Common Disasters and Uncommon Responses

1. Common Disasters and Uncommon Responses Shamima Khan

2. Common Disasters and Uncommon Responses Shamima Khan February 24, 2011 Knowledge Series – Emerging Indonesia MC 9-401

3. Key Messages • Indonesia remains vulnerable to disasters with high risks and high costs - prevention is increasingly important • Indonesia has developed successful responses – a result of government leadership and broad partnerships • There are many lessons learned from the Indonesia experience – effective models can be replicated globally, and challenges remain

4. 1. Indonesia remains vulnerable to disasters with high risks and high costs – prevention is increasingly important

5. Indonesia’s Disaster Context Indonesia’s Tsunami Risk Indonesia’s Earthquake Risk Indonesia’s Landslide Risk Indonesia’s Flood Risk

6. For all of Indonesia, exposure to disasters is high Probability/Risk: varies significantly Climate change: increases risks Exposure: high Preparedness: reduces vulnerability, reduces losses

7. 2000-08, 20% of total humanitarian aid spent on disaster relief; prevention support increased from 0.1% to 0.8% Aceh Tsunamii US$ 4.45 bn Yogyakarta earthquake US$ 3.13 bn Costs and Financing Small disasters also contribute to huge costs

8. Damage and Losses of Disasters Divine intervention? Human intervention… Quality of Construction (Prevention reduces losses)

9. Schools- Earthquake Risk Index 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 Senior High Junior High 10,000 Elementary 5,000 - Legend: : Very High : High : Moderate : Low : Very Low Bali Riau Aceh Jambi Papua E. Java C. Java Jakarta W. Java Banten Maluku W. Papua Lampung Bengkulu Gorontalo Yogyakarta N. Maluku S. Sumatra S. Sulawesi N. Sumatra C. Sulawesi W. Sumatra N. Sulawesi W. Sulawesi SE. Sulawesi E. Kalimantan S. Kalimantan C. Kalimantan W. Kalimantan Kepulauan Riau Bangka Belitung E. Nusa Tenggara W. Nusa Tenggara Focused Interventions Can Reduce Vulnerability: Schools

10. 2. Indonesia has developed successful responses – a result of government leadership and broad partnerships

12. MDTFs for Reconstruction and Rehabilitation • The Multi Donor Fund for Aceh and Nias (MDF): • Established April 2005; 15 Donors; US$678 million • Support post-tsunami rehab/recon. of Aceh and Nias • Open menu approach, six focus areas • The Java Reconstruction Fund (JRF): • Established 2006; 7 Donors; US$ 94 million • Support post-earthquake rehab/recon. of Central Java/Yogyakarta and tsunami affected West Java • Providing Housing and Livelihoods recovery

13. MDF Focus Areas of Support Large Infra. & Transport (IRFF) Recovery of Communities (Rekompak) Governance and Capacity Blding (ILO Roads) Sustaining the Environment (AFEP) Economic Devt. And Livelihood (EDFF) Enhancing Recovery Process (DRR-A)

14. JRF Focus Areas of Support Recovery of Communities (CSRRP/Rekompak) Recovery of Livelihoods (IOM)

15. Innovations in Design and Structure • Government • Institutional structures matched to nature of reconstruction needs • Agenda and priority setting • MDF-JRF • Inclusive Governance Structure • Forum for policy dialog and coordination • Flexible Funding – gap filling • Range of Partner and Implementing Agencies • Builds on Existing Mechanisms and Programs •  Govt. leads, partners support •  Gap filling, in key phases

16. 3. … many lessons learned from Indonesia –effective models can be replicated globally, but challenges remain

17. Replication: Models and Lessons Learned • Models: • Community Based Housing – ownership, transparency, cost-effectiveness • Mainstreaming DRR – Existing WB-Govt partnerships a key asset (e.g. in Indonesia PNPM, BOSKITA, DAK) • Aceh – linkages of recon, post-conflict programming and broader devt. • Lessons Learned: • Govt: strong institutional capacity, specialized authorities, policy and strategy • Partners: pre-existing programs, multiple PAs/IAs, internal emergency processes • Programs: Adapting to changing needs, sequencing, timelines geared for speed and closure, exit strategy • Financing: Mix of prevention/response, Incentive for prevention • South-South Exchanges: Indonesia emerging as regional resource on post-disaster recovery

18. A New Framework: IMDFF • Challenges: • High Disaster Risk • Also related to Climate Change • Desired Attributes: • Ownership • Speed • Quality/ Oversight • Flexibility • Proactive, not Reactive Standing Fund Inclusive Governance 2 Windows IMDFF Activities • Response • Housing • Infrastructure • Livelihoods • Preventive • DRR • Financing • Capacity Building

19. Challenges to Address • External: • Climate change and increasing vulnerability • Changing mindsets to prevention, preparedness • Government’s institutions and systems • Internal: • Bank’s processes (procurement, safeguards) • Risk aversion to complex engagements • Working with different partners

20. Conclusions and Questions • Summary: • Indonesia can benefit from global experience on prevention • Indonesia has lessons to offer on response • Indonesia is well positioned to manage disasters on both prevention and response • Development partners can support by strengthening the relevant institutions who have the mandate • Some Open Questions: • Rapid Response policies and procedures for governments? • Quality, speed, ownership – where’s the balance for acceptable levels of losses? • Before or After Disasters – how to match needs to partners? • Can we design a “Callable Resources” model?

21. TerimaKasih! • Thank You!