The current pandemic leaves disaster managers with new and unique challenges in preparing for – and responding to – natural disasters that may take place. With restrictions on human interaction and movement due to significant health challenges, the occurrence of a natural disaster could force large numbers of people into close proximity, with the potential to add to the disaster impact through spread of the highly contagious virus. To overcome this, planning and guidelines are required to be developed in short turnaround, and risks such as tsunami disasters require specific consideration.

The Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO (IOC-UNESCO), in consultation and collaboration with expert working groups within Intergovernmental Coordination Groups (ICGs), has released regional guidelines for tsunami warning services, evacuation and sheltering during the COVID-19 pandemic. The four regional guidelines (for the Pacific Ocean, the Caribbean, the Indian Ocean, and the North-eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean) include details of regional tsunami services, that can be used by national authorities responsible for the organisation of tsunami warning and emergency response to develop their own nationally-coordinated guidelines.

These guidelines are also supported by a special national version for Indonesia, particularly due to the nation’s recent history of large tsunami events. For some Southeast Asian countries, including the Philippines and Viet Nam, the Pacific Ocean regional guidelines will provide relevant information. Meanwhile, Thailand and Myanmar can refer to the Indian Ocean regional guidelines. Additionally, these guidelines can also be applied to other coastal hazards such as storm surges and flash flooding.

When the National Tsunami Warning Centre (NTWC) and/or a National Disaster Management Organisation (NDMO) issues a tsunami warning, the desired action for the public is to follow the advice of the authorities, including evacuation from identified at-risk locations as required. It is important to highlight that human life is the priority when tsunami evacuations are required, regardless of COVID-19 stay-at-home orders and physical distancing protocol. Of course, in a state of evacuation such protocols may not be practical. Regardless, handling any resultant COVID-19 infections must be done immediately following an evacuation, to minimise the risk or large-scale infection. Communities must also be aware of COVID-19 safety protocols and any requirement for physical distancing when sheltering at an evacuation site. In addition, a personal or family emergency backpack should be augmented with disposable tissues, alcohol-based hand sanitiser, disinfectant wipes, and possibly face masks, in consideration of the heightened sanitation and hygiene requirements due to the COVID-19 virus.

Written by : Shahasrakiranna | Source : Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission

Coordinating regional efforts on disaster management is the primary function of the AHA Centre, which requires strong processes and approaches to ensure successful coordination across a range of levels and with numerous parties. One of the key approaches for undertaking disaster management work – whether for the AHA Centre or all other disaster actors – is through utilisation of the Disaster Management Cycle, and its expansion and uptake across the ASEAN region.

The Disaster Management Cycle (DMC) itself sometimes varies in specifics, but generally follows the same key phases in a circular motion. It is important to recognise that this is not a ‘linear’ approach, but instead a cycle, with many elements of its final phases ‘feeding back’ into the early phases of the DMC.

PREVENTION
Prevention aims to directly avoid the onset of disaster and therefore its adverse impacts. It focuses on actions taken to avoid disaster situations, including examples such as land regulations to stop degradation, or development of river levees to prevent floods. The outright avoidance of adverse impacts of hazards and related disasters.

MITIGATION
Mitigation aims to limit or lessen the impact of potential disasters, usually when initial prevention methods have not been undertaken or were not successful. An example is the construction of earthquake resistant buildings, as there is little to be done about preventing earthquakes, however such construction can mitigate the impact.

PREPAREDNESS
Preparedness covers the knowledge and skills held by all actors to effectively anticipate, respond to, and recover from the impacts of disaster. This may include government processes to respond directly, community understanding of how to keep safe when disaster strikes, or organisations planning what are priorities for people during the aftermath of a disaster event.

RESPONSE
Response is formed by the direct emergency assistance after a disaster strikes, and is usually focused on the speedy saving of lives, and ensuring basic needs of affected communities are provided. There are many types of activities and focus areas in disaster response, including (but not limited to) assessments, food and non-food item provision, water access, sanitation and hygiene service delivery, and other key health and shelter activities.

