Improved DRM Delivery 1.1 MEGA-View (Map Viewer technology) completed for all Metro Manila with functionality defined by local users 1.2 Training of more than 100 potential users on MEGA-View 1.3 MEGA-View implementation Plan developed with MMDA and PHIVOLCS 1.4 MEGA-Know (Megacities Knowledge Base) developed with direct involvement of Focus Groups members 1.5 MEGA-Index methodology reviewed and tested 2.1 Prototype MEGA-Plan, a web-base course on Risk Sensitive Land Use Planning 2.2. Two trainings of urban and environmental planners from various governmental agencies and Local Government Units 2.3 Review of the urban planning Cookbook to include DRR parameters 2.4 Overall awareness-building of planners about DRR into the practice of their profession through the continuous work of Focus Group No Identification and evaluation of existing training events provided by key government agencies for their relevance to DRR in Metro Manila 3.2 Develop a plan for DRMMP to focus on Land-Use and Urban Planning 3.3 Creation of target audience through planners and key officials of MMDA, the 3 pilot cities of Makati, Marikina and Quezon, and the 17 Local Govt. Units 3.4 Reach agreement with World Bank Institute for the delivery of its Disaster Risk Management distance learning package for the Philippines 3.5 Successfully launch the first nation-wide distance learning 3.6 Undertaking of several participatory workshops/training 4.1 Discussion of partnership with key civil society organizations in Metro Manila involved in DRR 4.2 Creation of FG #4 and initial workshop with representatives of civil society organizations and governmental agencies 4.3 Development of the Terms of Reference for the Focus Group 4.4 Agreement with PICE on focusing on training of professionals to improve building code understanding and implementation 4.5 Initial discussion with CNDR for joint program involving the private sector 5.1 Collect and review of all national bills related to disaster management and state-of-theart legislation from the rest of the world. 5.2 Consolidate the most comprehensive bills into a single bill that incorporates the principles of disaster risk reduction 5.3 Undertake a process of consultation with key stakeholders, LGU s, legislators to provide a sound basis for the proposed bill 5.3 Document finding and provide recommendations to be submitted to appropriate forums to promote the proposed DRM bill 5.4 Introduction of a section concerning DRM into the Mid-term National Economic and Social Development Plan of the Philippines Megacities DRR EMI Final Report (30 June 2007) 11 P age

12 NEXT STEP: SCALING UP THE ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THE PREPARATORY PHASE The Preparatory Assistance Phase made a tangible contribution to urban disaster risk reduction. Among many other contributions, the support from UNDP/BCPR contributed to: Higher visibility and awareness on the issue of urban risk The creation of a global mechanism for promoting and supporting urban DRR The development of tools and methods that were developed jointly with city practitioners and tested and validated by them, and The investment in human potential through the development of a coalition of city managers, policy makers and professionals who are informed and engaged in reducing risks to their cities and their communities. The work undertaken with the cities (i.e., Manila, Kathmandu, Mumbai and others) has not only consolidated the engagement of these cities but created a demand from other cities. In fact, during the course of the preparatory phase, a new project on the implementation of the 3cd Program was launched in Amman, Jordan under the coordination of the UNDP-Jordan office, and the involvement of several Jordanian institutions and experts. At the same time, specific demands were submitted by other cities such as Quito (Ecuador), Lima (Peru), and Dhaka (Bangladesh) to get engaged in the 3cd Program. The demand from constitutes the best indicator for the value added of this project. Disaster risk reduction of cities, metropolises and megacities is a long term endeavor. At the time where urban population has, for the first time in the history of humankind, exceeded rural population and where many of the cities in developing countries are developing rapidly with little or no attention to disaster, the task of reducing urban risk requires vision, strategy, attention and resources. With the continuing support of UNDP/BCPR and other partners this program can continue to make its contribution by working directly with cities and to dedicate its resources and attention to their problems and issues. This evidence-based, practical and sustained approach has led to gaining the trust of city policy makers and managers and to the change in attitude among the professionals who run, manage and govern cities and contribute to the welfare and safety of their communities. By linking DRR to development and to governance, this project has made headways in the goal to mainstream DRR in city planning and operations. All along its implementation, the project closely engaged a broad range of stakeholders including academia, private sector, professional organizations, civil society organizations, government organizations at all levels, and multi-lateral agencies and regional agencies. The project also directly involved the UNDP country offices in the undertaking of the project, further contributing to their internal capacities and programs. The components of the next phase of the project for both Manila and Kathmandu are now being evaluated and facilitated by these country offices. The Amman project is undertaken directly with the country office. As the same time, renewed engagements from partners are confirming the value of the project. The ProVention Consortium and WBI recently renewed their investment in the project, and the Secretariat of the ISDR has been very closely involved in the development of the subsequent phase. With these commitments in place, UNDP/BCPR investment for the subsequent phase will provide further contribution to an area where risk reduction is most needed. A subsequent phase will further enhance the suit of training and DRR implementation tools that help build local Megacities DRR EMI Final Report (30 June 2007) 12 P age

13 competency and empower city managers, planners and practitioners in engaging their institutions and communities in the mainstreaming of DRR through their internal planning, operations and policy making processes. It will also improve current knowledge bases, knowledge sharing mechanisms and provide more evidence on local implementation of sound practices in urban disaster risk reduction. EMI is grateful for UNDP/BCPR contribution on the Preparatory Phase of the project and looks forward to further consolidating its partnership with UNDP/BCPR for the benefit of urban and megacities disaster risk reduction Submitted by EMI on 30 June 2007 Authors: Dr. Fouad Bendimerad, Project Director Dr. Khalid Bouzina, Project Manager Megacities DRR EMI Final Report (30 June 2007) 13 P age