Total Disaster Risk Management
Good Practices
2006 Supplement

Asian Disaster Reduction Center
March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

Foreword
In recent years, natural disasters have been affecting an increasing numbers of people throughout theworld. The Indian Ocean Tsunami caused an enormous tragedy the year before last, and moreover, theSouth Asia Earthquake in Pakistan October of last year resulted in huge number of lives in the Islamic
Republic of Pakistan, India and surrounding areas. It is important to point out that the Asian region
accounts for nearly 90% of the world’s affected population.
But these crises triggered and brought about serious awareness for the necessity of regional solidarity.

The support for emergency preparedness and response has been expanded over the entire world

immediately after the disasters. Disaster mitigation and prevention require the involvement of everybody,and it requires the organized participation of the entire population. National and international resources areneeded to reduce the vulnerability of the population.
Asian Disaster Reduction Center (ADRC) will not only continue to support the development ofscientific capability against disasters, but will also pay increasing attention to the social dimensions ofdisaster prevention. ADRC has collaborative status with the United Nation Office for the Coordination of
Humanitarian Affairs (UN-OCHA) Kobe and International Recovery Platform (IRP), and also works incollaboration with many stakeholders in Asia. ADRC and these partner organizations have formulated aholistic approach to disaster risk reduction known as Total Disaster Risk Management (TDRM).
“Total Disaster Risk Management: Good Practices” is a user-friendly handbook including the conceptof TDRM and its good practices, that was published for UN World Conference on Disaster Reduction thatwas held on 18-22 January 2005 in Kobe, Japan. Herein “2006 Supplement of Good Practices” contains
good practices submitted by ADRC member countries for relevant stakeholders to share knowledge inorder to contribute to global disaster risk reduction.
Furthermore, it would be our great pleasure to continue receiving a broad range of good practices fromyou. I hope this publication will stimulate the promotion of the TDRM approach and contribute to efforts
to build a safer world.
March 2006

Masayuki Kitamoto
Executive Director
Asian Disaster Reduction Center
Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

Contents
1 Armenia‐ Safety of Existing Dams for Irrigation in Rural Area. ........................................................................ 1
2 Indonesia‐ Some Experiences for Making People Calm that Caused Rumours
after the Earthquake Events in Indonesia........................................................................................... 3‐ Landslide Quick Response in West Java and West Sumatra, Indonesia............................................. 6‐ Strengthening Local Government on Emergency Management andContingency Planning for Earthquake and Tsunami Hazard,
in West Sumatra Province (Indonesia).............................................................................................. 9‐ Good Practices in the Merapi Prone Area: Communities Constitute Main Actors too..................... 11‐ Raising Earthquake Awareness of School Children : Experience of Indonesia............................... 14‐ Encouraged Nias IDPs in Sibolga Returning to Their Place ofOrigin through Grass Roots Level Training on Community Based
Disaster Risks Management (CBDRM) ........................................................................................... 16

3 Republic of Korea‐ Insurance Program for Wind and Water Related Disasters in Korea. ............................................... 18
4 Mongolia‐ Effectiveness of Fighting the Avian Influenza by Efficient Prevention Work................................... 20
5 Singapore‐ Operation Lionheart. ......................................................................................................................... 22
6 Tajikistan‐ Rapid Emergency Assessment and Coordination Team – REACT, Tajikistan................................. 25‐ Lake Sarez Risk Mitigation Project (LSRMP), Tajikistan................................................................ 27
7 Thailand‐ Community-based Evacuation System.............................................................................................. 30

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

Safety of Existing Dams for Irrigation in Rural Area
Armenia

Natural disasters such as earthquakes, floods. landslides, avalanches and mudflows may cause failure anddestruction of hydro-technical facilities.
Most dams are operating quite long time and special attention should be paid to exploitation risk.
Consequences of recent major earthquakes in India, China, Japan and Iran once again revealed thatseismic resistance of most dams is lower than expected maximum level of seismic impact.
At present 82 mostly earth dams are operating in Armenia.
Armenia is a country with high dam location (3 dams per 100 sq. km) and population (more than 100
people per 1 sq. km) density.
Most dams are located at 1500 - 2500 m above sea level.
50 small dams have been constructed many years ago disregarding modern approaches for dam design andconstruction, and those dams represent high risk for population and lifelines in downstream.
Dam maintenance risk is crucial for priority inspection, rehabilitation and early warning.
Since the small dams are filled out in 2-3 month it is essential to evaluate properly maximum expectedflood though some dams have no spillway.
Absolute number of small dams constructed on the base of old maps of seismic zoning and codes.
Expected seismic intensity in most Armenia's territory has been increased by 1-2 value of intensity in thelast 20 years.
Provided risk evaluation is based on dam and reservoir characteristics, number of people to be evacuatedand potential damage of crops, buildings and property.
Due to lack of necessary information on small dams it is difficult to realize the approaches recommended
by the ICOLD and other National committees.
The field inspection has been provided in order to acquire data, as well as the information obtained fromlocal governments and dam personnel responsible for dam safety.
Data on recent dam failure have been acquired and special geophysical and updated hydrologicalcomputation have been performed.
Data obtained have been classified by importance of risk ranking on weight inputs.

fig. 1 The bowl of the Shenik reservoir

The Shenik reservoir (fig. 1) is located in Aragatsotn marz (region) and is situated about 28 km away of
the nearest fault.
The reservoir was constructed in 1969.
The height of the dam is 18.0 m.
The reservoir capacity is 0.78x106 cub. m.
The surface area is 12.2 ha.
The check seismic intensity is 8 value on MSK-64 intensity scale.
Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

Fig. 2 The view of the Eghnik dam from upstream

The Eghnik reservoir (fig. 2) is located in Aragatsotn marz (region) and is situated about 24 km away of
the nearest fault.
The reservoir was constructed in 1961.
The height of the dam is 3.0 m.
The reservoir capacity is 0.06x106 cub. m.
The surface area is 0.44 ha.
The check seismic intensity is 8 value on MSK-64 intensity scale.
Population at risk represents about 200 people.
- Background Dam seismic risk reduction.
- Objective Seismic risk assessment.
- Term/Time Frame 9 months.
- Activities undertaken Creation of database on dam condition and partial failure- Major achievements Classification of risk for rural dams
- Total budget US 5000$- Contact details
Mnatsakan Mnatsakanyan, PhD, Team leader
Leading specialist, Buildings and Structures Seismic Resistance Department, National Survey for
Seismic Protection, Yerevan, Republic of Armenia
E-Mail: mmv_80@yahoo.com
Tel. +37493 22 92 53
Valery Khondkaryan, PhD, Professional mentor
E-Mail: khondkaryan@yahoo.com

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

SOME EXPERIENCES FOR MAKING PEOPLE CALM THATCAUSED RUMOURS AFTER THE EARTHQUAKE EVENTS IN
Good Practices 2006 Supplement
INDONESIA
By : Center of Volcanology and Geological Hazard Mitigation (CVGHM) Bandung, Indonesia
Some
Experiences for Making People Calm that Caused Rumours after the(This paper
send toinAsian
Disaster Reduction Center, email : goodpractise2006@adrc.or.jp)
Earthquake
EventsIndonesia
Indonesia lies on the tripple junction ofIndonesia
three majorⅠ active plates, namely : Eurasia, Indo

Pacific. As aandconcequence
this situation,
Indonesia
is a very
active earthquake
By :Australia
Center ofand
Volcanology
GeologicalofHazard
Mitigation(CVGHM)
Bandung,Indonesia
source zones. The source zone are generally represented by a subduction type and active faults.
Indonesia lies on the tripple junction of three major active plates, namely : Eurasia, Indo Australia andPacific. As a concequence of this situation, Indonesia is a very active earthquake source zones. The source
zoneTheare biggest
generally
represented
by a subduction
type and 26,
activefaults.
event
ever recorded
was the December
2004
earthquake, followed by tsunami in
Aceh region. This event shook the world, not only by the rareness of its magnitude (Mw = 9.2),
The biggest event ever recorded was the December 26, 2004 earthquake, followed by tsunami in Acehbut Thisalso eventby theshookhuge amountof casualties
thatthecatastrophedregion.
region.
the world,
not only byrareness of theits magnitude(Mw = 9.2), but also by thehuge amount of casualties that catastrophed the region.
Duringearthquake
eventsare continuing.
still continuing.
eventsof destructive
earthquakes
are onDuring2005,2005,
earthquake
eventsare still
SomeSome
eventsof destructive
earthquakes
are shown
the table
1 below.
shown
on the table 1 below.

NO.