REHABILITATION
Rehabilitation takes place in the early stages after the initial disaster response, with the aim to establish key services required for a functioning community in the short-term. It may include the development of camps for those who have lost their homes, or ensuring education can continue for children around the disaster site.

RECONSTRUCTION
This phase aims to re-develop the infrastructure and services required for long-term recovery, after the initial rehabilitation has taken place. It includes permanent housing development, full restoration of services, and other requirements to return a community to its pre-disaster state.

RECOVERY
Not only does the recovery phase include ongoing restoration of pre-disaster situation, but also involves improving and increasing infrastructure and services for affected communities. A significant part of this phase – and one that ‘closes the DMC loop’ – is the integration of prevention, mitigation and preparedness activities to ensure a more resilient and safe community in the face of future disasters.

Written by : William Shea

Disasters can happen at any time, and the occurrence of a pandemic, such as the world currently faces, means natural disaster becomes more challenging to manage and potentially more dangerous to communities. Dealing with response and recovery from natural disaster during the midst of the coronavirus pandemic raises an array of new and unsettling questions. Who has to respond? What assistance may be provided if hospitals are treating COVID-19 patients? What if there is already a scarcity of medical supplies and resources? Where are evacuees sheltered and housed if there is need to ensure displaced people can continue social distancing?

Additionally, the timeframe for managing such a multi-dimensional challenge could be up to months, and likely even years, throughout which both the pandemic response and potential natural disaster response must both be considered. There is also a history of epidemics that follow natural disasters.

The 2004 South Asian Tsunami that killed more than 250,000 people and displaced more than 1.7 million across 16 countries, also produced ideal conditions for an Acute Respiratory Infection outbreak in Aceh, Indonesia – already the worst hit region after the disaster. In 2010, the first Cholera outbreak in more than a century in Haiti resulted in 8,183 deaths, both amplifying and amplified by damage to infrastructure caused by the huge earthquake.

So on one hand, there is the fact that COVID-19 counter measures could hamper the emergency response to disasters, while on the other hand disaster situations will potentially disrupt current pandemic response actions (such as social distancing) that can increase the potential for increased spread of the virus.

With the current coronavirus pandemic adding a new layer of challenges and risks, community leaders must undertake structured planning for how they will deal with the worst-case scenario.

Planning includes asking and answering questions such as: What can go wrong? How likely is it to happen? What are the consequences? What resources do we need to mitigate the risk?

According to scientists at the University of Melbourne, there are four pre-emptive strategies that governments can adopt to counter the risks of COVID-19 and natural hazards.

PRE-EMPTIVE STRATEGIES TO COUNTER THE RISKS OF COVID-19 AND NATURAL HAZARDS

First, identifying possible pandemic-natural disaster hybrid scenarios, including worst-case scenarios is critical. This requires the building of new hybrid forecast models that combine existing pandemic projection models and natural hazard forecasting.

Second, emergency responses to extreme events can be modified in advance by considering seasonal weather forecasting models. As technology can provide predictions of possible natural hazards in the coming months, planning ahead is key.

Third, a re-design of policy responses is needed to address different natural hazards, with a focus on social distancing. Policy changes must be introduced to a wide range of post-disaster activities, ranging from emergency aid distribution to providing shelter.

Finally, supporting relief agencies serving lower income communities or regions and their governments is important, as impacts of compound effects on these areas are likely to be disproportionately high.

Although an epidemic does not usually fall within the disaster management sector, in terms of scale and suffering, it potentially should. While it may be difficult and hard to think of the additional risk caused by a second crisis at this time, risk management requires exactly that—staying ahead of events and always being prepared to respond.

Written by : Ina Rachmawati | Source : theconversation.com & www.preventionweb.net

Various natural hazards ranging from floods, tsunamis, earthquake and roaring hurricanes. It is probably not an easy feat to try to explain this to children. But there is actually a simulation game that educators can utilise so that children can learn how to respond to and mitigate disaster through an internet game.

The game was launched by United Nations in 2007 as part of World Disaster Reduction Campaign; it is simulating natural hazards and serves as an interactive educational tool for children. Targeted for age 9-16 years old audience, the player role is to plan and construct a safer environment for their local population by assessing disaster risk and limiting damage inflicted during a natural hazard strike.

The UN/ISDR secretariat developed the online video game based on the great success of the board game called “Riskland” for children aged 6 to 9, which was developed jointly with UNICEF. The Riskland game has been widely used worldwide in different languages, including local languages.

The on-line game called “Stop Disasters” (www.stopdisastersgame.org) aims at sensitising children on basic notions of disaster risk reduction in a fun and entertaining manner. Its main objective is to raise awareness about the issue but do not pretend to educate children on all the aspects of disaster risk reduction issues. The game is also supported by a website offering more information and teacher guides on natural hazards.

The game includes five natural hazard scenarios (flooding, tsunami, wildfire, hurricane and earthquake) set in five different geographic environments with three different levels of difficulty that require critical decision-making and strategic planning.

This online game aims at teaching children how to build safer villages and cities against disasters. Children will learn through playing how the location and the construction materials of houses can make a difference when disasters strike and how early warning systems, evacuation plans and education can save lives.

The player assumes the role of a contractor in charge of improving the area’s response to specific natural disasters. Within a set time limit, the player must manage their resources in order to construct and reinforce local buildings, conduct training, and purchase warning systems to help make the community safer.

Each scenario takes place in various locations around the world and focuses on disasters common to that area. For example, the tsunami scenario takes place in Southeast Asia, while the wildfires scenario takes place in Australia.

GAMEPLAY

The player is given a lot of freedom to make choices in the game. They can choose what to develop and where to develop it, and they can choose between developing buildings or creating defence systems. Once a structure is made, they can choose if or how they will upgrade it. The player has a set budget and they can decide how to distribute their money and which members of the population to spend it on.

The player is given a generic amount of time before a disaster strikes. They can use that time to invest in their community and build structures, create defences, and invest in warning systems and population training. Each scenario comes with a list of goals that must be met before the disaster strikes. For example, the player might have to build a school, house a certain amount of people, and develop the local economy (such as building a certain number of hotels). Each scenario also has some generic goals related to lowering the costs of the destruction and loss of life during and after the disaster. The challenge comes from managing the resources available: limited time and money and terrain-related building restrictions. The player is not given any implicit directions once the game controls are explained and is expected to figure out the game strategy on their own by clicking on objects and trying out different actions.

The game is a real-time, self-guided, point-and-click, grid-based map simulation. The player interacts with the game by clicking on objects on the map and on menus. All actions can be completed using a mouse. The player is expected to find information independently, and will be rewarded for exploring and making good choices with tooltips that appear after the action has been completed. This self-guided nature of the game drive the player to do multiple tries before correctly strategies the game play. reduces the learning component by preventing the player from acting purposefully on this information. A player’s knowledge may actually be minimized by this method because they may not be able to find all of the tooltips in the allotted time. However, the option to start the disaster early was useful as a self-guided feature because the player may finish before the time is up.

Written by : Ina Rachmawati | Source : www.stopdisastersgame.org, www.undrr.org, www.unric.org & web.cs.wpi.edu

We have begun the new decade with a significant and complex challenge, as the entire world comes face-to-face with the Coronavirus pandemic. While this may form a new context for many nations and people, it is only the most recent of many pandemics that have challenges the human race throughout history. Each pandemic’s impact on health, livelihoods and other areas may have varied, however the all hold one defining similarity. They require a global response that prioritises human life and looks out for the vulnerable, similar to many aspects of natural disaster. As the AHA Centre explores its role within this new challenge, we take a look back over some of the key pandemics faced throughout history – and particularly in recent times.