Location

Date of Occurences

Epicenter

Depth (Km)

MAG

MMI

1

Palolo, Sulawesi

24/1/2005

1.03 S; 119.99° E

30

6.2

VII

2

Garut, West Java2/2/2005

108.7° E; 7.2° S

10

4.2

V

3

Bau bau, Sulawesi

19/2/2005

122.34 E; 5.99 S

33

6.9

V

4

Nias, North Sumatra

28/3/2005

2.07° N; 97.01° E

30

8.7

VIII

5

Padang, West Sumatra

10/4/2005

1. 62° S; 99.56° E

30

6.8

V

6

Gunung Halu, West Java

15/4/2005

107.45° E; 7.19° S

5

5

V

7

Cot Glie, Aceh

5/10/2005

95.6° E; 5.2° N

10

5.7

V

8

Buru Island, Maluku

1/11/2005

127.34° E; 3.61° S

13

5.7

V

6.4

5.9

V

o

9

Seram Island, Maluku

13/11/2005o128.94 E; 3.08 S

Table
1. Destructiveearthquake
earthquakeevents
events in(source: CVGHM,
2005)
Table
1. Destructive
in Indonesia
Indonesiaduring
during2005
2005(source: CVGHM,2005)

Earthquake occurences in 2005 had only one event followed by a minor tsunami and not causing any
Earthquake
occurences2005
had onlyonone
event28.
followedby a minor
tsunaminot big
significant
damage.
It was inNiasearthquake
March
Even though
this quake
hadanda rathermagnitudewith its epicenter
sea,earthquake
fortunatelyon
it March
did not28.
generateany significant
tsunamicausing(8.7),
any significant
damage.below
It wastheNias
Even though
this quake
wave, only a minor tsunami observed in Nias Island and on the shore of small islands in the region.
had a rather big magnitude (8.7), with its epicenter below the sea, fortunately it did not generateanyansignificant
tsunamiminor
tsunamiobservedin NiasIsland and
shore
When
earthquake
occurswave,
belowonly
theasea
floor,
the panic
among
the people
was onnottheonly
dueofto theearthquake’s
shaking
but
also
to
the
rumourfollowing
it.
Some
of
there
rumours
were
even
born
in areassmall islands in the region.
situated far away from the earthquake epicenter. Below some experiences about socialization to the
inhabitant after earthquake occurences are presented.
An example of a rumour that made people panic in the area just shook by the quake was Palu Cityon Sulawesi island. On January 24, 2005 an earthquake occurs, with an epicenter situated on land
approximately 35 km south east Palu city. The people in Palu city were already moved to the higher
ground outside of Palu City because they heard from the rumour that the quake would be followed by atsunami. To calm the people down and make them return to their own house, a team from CVGHM wassent to Palu City and held a meeting with the Major of Palu city, administrator of village up to city levels,

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplementand directly socialized with the people. After this meeting
was held, the people ended by trusting the team on thefact that the quake would not be followed by a tsunami,
and little by little inhabitants went back home.
Just after an earthquake occured in Garut District,
West Java on February 2, 2005, the people aroundthe geothermal field thought that the earthquake wastriggered by the drilling activity of the geothermalcompany. The people started to blame the company andreacted by doing blockades on the road leading to thegeothermal field area. Some hundreds of geothermal The direct socialization of earthquake and tsunami to
the people in Palu, Sulawesi island
company employees were not able to go home afterwork that day, while the people were waiting an explanation of the company concerning the quake. The
explanation made by the company and from the chief district finally came, but did not satisfy the people.
They wanted the explanation from the formal office who responsible of the earthquake matter, a memberof CVGHM. After receiving the phone call from the chief district, a team from CVGHM was sent to the‘conflict’ area and reached the area at about one o’clock in the morning. The team explained to the people
that the earthquake had not been triggered by the geothermal drilling activity. The explanation satisfied
the people, who shortly reopened the road leading to the geothermal field and ‘released’ the employee forthem to return home.
The second experience was the exodus of Nias Island inhabitants who tried to go to Sumatra Island
because of their fear of a rumour that the earthquake
event, on March 28, 2005, would be followed by a very
big tsunami. The Quick Response Team, that was alreadyinstalled in Nias Island just after the quake, became very
active in making the people sure that the earthquake
would not be followed by a tsunami in their region.
Hundreds of people were successfully sent back to theirvillage.
Another example of a rumour that made people panic
was Bengkulu City, South - West of Sumatra, following
an earthquake on April 6, 2005, which epicenter lied onland approximately 25 km south east Bengkulu city. The Destructive earthquake in Nias on March 28, 2005.
people that lived in coastal area were already moved tothe higher ground outside of Bengkulu City because they heard from the rumours that the quake would be
followed by a tsunami. The people went on panicing for several days after the main shock and didn’t knowwhat to do. To calm the people down and make them return to their house, a team from CVGHM wasdispatched to Bengkulu City and held a meeting with the administrator of the village up to city levels anddirectly socialized the local people. After this meeting, the team gainded the trust of the peope that thequake would not be followed by a tsunami, and little by little inhabitants returned home. This earthquake
did not have any destructive effect.
Another story concerning rumours that made people panic happened in Padang City in West Sumatra,
following an earthquake event in April 10, 2005, whose epicenter lied off shore of West Sumatra west
coast. The people were already moved to the higher ground outside Padang City because they heard fromthe rumours that the quake would be followed by a tsunami. The people were panicking even after several
days after the main shock. Moreover, in April 12, 2005 a volcano near the city also erupted. The people ofcourse panicked even more and didn’t know what to do. To calm the people down and make them return

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplementback to their house again, a team from CVGHM was dispatched to Padang City and organizaed a big
meeting with the village administrators up to city levels, including senior and honorable inhabitants, which
was facilitated by the Major of Padang City. After this meeting the team gained the poeple’s trust that thequake would not be followed by a tsunami, and little by little the inhabitants returned home.
The five experiences above show that socializations concerning a kind of geological hazard are very
important. People in disaster areas are very vulnerable to rumours created among them. This situation
would not happen if the people were directly educated through socialization from the early beginning.
Earthquake Quick Response Team of CVGHM
1. BackgroundIndonesia lies on the tripple junction of three major active plates, namely: Eurasia, Indo Australia andPacific. The concequences of this situation make Indonesia to become a very active earthquake sourcezone. One of task and function of the Center of Volcanology and Geological Hazard Mitigation (CVGHM)
is to conduct earthquake mitigation. To support this program the CVGHM has conducted several
researches: monitoring of active fault, mapping of earthquake hazard zone, socialization, producing mapof active fault distribution & destructive earthquake epicenter, producing map of earthquake hazard zones,
cataloging of destructive earthquake of Indonesia, arranging guide for socialization, etc. Especially forearthquake mitigation during occurences, the CVGHM has arranged quick response teams for earthquake.
2. Objective
The objective is to reduce the number of victims and lost of property caused by earthquake disasters.
3. Term/ Time Frame
Earthquake response teams responsible continously to monitoring earthquake occurence in Indonesia andmake reports to the head of CVGHM. After every destructive earthquake event, if possible, the team will
go to the location of the earthquake disaster during a period of approximately for 15 days.
4. Activities Undertaken
The earthquake quick response team of CVGHM is responsible: to monitor after shock, to make aninventory of impacts by earthquake, directly socialize the people, to make earthquake intensity map, andto give technical recommendations to local governments.
5. Major Achievement
The major achievements of the earthquake quick response team CVGHM have been to make people calm,
not panic and give technical recommendations to local governments.
6. Total Budget
The total budget for earthquake quick response team in case of destructive earthquakes in java island
amounts to approximately Rp. 20 Million. If outside of java island approximately Rp. 50 Million.
7. Contact Detail
Dr. Surono (Head of Sub Directorate of Geological Hazard Mitigation)
Address: Jl. Diponegoro No. 57, BandungPhone: +62 22 7272 604, +62 22 7272 606
Mobile phone: +62 812 2339 446
Facsimile: +62 22 7202 761
e-mail address: surono@vsi.esdm.go.idAsian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

Landslide Quick Response in West Java and West Sumatra, Indonesia
LANDSLIDE QUICK RESPONSE
IN WEST JAVA AND Indonesia
WEST SUMATRA,INDONESIAⅡ

Indonesia
three major
major active
activeplates,
plates,namely:
namely:Eurasia,
Eurasia,Indo
IndoAustralia
Australiaand
andIndonesialies
liesononthe
the tripple
tripple junction
junction ofof threePacific.
The
concequencesof
thissituation
makes
Indonesia
vulnerable
togeologicalhazard,andPacific. The concequences of this situation makes Indonesia vulnerable to geological hazard, and thethe
topography
landslides.
Landslideoccurenceis isincreased
byby
high
rain
topographyofofsteep
steephills
hillsmakes
makesit itvulnerable
vulnerabletotolandslides.
Landslideoccurenceincreased
high
fall.
rain fall.
InIn2005,
regurlar basis.
basis. The
Thehighest
highestrain
rainfallfallperiod
periodisisbetween
between
2005,landslide
landslideoccurences
occurences happened
happened on
on aa regurlar
thethemonthsand February
February2006.
2006.During
Duringthis
thisperiod,landslideoccurences
are therefore
monthsofofDecember
December 2005
2005 andperiod,landslideoccurences
are therefore
atattheir
theirpeak.
peak.There
There
were
eventsof landslides
in 2005
in Indonesia,
and Java
Westrepresents
Java represents
were
45 45
eventsof landslides
in 2005
in Indonesia,
and West
the areathe
area
where
biggestamountsof landslides
occur.
numbervictims
andfrequency
landslidewhere
the thebiggestamountsof landslides
occur.
TheThenumberof ofvictims
andfrequency
of oflandslide
occurences
occurencesare
areshown
shownininthe
thetabletablebelow.
below.
Destroyed
DamagedVictims
HousesHousesDead
Injured
1. West Java
205
13
110
428
2. Central Java37
5
3. East Java1
2
37
4. Aceh8151
5. North Sumatra
3
1
6. West Sumatra
25
916
Table 1. Victims and damaged
housesbylandslide
during2005.
Table 1. Victims and damaged houses by landslide during 2005.
No.