Black Death / Bubonic Plague (1347-1351)
The bubonic plague is famous for its spread during a time that sea travel and ports were major links between countries and continents. Thought to have spread through rats and fleas, the plague (or Black Death as its more commonly known), moved across Europe, Africa and Asia killing anywhere between 75 to 200 million people over a number of years.

Smallpox (1520-1980)
The smallpox pandemic had a significant impact on native populations across the American continent, brought and spread by conquerors, adventurers and settlers into new and foreign lands. In the 1500’s the Aztecs experienced significant decimation, while it is also estimated that the disease killed 90% of native Americans in general. By the 1800’s the disease was still prevalent, and was killing around 400,000 people per year in Europe. As a result, the first ever vaccine created was to deal with smallpox, with its eradication finally complete by 1980.

Spanish Flu (1918-1919)
The smallpox pandemic had a significant impact on native populations across the American continent, brought and spread by conquerors, adventurers and settlers into new and foreign lands. In the 1500’s the Aztecs experienced significant decimation, while it is also estimated that the disease killed 90% of native Americans in general. By the 1800’s the disease was still prevalent, and was killing around 400,000 people per year in Europe. As a result, the first ever vaccine created was to deal with smallpox, with its eradication finally complete by 1980.

Asian Flu (1957-1958)
The smallpox pandemic had a significant impact on native populations across the American continent, brought and spread by conquerors, adventurers and settlers into new and foreign lands. In the 1500’s the Aztecs experienced significant decimation, while it is also estimated that the disease killed 90% of native Americans in general. By the 1800’s the disease was still prevalent, and was killing around 400,000 people per year in Europe. As a result, the first ever vaccine created was to deal with smallpox, with its eradication finally complete by 1980.

Hong Kong Flu (1968-1970)
Ten years after the Asian Flu came the Hong Kong Flu, with the initial outbreak in Hong Kong quickly moving into Singapore and Vietnam. Within a few months cases were detected across Asia, the Middle East, Europe, Australia and the United States, resulting in the deaths of over a million people worldwide. Even with a low death rate of around 0.5%, the pandemic did take the lives of around 500,000 people in Hong Kong itself, which was around 15% of the city’s population during the late 1960’s.

HIV AIDS (1981-Present)
HIV AIDS first appeared in Africa during 1976, and has gone on to form one of humankind’s greatest pandemic challenges for many decades. The disease has killed more than 36 million people since 1981, and has infected an estimated 5% of the total sub-Saharan African population. While awareness and treatments have grown and improved, and deaths and sickness have decreased with medicinal improvements, there is still no vaccine for the blood and sexually-transmitted disease, and it continues to be transmitted across the world.

Swine Flu (2009-2010)
The second pandemic from the H1N1 virus (the first being the Spanish Flu), Swine Flu resulted from a mix of flu strains during previous years. Killing a relatively smaller amount of people in comparison to other pandemics (200,000 deaths), there are studies that approximate the infection of between 700 million to 1.4 billion people across the world – which equates to up to 20% of the overall population at the time.

Ebola (2014-2016)
Having gone through a number of outbreaks since it was first discovered in 1976, Ebola became a serious pandemic in West Africa during 2014-2016. Spreading through contact with body fluids from humans and animals, this extremely deadly disease kills anywhere between 25-90% of people it infects, with an average of 50% death rate since its discovery. A vaccine was approved in 2019, with the hope that such advances can completely eradicate the deadly disease that killed over 11,300 during the 2014-16 pandemic.

Written by : William Shea | Source : https://jmvh.org and The Conversation

The significant flooding that hit Jakarta and its surrounds on 1 January 2020 required significant attention from the Government of Indonesia, prompting the National Disaster Management Authority (Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana – BNPB) to immediately conduct a coordination meeting with related parties. During this meeting a significant decision was made to attempt to alleviate flooding in Jakarta and its surrounds. This plan was to utilise Weather Modification Technology – or WMT. The Indonesian Agency for Assessment and Application of Technology (Badan Pengajian dan Penerapan Teknologi – BPPT) had developed a strategy by conducting an analysis of the growth of clouds that cause rain across the Jakarta metropolitan area. These clouds originate from the west and northwest of area, from the Sunda Strait, Lampung and surrounding regions.

On Thursday, January 2, 2020, the BPPT together with the TNI (Indonesian National Armed Forces) undertook preparations of required equipment and rain seedling materials, as well as an aeroplanes including a CASA CN-295 and a Hercules. On the morning of January 3, prediction and monitoring of cloud growth and movement was carried out, with all potential rainclouds moving towards Jakarta to be planted by plane using salt (NaCl) seedlings. Seeding clouds with salt is done to make clouds heavier, therefore causing rain to fall, and doing so in this case before the clouds reached the flooded areas of Jakarta. This aimed to or at least to decrease rain intensity once clouds arrived in the area, as well as reduce and re-distribute rainwater to support the flooded areas. WMT activities are also used for other disaster relief operations, such as putting out forest and land fires, filling reservoirs, and wetting fire-prone peatlands. WMT can also be utilised to increase river elevation for irrigation, so as to increase agricultural production.

Indonesia has implemented reliable WMT activities in overcoming water deficits, floods and fires since 1997. This has also increasingly included the control of flooding through optimal implementation of WMT. It can be utilised in most conditions and weather seasons, and may also be utilised to support national strategic projects and important national activities, by reducing smoke disruption ensuring a location is unobstructed by extreme weather conditions.

Written by : Ina Rachmawati | Source : BNPB publication

Disaster plays a large role across the communities of the Philippines, with the ASEAN Member State constantly affording significant attention and resources to ensuring its citizens and infrastructure are prepared and resilient to disaster occurrences that frequently impact the nation due to its geographic context. For the entire month of July 2019, the Philippines celebrated its National Disaster Resilience Month (NDRM) that involved numerous events and activities across the nation aimed at increasing awareness and resilience for its people in the face of ongoing natural disaster threats.

The theme for 2019’s celebration was Kahandaan sa Sakuna’t Peligro Para Sa Tunay na Pagbabago – which translates to Disaster Risk and Emergency Preparedness for Genuine Development in the English language – with NDRM kicking off on July 1st through a number of opening events. The Philippines’ National Disaster Management Organisation (NDMO) – the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (NDRRMC) – kicked-off the month-long celebration with the launching of its DELSA Satellite Warehouse in Quezon City, an event that will be covered in detail in the next volume of the AHA Centre’s Column publication. For the entire month of July, the Government of the Philippines, institutions, businesses and the general public took part in activities related to disaster resilience, particularly covering the four thematic areas of DRRM –Disaster Prevention and Mitigation, Disaster Preparedness, Disaster Response and Disaster Rehabilitation and Recovery.

A variety of engaging and interesting activities were planned for the whole month, with each of the nation’s numerous regions implementing its own schedule for celebrations and awareness raising within the community. The Municipality of San Jose de Buenavista, through the Antique Provincial Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Office, undertook a ‘caravan’ around San Jose de Buenavista to raise community awareness on the importance of readiness within the landslide and flood-prone region. In San Fernando City, the annual Run for Resilience event was organised. The annual event was formed to offer thanks for the support of the many partners who promote disaster resilience in the community. Schools across the nation will participate in activities such as essay writing, song development and poster creation, with the aim to ensure strong resilience in the next generations of the country’s youth. In Butuan City, officials aim to highlight their Disaster Risk Reduction and Management (DRRM) Heroes – namely the health care providers in provincial and district hospitals who are at the frontlines providing care during emergencies and disasters.