Location

Threated
Houses
768
20
2
8
-

this
table,
2 majorlandslides,
involvedthe Landslide
Quick
InInthis
table,
wewe
cancansee seethat that
therethere
werewere
2 majorlandslides,
wihch wihch
involvedthe Landslide
Quick Response
ResponseTeam(LQRT):
Ciamislandslide
of
West
Java
and
Lubuk
Begalung
landslideofWestTeam (LQRT): Ciamis landslide of West Java and Lubuk Begalung landslide of West Sumatra.
Sumatra.

Ciamis represented one of the landslide occurences inCiamis represented one of the landslide occurences inWest Java in the year 2005. This landslide occured inWest Java in the year 2005. This landslide occured in
December 12, 2005 in Situmandala village, Rancah
December 12, 2005 in Situmandala village, Rancah
districk, Ciamis regency, West Java and is still subject
districk, Ciamis regency, West Java and is still subject
to research by LQRT of Center of Volcanology andto research by LQRT of Center of Volcanology andGeological
Mitigation(CVGHM).
(CVGHM).
Geological Hazard
Hazard Mitigation
TheThetypetypeofoflandslide
landslidewas
wasslump,
slump,followed
followedbybyfracturing.
fracturing.The
The
dimensions
were asas follow:
follow:length
lengthofof5050
dimensions ofof landslide
landslide weremeters,wideof20
meters,heightofcrownmeters, wide of 20 meters, height of crown ofof1 1– –5 5
meters,
The situation
situationofof
meters, subsidence
subsidence ofof 1
1 –– 55 meters.
meters. The
Crown of landslide height 3 m as a rice field at
disasterby steep
steep hilly
hillyslope
slopeofof
disaster area
area waswas encouraged
encouraged byCrownof landslidevillage,height Ciamis,
3 m as Westa riceJava.
field atSitumandala45º,made fromfromtuffaceous
tuffaceoussandstone,sandstone,
45º,asasaabedrock
bedrock was
was made
Situmandala village, Ciamis, West Java.
partwith thick
thick approximately 4 meter. The landslide site was apartofofTapak
TapakFormation,
Formation,andand hadhad weathered
weathered withrice
field,
plantations
and
in
a
part
of
a
disasterarea
constitutedof a groupcauses of
thisapproximately 4 meter. The landslide site was a rice
field, plantations
andofinhousing.
a part ofThea disasterarea
lanslidewere:ofthe
big amountof rainfall
beforeofthe
landslide,in theconstituteda groupof housing.
The causes
thislanslide steep
were: slope,the bigrarenessamountofof vegetation
rainfall before
upper
slope, dominant
use ofrarenessthe landofby
wet rice infield
upperslope,slope,dominant
lithologyuseconsistingof weathered
the landslide,steep slope,
vegetation
theinupperof the land
by wetrice field sandstone
in upper slope,of About
weatheredtuffaceoussuceptibility
sandstone which
createda weaktuffaceous
whichlithology
created aconsisting
weak zone.
the landslide
zone mapof WestJavazone. Aboutthe landslide
suceptibilityzone
map ofcreated byzone,
CVGHM,
thethatdisasterarea
createdby CVGHM,
the disasterarea wasincluded
asWesta highJava
suceptibility
meaningin thisarea
wasincludedasahighsuceptibility
zone,
meaning
that
in
this
area
landslideoccurences
arecommonlandslide occurences are common and the old landslide can be active in case of high rainfall or change ofand the The
old landslide
landslide canbecauseactivefivein caseof high
rainfallor bechangeof landuse.
The landslide
could
landuse.
could
hectarsof ricefield tocoveredwith landslidematerial,
break
cause
of ricefieldLQRT
to behascoveredlandslide material,
roads and which
threat were28
offroadsfiveandhectars
threat 28
houses.
given withrecommendations
to the break
Local off
Government,houses.into
LQRT
divided: has given recommendations to the Local Government, which were divided into :Shortterm
termrecommendation
recommendation: :44 houses
houses situatedsituated below✓ Short
below thethe landslide
landslidematerialmaterialmust
mustbeberelocatedrelocatedandandfractures
in
the
upper
slope
must
be
filledwithclay
toprevent
infiltrationofwater.
fractures in the upper slope must be filled with clay to prevent infiltration of water.


Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement✓ Mid term recommendation : 24 houses in the lower slope must be relocated and before that, people
must be evacuated in case of continuing heavy rainfall.
✓ Long term recommendation : Local Government must determine safety location away from landslide.
The second experience of landslide mitigation conductedby LQRT was the case of Lubuk Begalung landslide.
This landslide caused the death of 25 people, the highest
amount of victims of landslide in 2005 in Indonesia.
This landslide occured on September 2, 2005 in Gaungvillage, Lubuk Begalung district, Padang, West Sumatra.
The type of landslide is debris slide that followed byfracturing. The landslide dimensions were as follow:
length of 25 meters, width of 50 meters, height of crownof 2 meters. The situation of disaster area was encouraged
by a steep hilly slope of 20º - 30º, as a bedrock was
hardly tuffaceous and had weathered with a thickness Landslide in Gaung village, Lubuk Begalung distric,
Padang, West Sumatra.
of approximately 2 meters. In the lower slope was theGaung village. The causes of the lanslide are the following: high amount of rainfall before the landslide
during 2 days, steep slope, rareness of vegetation in the upper slope, the lithology consists of weatheredtuffaceous creating a weak zone. Concerning the landslide suceptibility zone map of West Java created by
CVGHM, the disaster area was a high suceptibility zone, meaning that in this area landslides can often be
active in case of high rainfall or change of landuse. The landslide caused the death of 25 peoples 4 people
were injured and 9 houses were destroyed.
LQRT has given the following recommendations to the Local Government:✓ fill fractures in the upper slope with clay to prevent infiltration of water.
✓ plant deep rooted vegetation in the upper slope.
✓ In the long term, housings in this location must be relocated.
✓ be carefull during evacuation of the victims because of the accumulation of landslide material in theupper slope.
✓ put warning signs of landslide along the road from Teluk Bayur to Teluk Nibung.

Landslide Quick Response Team of CVGHM
1. BackgroundIndonesia lies on the tripple junction of three major active plates, namely : Eurasia, Indo Australia andPacific. The concequences of this situation, making Indonesia vulnerable to geological hazard, created a
topography of steep hills vulnerable to landslides. Landslide occurence is encouraged by high rain fall.
One of the task and function of the Center of Volcanology and Geological Hazard Mitigation (CVGHM)
is to conduct landslide mitigation. To support this program, the CVGHM has been conducted several
research: monitoring of strategy area vulnerable to landslides, mapping of landslide suceptibility zone,socialization, building catalogue of landslide occurences in Indonesia, arranging guides for socialization,etc. Especially for landslide mitigation during occurence, the CVGHM has arranged teams of landslide
quick response team.
2. Objective
The objective is to reduce the number of victims and the lost of property caused by landslide disasters.
3. Term/ Time Frame

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

Landslide response teams are continously responsible for monitoring landslide occurences in Indonesia
and making reports to the head of CVGHM. Every landslide occurence, if possible, a team will go to thelocation of the earthquake disaster during approximately 7 days if it occured in Java island and 10 days if
outset Java island.
4. Activities Undertaken
The landslide quick response team of CVGHM is responsible for giving technical recommendations
during and after landslide to the Local Government and to conduct directly socialization to people andLocal Government.
5. Major Achievement
The landslide quick response team of CVGHM achievement has been to make people calm, not panic andgive technical recommendations to local government.
6. Total Budget
The total budget for landslide quick response team in the case of a landslide in Java island approximatelyamounts to Rp. 15 Millions and in case of outside of Java island, it approximately respresents Rp. 40
Millions.
7. Contact Detail
Dr. Surono (Head of Sub Directorate of Geological Hazard Mitigation)
Address: Jl. Diponegoro No. 57, BandungPhone: +62 22 7272 604, +62 22 7272 606
Mobile phone: +62 812 2339 446
Facsimile: +62 22 7202 761
e-mail address: surono@vsi.esdm.go.idAsian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

Strengthening Local Government on Emergency Management and Contingency
Planning for Earthquake and Tsunami Hazard, in West Sumatra Province (Indonesia).
Indonesia Ⅲ

Big earthquake and tsunami disaster in Aceh and North Sumatera Indonesia on December 26, 2004 causeda large number deaths among the people and extensive infrastructure damage. This has shaken and raised
our awareness to strengthen our capability and enhanced our capacity to deal with disasters. Furthermore,according to geologists and other earth scientists, the west coast of Sumatra Island was proven to be as anearthquake and tsunami disaster prone area. This region belongs to four provinces, namely Nanggroe Aceh
Darussalam (NAD), West Sumatera, Bengkulu and Lampung.
One month after Emergency response in Aceh and Nias, the Government of Indonesia, in cooperation
with many national and international agencies and organizations, held The National Post Tsunami Lessons
Learned and Best Practices Workshop. The main goal of this workshop was to identify and evaluate thedisaster management efforts that have been done in Aceh and Nias in order to get valuable lessons andgood practices in the large scale of disaster handling. One of the recommendation that was raised during
the workshop was to strengthen the capacity of local government as well as communities who live in theearthquake and tsunami prone area by preparing contingency plans.
BAKORNAS PBP, as the National Coordinating Board
for Disaster Management is responsible to coordinate
the implementation of ongoing contingency plan.
Considering the limited budged and concerning the
majority of the tsunami and earthquake prone region, at
first, it was decided to conduct Emergency management
and Contingency Training programs for West Sumatra,
Bengkulu, Lampung, and East Nusa Tenggara. For thispurpose, BAKORNAS PBP invited the participation of
UN agencies to support this program.
Baiturrahman Banda Aceh Grand Mosque After
Close to the end of the year 2005, BAKORNAS PBPTsunamihad successfully conducted the training program in East
Nusa Tenggara and West Sumatra Province. Beside, in the provincial level, in West Sumatra, the program
had also been done at the district level, namely Pariaman, Padang City, Pasaman, Pesisir Selatan and
Mentawai. In Padang city and Pariaman, considered as dense populated regions, the program had also
been supplemented by evacuation drills and exercises in relation with tsunami disasters.