Disaster response trainings in schools and government offices and in disaster prone areas were held across different locations, that formed the practical aspect of the NDRM in strengthening disaster resilience for people of the Philippines. Other events aimed to strengthen internal and external partnerships on disaster management, through events such as: ceremonial turnover of tents from the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF); the launch and implementation of the 2019 Nationwide Simultaneous Hands-Only CPR Campaign; Basic Life Support Training for the DOH Security Personnel, and; a ceremonial signing of the memorandum of agreement with the Philippine Disaster Resilience Foundation.

Written by : William Shea | Photo : The Philippines Office of Civil Defense Facebook Page

Readers of The Column, and those with general knowledge of disaster management in the ASEAN region, should by now be well acquainted with the One ASEAN One Response vision. This vision forms the blueprint for the current and future state of disaster management in ASEAN, driven by the AHA Centre, and strives to develop timely, appropriate and united responses to disaster across the ASEAN region and abroad. One ASEAN One Response is a broad and complex vision, with such breadth and complexity also reflected within its implementation and realisation. Therefore, in early 2018, the AHA Centre developed a book – Operationalising One ASEAN One Response – to form the framework and guidance for the real steps that must be taken to ensure the implementation and realisation of One ASEAN One Response for all stakeholders throughout the ASEAN disaster management sector.

The book begins by tracking back and compiling the context and history of the One ASEAN One Response vision’s development, including the birth of the idea after Typhoon Haiyan, its conceptualisation and promotion, and other steps in its journey until its formalisation through the Declaration on One ASEAN One Response – signed by all ASEAN Member States in 2016. Throughout the early chapters of the book we also learn more about a range of elements, processes and key stakeholders within the One ASEAN One Response movement, allowing for a strong understanding of the mechanisms and parties central to the vision’s real implementation.

With a sound understanding and picture of the One ASEAN One Response context and history, the book then turns to the all-important operationalisation of the vision, capturing the processes, mechanisms and measurements that guide the realisation of a collective regional response for all members of the ASEAN community. The overall goal of One ASEAN One Response is the umbrella under which the operationalisation takes place – namely to increase speed of disaster response, provide to-scale resources for preparedness and response, and do so in solidarity as a strong, united ASEAN region with the common objective of responding to the needs of those affected by disaster. With such a goal identified, the book then identifies the seven key principles of One ASEAN One Response, which ensure that ASEAN responds through singular mechanisms including:

1. ONE POLICY FRAMEWORK – AADMER
2. ONE SOP – SASOP
3. ONE RESPONSE PLAN – AJDRP
4. ONE POLICY BODY – ACDM
5. ONE POINT OF CONTACT – NDMOs
6. ONE REGIONAL COORDINATING AGENCY – AHA Centre
7. ONE FIELD COORDINATION CENTRE – JOCCA

The book then moves on to providing answers regarding key elements of One ASEAN One Response operationalisation, covering nine specific elements that form the entire cycle of disaster management in the ASEAN region. These elements are made up of:

1. Policy guidance
2. Coordination mechanism
3. ASEAN-ERAT
4. Information management
5. Operating procedures
6. Response plan
7. Standby assets and capacities
8. Participating actors
9. Exercises and after-action reviews

Finally, the book concludes with an overall roadmap of One ASEAN One Response implementation, including progress indicators that can be used to measure the implementation stages of the vision. Overall, the implementation has four key phases – namely ASEAN 1.0, ASEAN 2.0, ASEAN 3.0 and ASEAN X.0. As highlighted within this roadmap, at time of printing the One ASEAN One Response has already reached, and is working its way through ASEAN 2.0. As the implementation continues, ASEAN 3.0 should see the region able to successfully engage East Asia Summit participating countries within all aspects of response mobilisation, and further into the future, ASEAN X.0 would see ASEAN capable of engaging in responses outside of the ASEAN region itself.

Written by : William Shea | Photo : AHA Centre