The expected goals of the training programs and workshops of each district/cities are as follow:
1. Produce new local trainers for Emergeny management and Contingency Planning.
2. Establish Contingency Planning for provinces and Districts/Cities of West Sumatra.
The number of participants of every single workshop was 35 people, composed of disaster managers at
provincial level (SATKORLAK PBP/ Implementing Coordination Unit), disaster managers at District/
Municipality level called SATLAK (Implementing Unit), Military and police personnel, Academia, and
Non Government Organizations.
The facilitators of the trainings are the practitioners, officers from government and non government. They
are coordinated by BAKORNAS PBP in cooperation with Indonesian Society for Disaster Management(MPBI).
The Training and workshop program trained 210 persons in total, and at least 30 new local facilitators.
Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

The program produced 5 contingency plans in the districtlevels and 1 contingency plan at the provincial level.
The total budget provided for the 6 (six) Districts/Cities
in West Sumatra amounted to USD 99.000.

Workshop in West Sumatra- Background
Following the tsunami disaster that destroyed Ache and North Sumatra on 26 December 2004, theGovernment of Indonesia gives special attention to the region along the west coast of Sumatra which isthreatened by earthquake and tsunami hazard by strengthening capacity and awareness to the people andlocal government in that area.
- Objective
To strengthen the capability and awareness of the government and community in West Sumatra Provincethrough workshops on emergency management and contingency planning for earthquake and tsunami
hazard.
- Term/Time Frame
During 3 (three) months, from October 2005 to December 2005.
- Activities undertaken
To conduct workshops on emergency management and contingency planning for 5 (five) district levels(West Pasaman, Pariaman, South Pesisir, Padang City and Mentawai Islands) and 1 (one) province level(West Sumatra). The activity is conducted by BAKORNAS PBP, SATKORLAK PBP West Sumatra and 5
SATLAK PBP Districts, supported by United Nations (OCHA, WHO, WFP, UNDP, UNESCO).
- Major achievements
Each workshop is attended by 35 people. Today, 210 people have been trained. 30 new facilitators havebeen designated and 6 (six) contingency plans have been produced.
- Total budgets
USD 99.000- Contact details
BAKORNAS PBPJalan Ir. H Juanda 36 Jakarta.
Telp/Fax : 62-21-3504983
Emai: mitigasi@bakornaspbp.go.id
Contact Person:
Sugeng Triutomo, Director for Disaster Mitigation,Emai: striutomo@bakornaspbp.go.id

10

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

Good Practices in the Merapi Prone Area: Communities Constitute Main
Actors too
Indonesia Ⅳ

Merapi plays an extremely large role in the local community. This volcano has significant meanings, bothmaterial and spiritual, to the local community. Spiritually, it is believed that Merapi is a part of the axis oflife interconnected with the south sea, panggung krapyak monument, Sultan palace, the tugu monument,
and the volcano itself. On the positive side, the area surrounding the volcano is very fertile, and the bodyof the volcano provides a water reservoir.
On the downside, there are the eruptions that have the potential to damage the environment and claim
human lives. The eruption on November 22, 1994 confirmed this. The unpredicted direction of the
pyroclastic surge and the lack of preparedness on the part of the institution responsible, left 68 people
dead, one lost and 23 with serious and minor injuries. Disasters are often seen as the inevitable result of
Merapi’s eruptions. As up to now, we are unable to manage this risk completely. Not only because of
the exceptional force of the eruptions, but also because the timing of eruptions is difficult to predict. So,
when Merapi erupts again, will there be more victims? Couldn’t we more accurately examine various
phenomena that have occurred in the past and re-assess our disaster management? Of course we can.
The pyroclastic flows and pyroclastic surges erupting from Merapi are directed towards the west andsouthwest areas. But deviations towards this direction are not unusual. The probability of deviations
towards the north, northwest area, and south are close to 25%. Such deviations occurred during different
periods of eruption in 1942 –1943, 1953–1957, and 1992 – 1997. Based on the experience of the eruption
on November 22, 1997, the maximum limit of a deviant pyroclastic surge is 6.3 km. This is half the
distance achieved by a ‘normal’ pyroclastic surge that occurred on January 7 – 8, 1969, which reached 9.5
km outside the river valley and 13.5 km in the river valley.
On February 10, 2001, we were in a state of chaos because Merapi “exhaled a breath” that reached 5.5
km in Sat River, with ash falling in Dukun, Srumbung, Salam, Ngluwar and Muntilan sub-districts.
When Merapi erupted, the inhabitants of Kaliurang, Srumbung and Magelang were able to carry out anorderly evacuation. Inhabitants of the two most at-risk sub-villages, Kaliurang Utara and Sumber Rejo
had evacuated to temporary barracks, long before the appropriate authorities took action. To build theircapacity in conducting evacuations, the community had undertaken preparedness training. This wasreally a proactive action, which was produced by the community after the experience of series of disastermanagement trainings conducted by Disaster Research, Education & Management (DREaM) Working
Group of National Development University Yogyakarta and KAPPALA Indonesia Foundation. Thiswas done by more than 30 communities in the Merapi area, in eight sub-districts, in four regencies andtwo provinces. The aim of disaster management is to build a common perception. The source of threat
is studied in order to determine an early warning system. Mapping is carried out to determine risk andassess capacity. Emergency relief skills and several methods of evaluation are studied in order to build
preparedness capacity.
The training did not end there. Follow up was planned, and agreements got developed, and finally,
implemented. The Turgo –Turi community already had an observation post full of communications andobservation equipment, for a better early warning system. Family bunkers are also in the process of being
constructed to supplement the existing communal bunkers. Realizing that the poor state of the roads
hampers the evacuation process, the inhabitants of Kaliurang – Srumbung, on their own initiative, are
improving the quality of the roads. The people of Kaliadem have agreed to form a preparedness team fortourists. Many other plans have also been agreed on.

11

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

In closing, we can look at what the inhabitants of Merapi feel: if they are not prepared, when Merapi
erupts, the threat will result in a disaster, but in the end, these eruptions are an act of God. We must notforget that building capacity does not simply mean returning to normal so that we “are not hit with thesame stone twice”. Don’t be dependent on others, if you can do it yourself.

Appropriate tools for evacuation of victims.

Fist aid training for preliminary school: try to help yourself

12

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

Background
The Merapi volcano in Central Java, Indonesia, is an active volcano which threatens the people living in
its surrounding area. The area is situated in two provinces, Central Java and Jogjakarta. It is very fertileand densely populated.
Objective
To strengthen the capacity of the community living in the villages surrounding Merapi volcano, by giving
them the best practice in disaster preparedness.
Term/Time Frame
Series of activities conducted since 2001 until present.
Activities undertaken
Risk mapping, disaster preparedness training, simple early warning systems, evacuation routes, andevacuation techniques.
Major achievements
Trained and skilled people, early warning system, evacuation roads, evacuation site and bunkers.
Total Budgets
p.m.
Contact details
Disaster Research, Education & Management (DREaM), National Development University (UPN)
Yogyakarta and KAPPALA Indonesia Foundation.
c.q. Mr. Eko Teguh Paripurno at paripurno@telkom.net

13

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

Raising Earthquake Awareness of School Children : Experience of Indonesia
Indonesia Ⅴ

Due to its geographic location within the zone of interaction of Eurasian, Indo-australian and Pacifictectonic plates, Indonesia is a seismic prone country. School children are among the most vulnerable
groups toward earthquake hazard, due to the large number of school age population and vulnerability ofthe school buildings. To reduce the disaster risk of the school children, one of the non-structural mitigation
option developed within the country is an education program to raise the awareness of the school children
toward the earthquake hazard, where children can learn, in a more informal process within an extracurriculum program, about what is an earthquake, what are its impacts on human life and human activities,
what are the hazardous situations during an earthquake event and what can be done to protect oneself fromsuch hazardous events, etc. The program is designed to provide earthquake awareness to school children
through a series of children-instructor interaction, filled with fun exercises and games, to improve theirunderstanding of the various issues related to earthquake preparedness.
To support the Indonesian elementary schools with the qualified instructors to run the program, a seriesof Training for Trainers (ToT) program had been developed and implemented. The ToT participants
are selected among elementary school teachers from all over the country, in particular science andsport activities teachers, as well as (boy/girl) scout instructors. The ToT program was developed andimplemented in the year 1999 to 2001 by the Bandung Institute of Technology (ITB), in collaboration
with the Directorate General of Elementary and Secondary Education of the Ministry of Education, within
the Indonesian Urban Disaster Mitigation Project as part of the ADPC- Asian Urban Disaster Mitigation
Program. Support for the program came also from UNICEF and UNESCO. From the year 2002 onward,
the program was redeveloped and improved by the Disaster Mitigation Center of the ITB and eventuallyadopted by the Ministry of Education as part of its Broad-based Education Life-Skill Program and became
an annual training program of the Ministry which, until year 2005, trained more than 700 teachers/
instructors. The participants are selected among the elementary schools and local Department of Education
officials in the earthquake prone cities and districts from all over Indonesia.
The objectives of the ToT program are :• To provide the participants with the knowledge and understanding of earthquake hazard and its
related preparedness activities and skills necessary to anticipate the hazard• To provide the skills and guidance for the teachers in developing school earthquake preparedness
action planning together with the school community• To improve the skill of the teachers/instructors in disseminating the information and creating theawareness within the school community, and in particular preparing the school children for the
possible earthquake events
The benefit of the program includes improving the local
community awareness and improved school safety, notonly for earthquake hazard, but also for other type ofnatural (or man made) hazards (multi hazard approach).
The training introduces an alternative approach toearthquake science teaching through various fun
exercises and drills, which can improve the interestand understanding of the children to the substance andavoiding the subject from being boring or scary to thechildren.

Demonstrating vulnerable schoolbuilding to participants

The content of the training includes introduction toearthquake hazard and its impact on society and in particular on the school environment, knowledge
14

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

and skills related to earthquake risk reduction in schoolcommunity, from the point of view of school safety related
to school buildings and school activities, and action planning
process for school earthquake preparedness program.
It is expected that in the long run the ToT program willcontribute to the school earthquake safety improvement
through the improvement of the earthquake hazard awarenessraising program in the elementary schools within the country.
Design of awareness material onearthquake protection drill forschool children

Background:Indonesia is an earthquake prone country and school children belong to one of the most vulnerable groupsof the population toward earthquake hazard. Earthquake awareness program is required to be implemented
nationally.
Objective:• To provide the participants with the knowledge and understanding of earthquake hazard and its
related preparedness activities and skills necessary to anticipate the hazard• To provide the skills and guidance for the teachers in developing school earthquake preparedness
action planning together with the school community• To improve the skill of the teachers/instructors in disseminating the information and creating theawareness within the school community, and in particular preparing the school children for the
possible earthquake events
Term/Time Frame:
Program development : 1999-2001, training implementation from 2001 onward
Activities Undertaken:• Training of instructors for earthquake preparedness program in elementary schools
Major Activities:• Awareness program development consisting of training curriculum and material development• Pilot training• Full scale implementation
Total Budget:• About US $ 30.000 for the program and material development• About US $ 15.000 per year for running the national annual training program
Contact Details:Center for Disaster Mitigation- Institut Teknologi Bandung (CDM-ITB)PAU Building 8th Floor
Jl. Ganesa 10 Bandung 40132
Phone : 62 22 2504987 Ext 1819; 62 22 708 08949
Fax: 62 22 2504987; 2508125
Email : pmb@kppmb.itb.ac.id
Website :http://kppmb.itb.ac.id

15

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

Encouraged Nias IDPs in Sibolga Returning to Their Place of Origin through Grass
Roots Level Training on Community Based Disaster Risks Management (CBDRM)
Indonesia Ⅵ

Series of strong earthquake of more than 7.0 on Richter scale have hit Nias island and North Sumatra. In
various locations of Nias island high tide waves were seen, that many local people named local tsunami.
No matter how big the magnitude and how high the tide were, many of the Nias people were traumatized
and afraid to stay in their place of origin, especially those living along the coast, because many rumors
saying that Nias island is like a cup floating on water when there is imbalance will drown. They wereindications that it would likely to happen shortly, because part of some villages had already been flooded
according to the villagers. In fact, most of the infrastructures in the island were damaged. As the result of
this, many people moved out from the island. There were three main reasons for this: first of all, wrong
understanding of the island’s geological structure; secondly, trauma of tsunami tragedy that happened in
Aceh and; thirdly, they have no shelter to stay as most of the houses had been damaged.
Other locations represented nearby cities in North Sumatra. Since December 2004 and January 2005,
more than 650 people have been displaced to Sibolga, about eight hours by ferry from Gunung Sitoli, thecapital of Nias District. They were accommodated in two temporary shelters; 350 people stayed in unused SMK-PGRI building and 300 people lived in the tents located in Sibuluan village. Many more lived
with relatives or host families scattered all over Sibolga. Unfortunately, no accurate data was available
due to high movement of the IDPs and the local government did not recognize them as IDPs but rather
as guests from Nias for their relatives or neighbours in Sibolga. Even five months after being displaced,
they still haven’t received minimum aids materials, neither from the government, nor from NGOs, as mostof them has been focusing on Aceh emergency response and recovery. In May 2005, IIDP dispatched anassessment team. One of the findings was that the majority of the Internally Displaced People (IDP) had
no idea about tsunami and earthquake, because in fact, no adequate information had been provided by
local authorities.
In response to the situations and conditions above, IIDP, with the financial support of IOM Indonesia and
ECHO, started providing basic information related to tsunami, earthquake, the dos and don’ts before andafter its occurence, how to live healthy and comfortably in the camp. After discussion of this idea, it was
concluded that a combined interventions should be done, not just by re-producing and distributing posters
and flyers (IEC materials), but also by providing the communities with Community Based Disaster Risk
Management (CBDRM) Training.
IIDP re-produced 7 types of posters and flyers with the following topics: Living healthy while displaced,
Living comfort in temporary shelters, What has to be done for anticipating an earthquake, What has to bedone during an earthquake, What has to be done after an earthquake or a disaster event, and finally, about
Tsunami.
Special sessions on about earthquakes and geological conditions of the Nias island in parallel with the
distribution of posters and flyers were given during the training. After knowing that the rumors sayingthat Nias island will drown in the near future was wrong, and acquiring a better knowledge about theearthquake phenomenon, local people became more confident and ready to return to their home land. By
the end of June 2005, almost all IDPs confidently return to their homeland. There was only one old lady
that till the last minutes, when the ferry was about to leave, did not want to join the group already on
board. After intensive dialogue and using persuasive approaches, that lady finally got into the ferry withthe group returning to their homeland.

16

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

The Children actively involved

The lactating women also involved

Program Profile:
Background: During that time, some institutions (both international and national) implemented livelihood
activities through cash for work, farming, fisheries and other productive activities, but very few deal
with disaster mitigation, community preparedness and distribution of IEC (information, Education andCommunication) materials. IIDP believed that disaster mitigation and preparedness efforts were equallyimportant as the emergency response and/or reconstruction efforts. Even in the long run, this effort willplay a very significant role in anticipating such disasters and reducing the number of victims as long as
people have adequate information about the hazards and its characteristics. Furthermore, people in theaffected areas could recover from trauma and keep their healthy life as long as they receive appropriate
information on keeping healthy when displaced, how to deal with trauma and other productive activities.
Objectives:

1. Encouraged IDPs of Nias in Sibolga to return to their homeland
2. Developed local capacity on risks mapping, mitigation and contingency planning

Time frame: 3 weeks
Achievements:
1. Good IEC materials i.e. posters and flyers with relevant topics and easy to understand with highcommunicability could be effectively used for awareness building
2. CBDRM is one of the most effective approaches to build internal capacity, to analyze risks and todevelop understanding of the people about their role in disaster management
3. Intensive facilitation from well-trained facilitators is one of key factors of success for local
capacity building and improvement of people’s awareness4. In fact, the interventions made by IIDP with financial supports of IOM and ECHO is one of thefactors that encouraged the displaced people to return to their homeland.
5. As a follow up of the Sibolga program, on September-December 2005, IIDP conducted CBDRM
training at grassroots level targeting 1,000 local community members in Nias districts. It is hoped
this kind of lessons learned could be replicated in other places.
Total Budget: US $10,000
Contact Detail: Indonesian Institute for Disaster Preparedness (IIDP)
Jalan Tebet Barat VC no 18 Jakarta Selatan 12810-Indonesia
Emai: iidp@cbn.net.id
Phone: +62-21-70660 592, +62-21-8131199 58965
Fax: +62-21-831 4691
Contact person: Ms. Chandra Lukitasari, Executive Director IIDP
HP
: +62-811 966901
17

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

Insurance Program for Wind and Water Related Disasters in Korea
1. Background and Objective

Republic of Korea

Since the Korean Government began to support damaged private facilities in the 1960s, people’s demandand hence the support coverage has kept increasing. People simply think that the government shouldcompensate, not support, disaster damages more and more.
To minimize government’s burden and citizens’ moral hazard, an insurance program for wind and water
related disasters was introduced. This insurance program aims to improve the current various support
programs offered for free, to enhance the voluntary safety culture, and to reduce country’s budgetaryburden.
2. Target Coverage and Current Status
Based on the Natural Disaster Countermeasures Act, houses, green houses, and cattle sheds are selected
as pilot objects that can be covered by the insurance, when those facilities are damaged by typhoon, flood,
torrential rain, storm, wind, waves, and storm surge.
To promote the insurance program, nine local governments are selected and funded for pilot test. To
estimate insurance rate and other basic insurance data, wind and water insurance management maps areproduced based on the previous damages and future risks.
In June 2004 a draft for Wind and Water Related Insurance Act was proposed. In May and October, 2005
advanced notice for the Act was issued and the Act was reviewed by the National Assembly, respectively.
3. Future Direction
If facilities that have insurance coverage are damaged by natural disasters, the Government does notsupport the recovery costs of those facilities. Since the insurance program, however, is at the early stage
and if a structure, which is supposed to have insurance and is not insured currently, is damaged, thesupport from the Government will bring support at a minimum level and the support will be reduced
gradually to minimize the confusion.
Database systems that can compile various statistical data for object facilities will be established andmanaged by the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA). Research on wind and water related
disasters will be conducted to foster insurance business.
Central and local governments are encouraged to loan and support related budgets for target objects and topromote the insurance program with respect to recovery budget support.
The insurance program can be bought through ordinary insurance underwriters, agents, canvassers, andcompanies. It is also possible to sell the wind and water related insurance as a part of other insurancessuch as fire insurance and casualty insurance.

18

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement<Cattle Shed Damaged by Blizzard in 2004>- Nonsan City, Chungnam Province -<Damaged House by Landslide in 2003>- Samcheok City, Gangwon Province -- Background
People keep asking more compensation (not supported) when private property damage occurs- Objective
To reduce government financial burden and minimize people’s moral hazard- Term/Time Frame
1997~2003: Feasibility Study
2004: Establishment of Wind and Water Related Insurance Act (draft bill) by Task Force
2005: First Reading in the State Council and referred to the National Assembly- Activities Undertaken
The program is to be implemented in nine “pilot” local governments in 2006
- Major Achievement
Private owners are expected to take care of their facilities and houses more carefully and Government’s
budgetary burden is expected to decrease- Total Budget$5.9 million ($5.2 million from national budget and $0.7 million from local budget)- Contact Details
Mr. Dugkeun Park, Ph.D., Senior Analyst,
National Institute for Disaster Prevention, National Emergency Management Agency
253-42, 7th Floor, Gongdeok-Dong, Mapo-Ku, Seoul, 121-719, KOREA
e-mail: dr_park@nema.go.kr, tel: +82-(0)2-3274-2244~5, fax: +82-(0)2-3274-2246

19

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

Effectiveness of Fighting the Avian Influenza by Efficient Prevention Work
Mongolia

In connection with the death of birds and a newly developed situation, the National emergency
management agency organized on 8th of August 2005 a working meeting by inviting leaders andspecialists from the Ministry of health, the Ministry of food and agriculture, and the Department of state
professional inspection, and the Central laboratory of the state veterinary and hygiene. We developed andimplemented the next measures jointly with these organizations.
We confirmed the conclusions of laboratory analysis and took some measures to determine the subtype of
the avian influenza viruses. We are conducting a survey by screening & monitoring in local areas, in orderto have this epidemic under control. We analyzed a total of 205 dead wild birds’ samples. From them, wediscovered H5N1 viruses on 4 birds, which died in the lake of Erkel in Khovsgol province and in the lakeof Khunt in Bulgan province.
In this case, we provided a professional instruction and recommendation. We also despatched a joint
working group from the related organizations to the Khovsgol province in order to work on it.
We organized a work and took some measures to prevent the possible spread of the infection by issuingorders from the head of the Department of state professional inspection to prohibit temporarily theimportation of birds and animals related products from China and Russia, which are connected to the footand mouth diseases, as well as the avian influenza in both our southern and northern regions.
All of the 111 people and 4200 domestic animals around the lake of Erkhel in Khovsgol province havebeen vaccinated against the A type virus of the avian influenza.
We also took some measures to prohibit the use of water and the entrance of the domestic animals to thelake in which many birds died. The households were moved by 4 kilometers away from this lake.
(from the study issued by the Department of veterinary of the Ministry for food and agriculture, we findthat a total of 10 economic entities and more than 2000 households are raising a poultry in the nation,
which is equivalent to about 200 thousand birds)
We followed the policy about the vaccination of all the domestic birds in Mongolia in order to protect the
population from the avian influenza. We also planned to buy 300000 doses of vaccine with the help of thefund given by the Government.
We screened the households around the Erkhel lake in Alag-Erdene soum of the Khovsgol province.
During this screening, we extracted a sample from 5 children who complained of fever and cough. Then,
we conducted an analysis on these samples by immuno chromatograf to detect the A B virus of avian
influenza. But all the results were negative. We also conducted an analysis on these samples to detect asubtype of the A virus such as H1, H3, H5 and special variances of B type virus. But all these results were
negative too. We provided 5 pieces of personal protection equipment, necessary medicine and feeding
environment to the team who worked in Khovsgol province to gather, transport, and store the samples. We
also received some personnel protective equipment from USAID.
The National center for research of communicable diseases delivered 250 doses of avian influenza
prevention vaccine to Khovsgol province and immunized the population at risk. In addition, the National
center for research of communicable diseases also delivered 100 doses of vaccine to the health center ofKhovsgol province and vaccinated the people working in the poultry and pig farms.
During this time more than 600 migratory and wild birds died of avian influenza.

20

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement- Back ground:

There are no background. The avian influenza occurred for the first time in
Mongolia.

- Objective:

to prevent the avian influenza from spreading from wild bird to domestic bird
and from bird to human- Term/Time Frame:from August till November 2006 when all the migratory birds will beback to tropical countries.

- Activities undertaken: Identification of viruses, decontaminations, establishment ofa restricted zone and vaccination etc- Major achievements: prevent the avian influenza from spreading from wild bird todomestic bird and from bird to human- Total Budget:¥258 million- Contact details:

T.Enkhbat specialist for health issues at the Operational Coordination andManagement Division, NEMA phone: 263567
email: enkhbat@emer.pmis.gov.mn

21

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

Operation Lionheart
Singapore

Background

1. Since 1990, SCDF has a rotating overseas rescue contingent ready to provide assistance to countries
in the Asia-Pacific region that have been hit by major natural or man-made disasters. Under the mission
name of Operation Lionheart, the contingent is on a 24-hour standby and ready at 2 hours’ notice to departto the affected country. The contingent comprises over 40 personnel and is self-sufficient in terms of food,logistics and equipment for a duration of two weeks. The personnel are trained and equipped in accordancewith INSARAG standardised guidelines for disaster response.
Major Overseas Missions Undertaken
2.

So far, 8 Operation Lionheart missions have been undertaken as follows:
Earthquake in Baguio City, Philippines – Jul 1990;
Highland Towers Collapse in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia – Dec 1993;
921 Earthquake in Taichung, Taiwan – Sep 1999;
Asian Tsunami Disaster in Aceh, Indonesia – Dec 2004;
Asian Tsunami Disaster in Phuket, Thailand – Dec 2004;
Nias Island Earthquake in Gunung Sitoli, Indonesia – Mar 2005;
Sumatran Forest Fires in Rokan Hilir, Indonesia – Aug 2005; andSouth Asian Earthquake in Muzaffarabad, Pakistan – Oct 2005.

a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.

3. In the past 2 years, Operation Lionheart contingents were deployed successfully on 5 ocassions andthe details are as follows:a. Asian Tsunami Disaster in Aceh, Indonesia
A total of 50 SCDF rescuers were despatched to assist in search and rescue operations in Banda
Aceh for 12 days from 31 Dec 2004 to 11 Jan 2005. In total, they assisted in the extricationof 93 bodies. They also worked with the Singapore Armed Forces’ (SAF) medical unit in the
Refugee Relief Centre at the SECATA Camp which housed an estimated 2,000 people. They
attended to patients, assisted in dispensing medicine and constructing drainage and sanitation
facilities, as well as providing emergency behavior support for traumatized refugees and Bahasa
Indonesia translation assistance.

Operation Lionheart contingent conducting rescue operation

22

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplementb.

Asian Tsunami Disaster in Phuket, Thailand
A 23-member contingent to Phuket was deployed for 12 days from 31 Dec 2004 to 11 Jan 2005
to conduct search and rescue (SAR) operations at the Khao Lak area, which comprised hotels
and resort facilities. The damages at Khao Lak stretched for about 10km along the coast and
300m inland. The waves had destroyed buildings and uprooted trees, with many bodies trapped
under debris and water. On 1 Jan 2005, the contingent was reinforced with an additional 57
rescuers. Search operations were also conducted at Charlie Beach Resort on Phi Phi Island.
The search and rescue operations at Khao Lak included the conduct of joint air recce with theRepublic of Singapore Air Force’s (RSAF’s) Super Puma and sea recce with the Royal Thai
Navy. In total, the SCDF contingent extricated 14 bodies.

c. Nias Island Earthquake in Gunung Sitoli, Indonesia
On 29 March 2005, SCDF despatched a total of 40 rescuers to assist in SAR operations on Nias
Island in the aftermath of a destructive earthquake. The contingent conducted search operations
from 30 March to 4 April 2005, and was able to rescue two survivors and recovered 13 bodies
from the earthquake-hit town of Gunung Sitoli. SCDF also provided relief supplies to the local
community prior to the contingent’s departure from Nias. Upon requests for equipment andexpertise in debris removal by the Indonesian authorities, SCDF donated 15 sets of portablebreakers valued at S$60,000 to them. SCDF also sent 2 Disaster Assistance and Rescue TeamSpecialists over to Nias on 8 April 2005 to provide training for the TNI personnel on the use of
the portable breakers.
d.

Sumatran Forest Fires in Rokan Hilir, Indonesia
On 18 Aug 2005, SCDF contingent consisting of 54 personnel was deployed to Sumatra toassist in tackling the widespread forest fires there. The contingent worked closely with the Landand Forest Division, Indonesian Ministry of Environment and local Polhut (Forest Ranger /Polisi Kehutanan) on the areas of deployment. Over a period of 4 days (19 to 22 Aug 2005), thecontingent operated at 6 different sites comprising 3 wild land vegetation sites and 3 oil palm
plantation fields. Portable pumps and jets were the main equipment used by the fire fighters totackle these smouldering peat fires.

e. South Asian Earthquake in Muzaffarabad, Pakistan
SCDF deployed an overseas rescue contingent consisting of 44 personnel to Pakistan on 10 Oct
2005 to assist the local authorities in search and rescue efforts. During the 12-day deployment,
the contingent operated under the umbrella of the Pakistani military as well as the UN On-Site
Operations Command Centre (OSOCC). The contingent assisted in the provision of medical
aid at a central Muzaffarabad base hospital as well as the heli-evacuation of quake victims fromsurrounding towns.
Operations in Muzaffarabad came to a close on 18 Oct 2005 when the focus of relief efforts
shifted from short term relief operations to long term recovery work by humanitarian agencies
such as the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the World Food Programme (WFP). In total,
over 500 casualties were treated by SCDF personnel during their deployment.
Conclusion
4. SCDF will continue to undertake an active role in maintaining our operational readiness to respondto any major disasters beyond our shores, extending search and rescue assistance to needy countries in theregion.
23

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

Contact details
5. Any queries or clarifications should be directed to MAJ Albert Seow, Assistant Director Operations
Planning (SEOW_kok_piat@scdf.gov.sg) or MAJ Alvin Low, Senior Officer Projects (ALVIN_low@scdf.
gov.sg).

24

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

Rapid Emergency Assessment and Coordination Team – REACT
Tajikistan Ⅰ

The Disaster Management Partnership in Tajikistan – Rapid
Emergency Assessment and Coordination Team (REACT)
was established in 2001 by UN OCHA and the Ministry of
Emergency Situations (MoES) to promote the sharing of
information, logistics and other resources between partners activein disaster management sector. Initially established to improvedisaster response coordination, over the past few years thepartnership has considerably expanded its activities, which now
includes coordination efforts in broader disaster management
areas, including community based disaster mitigation, hazard
mapping and GIS. An indicator of the usefulness and successof REACT is the increasing number of partners, drawn fromamong international organisations, as well as from NGOs andGovernment. Presently REACT is constituted by 65 different organisations: 16 Government agencies, 7
donor organisations, 9 UN agencies, 28 International NGOs, and 5 local NGOs.
REACT has proved invaluable in mitigating, preparing and responding to recent disasters nationwide.
Recently, during three major disasters in Tajikistan, July floods of 2004, heavy snowfall of February 2005,
and floods of June-July 2005, the REACT partnership worked closely and in a very coordinated way toaddress the needs of the affected population during the emergencies and supported the local authorities indealing with the impact of the disaster.
Within the REACT Parnership, 5 sectoral groups have been established to deal with: 1- Food Aid, 2- Nonfood items, including shelter, 3- Health, 4- Water and Sanitation, and 5- Education. These sectoral groups
are working towards developing strategies for effective preparedness and response in their specific areas.
Their work feeds into updating of the Inter-Agency Contingency Plan for Tajikistan. A Rapid Response
Coordination Group has been established within the partnership to reassure efficient disaster response.
All information on all aspects of disaster management is shared on www.untj.org, where interested people
or organizations can find up-to-date information on the overall situation in the country as well as recent
disasters.
REACT partners are also working on the implementation of the outcomes of the World Conference on
Disaster Reduction, 2005 – the Hyogo Framework of Action and supporting the Government in creating a
National Disaster Preparedness Plan for Tajikistan.
In order to ensure effective coordination of disastermanagement activities in the regions, Regional REACT
groups have been established in Rasht Valley, Zerafshan
Valley and Kulyab zone. These regional coordinationgroups conduct regular meetings and carry out joint
assessments of disaster affected areas.

REACT meeting in progress

25

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

Structure of the Disaster Risk Management Partnership in Tajikistan

Please give us the following information for readers to search.
- Background: Since 2001, the UN has been leading a disaster management coordination group formerly
known as the Rapid Emergency Assessment and Coordination Team (REACT), which originally brought
together the UN, NGOs and the Red Cross with the Ministry of Emergency Situations (MoES). Buildingon UNDP support, REACT has become the national Disaster Management Team, whose activities have
expanded over the past year to include coordination efforts in broader disaster management areas,
including community-based mitigation and hazard mapping.More information can be found at www.untj.
org- Objective: Establishment of a strong and unified coordination mechanism, which fosters national
leadership and coordinates all international actors in the field of disaster management in Tajikistan.
- Term/Time Frame: 2001 – ongoing- Activities undertaken: REACT established at capital level with a specific ToR; Five sectoral groups
established, dealing with Health, Water and Sanitation, Non Food Items, Food, Shelter; Regional REACT
teams established in 3 regions of the country; Monthly meetings conducted; REACT activated during
natural disasters, responses were coordinated and timely assistance provided to affected population.
- Major achievements: Participation of more than 50 national state entities, local and internationalorganizations in frequent REACT Forums. “One-stop” location for information collection anddissemination.
- Total Budget: approx. USD 20,000/annually- Contact details:i) Mr. Islom Usmanov, Deputy Minister, MoES,Tajikistan: (992 372) 214820, 211331ii) Ms. Nigina Alieva, REACT Focal Point, UN Disaster Risk Management Project. Email: nigina.alieva@
undp.org Tel.: (992 372) 215932, 278035. Mobile: (992 917) 733 623
iii) Mr. Khusrav Sharifov, UN Disaster Risk Management Project. Email: khusrav.sharifov@undp.org,
Tel.: (992 372) 215932, 278035. Mobile (992 917) 707 858

26

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

Lake Sarez Risk Mitigation Project (LSRMP), Tajikistan
Tajikistan Ⅱ

In 1911, a massive rockslide caused by an earthquake in the Pamir Mountains of eastern Tajikistancompletely blocked the valley of the Bartang (Murghab) River, a headwater tributary to the Amu Darya
river basin. Lake Sarez, which formed behind this landslide dam, now contains an estimated 17 km3 ofwater. Studies suggest that a major outburst flood from Lake Sarez would devastate human infrastructurein the Amu Darya river basin downstream from the lake in the Central Asian region, affecting as many as
5,000,000 people. The population most at risk from such a flood are those living in the first 540 km below
the lake in the countries of Tajikistan and Afghanistan.
Taking this into account, the President of Tajikistan released an international appeal to address this issue.
Following several missions and expert consultancies, Lake Sarez Risk Mitigation Project was designed
and co-financed, using various sources and types of funds were arranged for the project. The World Bankand the Government of Tajikistan articulated an overall project framework, and responsibility for theoverall implementation was assigned to the Ministry of Emergency Situations and Civil Defense (MoES)of Tajikistan.
The goal of the project is to reduce vulnerability to a potential major flood in valleys of the Bartang andPyanj rivers of Tajikistan and to reduce the risk of flooding in other Central Asian countries.
The target area of the project is the vulnerable communities situated in the 540 kilometers along theBartang river in Gorno-Badakhshan Autonomous Oblast (GBAO) and Pyanj river in the south of
Tajikistan, all the way from Lake Sarez to Hamadoni District (former Moscowski) of Khatlon Oblast. The
Bartang and Pyanj rivers flow through populated narrow valleys down from the Usoy Dam to Hamadoni
District. At that place, the Pyanj River widens. However, a USACE model developed in 1998 indicatesthat a worst-case flood would form again beyond the wider valley areas, so that the very fast-moving flood
crest would still be 5 meters high at the town of Termez on the Uzbekistan/Afghanistan border some 1400
kilometers below Sarez.
The project has four components, which include:• Design and installation of a monitoring and warning system. This system will be able to (i) sense
the beginning of an outburst flood or a substantial
increase the danger, and (ii) send a signal thatwill trigger alarms in the most vulnerable villages
below the dam, and (iii) provide long-term dataneeded to understand better the technical options
for reducing the likelihood of a flood.
• Social training and safety related supplies.
This part is also known as the Social Component.
• Studies to assess possible long-term solutions
to the Sarez outburst flood hazard.
• Institutional strengthening. Consultants’services, incremental operating costs andequipment to strengthen the capacity of the GoT
Lake Sarez
organizations responsible for implementing the
project.
The Project is an excellent example of expertise and ownership within a government institution - in thiscase the Ministry of Emergency Situations. The Usoy Department that now bears full responsibility for
27

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

The Project is an excellent example of expertise and ownership within a government institution in this case the Ministry of Emergency Situations. The Usoy Department that now bears full
responsibility for operation and maintenance of a technologically sophisticated monitoring and
Early Warning Systems (M&EWS) has considerably improved its capacity and is quite capable tooperation
andofmaintenancea future.
technologically sophisticated monitoring and Early Warning Systems
take care
the system inofthe(M&EWS) has considerably improved its capacity and is quite capable to take care of the system in the
In general, the LSRMP is geared to achieve its development objective, which is to help alert andfuture.
prepare vulnerable people in case of a disaster associated with an outburst flood from Lake Sarez
In general, the LSRMP is geared to achieve its development objective, which is to help alert and prepare
and other frequent natural hazards such as mudslides, rockfalls, avalanches and seasonal floods.
vulnerable
people incaseisofthea situation
disaster faced
associatedoutburst floodand other
One indicationof thisby thewith
UsoyanDepartment
on 14from
July Lake
2005, Sarez
when thefrequent
as anmudslides,
rockfalls,
and toseasonal
floods.
One
indication ofearlynatural
warninghazards
systemsuch
issuedalarm level
1 at the avalanches
Usoy Dam due
the raisingof thewater
this isthesituation
faced
by
the
Usoy
Department
on
14
July
2005,
when
the
early
warningsystemissuedlevel by more than 25 cm within 24 hours, which was detected by the real-time monitoringan alarm
level
1
at
the
Usoy
Dam
due
to
the
raising
of
the
water
level
by
more
than
25
cm
within24
system.
hours, which was detected by the real-time monitoring system.

Please give us the following information for readers to search.
- Background:
Lake
Sarez
(LSRMP)waswasinitiatedinitiated
Government- Background:Lake
SarezRisk
RiskMitigation
Mitigation Project
Project (LSRMP)
by bythetheGovernmentof of
Tajikistan
and supported
by International
Community
in orderto reduce
the riskof LakeTajikistan
and supported
by International
Community
in orderto reduce
the ofriskoutburstof outburstof Sarez.
The Lake
lake wasformedby awasmassiverockslidecausedrockslideby an earthquake
in 1911. Lake
contains
Sarez.
The lake
formedby a massive
caused by backan earthquakeback Sarez
in 1911.
LakeofSarez
contains
17 km3 of water,
is considered
to bepeople
a threatliving
to fiveinmillion
17 km3water,and is considered
to be aandthreatto five million
Centralpeople
Asian living
countries,
in Central
Asian countries,
especially in
Tajikistan
and Afghanistan.
The lakein thein Pamir
especiallyin Tajikistan
and Afghanistan.
The
lake is locatedin the easternpartisoflocatedTajikistan,eastern
partofTajikistan,in
Pamir
Mountainsof
Gorno-Badakhshan
Autonomous
Oblast.
More
Mountains of Gorno-Badakhshan Autonomous Oblast. More information can be found at www.sarez.tj
information can be found at www.sarez.tj

Please give us the following information for readers to search.

0H- Objective: Reduce vulnerability to a potential major flood in valleys of the Bartang and Pyanj rivers of
Tajikistan and to reduce the risk of flooding in other Central Asian countries.
- Term/Time Frame: December 2000 – December 2005
- Activities undertaken: (i) A comprehensive risk assessment and community preparedness, as well as
training activities have been successfully completed; (ii) Installation of the monitoring and early warning
28

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

systems in Lake Sarez was completed in December 2004; (iii) The Usoy Department within the Ministryof Emergency Situations and Civil Defense has been established and is in charge of the operation andmaintenance of the systems. Its staff have received training and continue to be trained on the operation andmaintenance of the systems; and (iv) A study on long-term solutions was completed in March 2005, whichmakes recommendations for a medium-term mitigation plan for Lake Sarez.
- Major achievements: Vulnerable communities trained and preparedness plans developed; A real time
monitoring and early warning system installed; MoES staff trained at all levels to use and maintain thesystem- Total Budget: USD 4,290,000 mln. (Government of Tajikistan USD 0.17 mln, Government of
Switzerland grant USD 2.9 mln, USAID grant USD 0.25 mln, Aga Khan Foundation grant USD 0.5 mln,
International Development Agency USD 0.47 mln);- Contact details: Mr. Islom Usmanov, Deputy Minister, Ministry of Emergency Situations and Civil
Defense of Tajikistan. Tel.: (992 372) 214820, Mobile (992 917) 747 392

29

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

Community-Based Evacuation System
ThailandTambon Khuk Khak of Takua Pa district, Phang Nga province
Before December 26, 2004

1. Background
Nestled amidst coastal shoreline of Andaman Sea and mountain range covered with tropical forest,
Tambon Khuk Khak of Takua Pa district, Phang Nga province, Thailand has naturally endowed withscenic surroundings such as beautiful beaches and serene tropical forest. This natural endowment has
attracted thousands of tourists near and far to visit this bustling town. Tambon Kunk Khak is composedof 7 villages with 4,704 inhabitants or 2,594 households. Fishery and off – shore aquaculture activities
have long been the sole major source of income among the majority of the inhabitants. Until very recently,
tourism related activities have become other sources of income generation. Hundreds of hotels and resorts,
shops and restaurants have been erected to accommodate and to cater the influx both foreign and local
tourists. Consequently, the standard of living and livelihood of the people have been better off.

After December 26, 2004

30

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

Then came, the most devastating natural disaster, the Indian Ocean Tsunami of 26 December 2004. Withinminutes, 300 lives of native inhabitants were lost and missing, 556 houses and 72 hotels and resorts,
livelihoods, infrastructure were destroyed, setting back hard – earned development gains for decades.
2. Objective(1) To develop the model of systematic, standardized and community – based tsunami evacuation
system.
(2) To be knowledge – base venue where everyone can visit and learn about systematic, standardized
and community – based evacuation system.
3. Component of the Model
So as to prevent and reduce the impact of potential disaster particularly the tsunami, Puan Pung Pa
Voluntary Foundation (Thai Red Cross Society), Phang Nga local authorities and community members andDepartment of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation had integrated and developed the model of community
based tsunami evacuation system at Bang Niang village, Tambon Khuk Khak Ta Kua Pa district, Phang
Nga province. This community-based evacuation system model comprises 5 components as follows;(1) Evacuation building that can accommodate 200 persons with the area of coverage within the radiusof 500 meters from the building. Besides, this building will be equipped with facilities, equipments
and food that meet the standard requirement.
(2) Warning tower. This tower has been fully equipped with modern and appropriate devices forreceiving and disseminating warning information.
(3) Evacuation route maps and signs with the symbols and inscription in English and Thai.
(4) Parking area and traffic routes around the evacuation building.
(5) Life jackets and other basic necessities.
Besides, the management of evacuation system has been laid to ensure the effectiveness of the system inthe face of emergency. This evacuation system management comprises 8 parts;(1) Rapid and safe evacuation system(2) Maintenance system of evacuation building and evacuation routes(3) 24 – hour information receiving and disseminating system(4) Security and road traffic system(5) Catering and basic necessities distribution system(6) Evacuee registration system(7) Health and environment surveillance system(8) Evacuation drill system(9) Public participation preparation system

Warning Tower

Bang Niang villagers preparedness approach(CBDRM) with ADPC

31

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement

Evacuation Route Map

Evacuation Building Place

4. Implementation Guideline
4.1 Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation (DDPM) had been assigned to shoulder the
responsibility of 2 abovementioned parts (part (1) and part (8)), which can be elaborated as follows;
4.2 DDPM and ADPC (Asian Disaster Preparedness Center) jointly launched the community – based
disaster risk management (CBDRM) activity at Bang Niang village to put public participation
preparation system into gear. Through this CBDRM approach, the people in the community had thechance to fully participate and make the decision in mapping the evacuation routes, locating safetyareas etc. Besides, the awareness and preparedness among the general public had been created, andthe community leaders were well equipped to be the safety guides.
5. Achievements
Bang Niang community-based tsunami evacuation model has been launched since August, 2005. Many
activities have been materialized and can be elaborated as follows;(1) Provincial Evacuation Action Plan has been formulated and approved by provincial governor in acapacity of Provincial Civil Defense Commander. This evacuation plan comprises 5 main components:• Legal framework• Objectives• Implementation Guideline- Division of Responsibility of Core Agencies- Supportive Agencies and NGOs
• Target Group of Evacuee• Implementation Procedure- Pre-Disaster Phase- On-Going Phase(2) Local authorities, NGOs and community jointly conducted the evacuation drill on 16 December, 2005.
Approximately 2,000 persons and 1,000 observers participated in the drill. Such a drill will be carriedout twice annually to ensure the effectiveness of evacuation procedure, to maintain the awareness andpreparedness of all stakeholders, and to improve the deficiency in the procedure.
6. Conclusion(1) The people of Bang Niang village has fully participated in developing this community-based
evacuation system model. Their intervention started from formulating evacuation plan through theevacuation drill, which is compatible with public participation principle, think together, plan together,
activate together and evacuate together.
(2) Bang Niang village community-based evacuation system will serve as the role model of all
stakeholders’ intervention to sustainably achieve the 8 – systems – objectives; (a) community
participation system, (b) warning information system, (c) warning information dissemination system,
32

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Good Practices 2006 Supplement(d) volunteer system, (e) security system, (f) evacuation building management system, (g) disabled
evacuee assistance system, and (h) tourist evacuation system.
Budget

1. Evacuation building : 5 million Baht (125,000 US dollars)
2. Warning tower: 900,000 Baht ( 22,500 US dollars)

Contact Details
Suporn Ratananakin (Mr.)
Director of Research and International Cooperation
Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation
3/12 U-Thong Nok Road
Dusit, Bangkok 10300
ThailandTel : 66-2- 243 3518
Fax : 66 -2-243 5279

33

Asian Disaster Reduction Center March 2006

Total Disaster Risk Management
Good Practices 2006 Supplement
March 2006

Asian Disaster Reduction Center
Hitomiraikan 5F, 1-5-2 Wakihamakaigan-doriChuo-ku, Kobe 651-0073, JAPAN
Tel: +81-78-262-5540 Fax: +81-78-262-5546
Website: http://www.adrc.or.jp
E-mail: rep@adrc.or.jp
Copyright (c) Asian Disaster Reduction Center, 2006.
All rights reserved.
Kobe, Japan