2. Highlights of 2009/2010

2. Highlights of 2009/2010
2-1. DRR Policy Peer Review (Pilot Project)
The ADRC launched its new initiative "DRR Policy Peer Review" as a pilot in FY 2009 forfurther supporting the efforts for the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA)in member countries, as well as for promoting information sharing and strengthening the relations
among member countries.
Peer Review is generally the evaluation and review of certain subjects by other professional
and technical people in the same field in order to appropriately maintain or enhance the quality ofthe subjects based on high technical point of view. In the context of this project, it means thatoutside experts from member countries and in the field of disaster risk reduction review andassess disaster risk reduction related measures, programs and policies of member countries forfurther promoting disaster risk reduction.
The topic selected for the year's review was "disaster education and public awareness," andBhutan and Thailand were selected as countries to be reviewed. After country reports weresubmitted by the two target countries, each reviewer team consisting of a member countryrepresentative, an expert from Japan, and an ADRC officer visited Bhutan and Thailand
respectively as explained below.
ThailandOn 17-18 November 2009, the ADRC reviewer
team comprised of Mr. Naoki Shiratsuchi of theJapanese Red Cross Society, Dr. Alvaro Antonyan of theArmenian National Survey for Seismic Protection
Agency, and one of ADRC staff members visitedThailand.
During the two day survey, the team visited various

Fig.2-1-1 Interview survey in Thailand

ministries and institutions, including the Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation(DDPM, ADRC's counterpart in Thailand), the Ministry of Education, the National Disaster
Warning Center, and the Thai Red Cross Society to examine how disaster education and publicawareness have been promoted by both governmental and non-governmental organizations inThailand.
Through the survey, the reviewer team identified various CBDRM and disaster education
activities which have been undertaken by various actors in Thailand. The team also learnt that,Thailand, as the lead shepherd country of the ASEAN Regional Drawing Competition, has playeda key role in the organization of this regional event with the main aim of raising public awarenessof disaster risk reduction.
Based on the observation of the review team, the following strengths and weaknesses wereidentified.

3

Strengths

Weaknesses

・ Thai government's strong commitment to making disastermanagement a priority
・ Well established institutional arrangement in national andlocal government for decision making and coordination atpolicy level・ Active approach to support the strengthening of disaster risk
management cooperation in the ASEAN region
・ A fair allocation of budget to disaster risk management efforts
at the national level
・ High level of awareness, motivation, capabilities of officials
at the national level
・ Diligence, educational level, discipline of the Thai people・ "Home-court advantage" of many international disaster risk
management organizations in Thailand, including theUNISDR, ADPC, and the IFRC. Also, regional support by
JICA and ADRC
・ Because Thailand is not a particularly disaster-prone country,
there is some breathing time to prepare (in disaster-prone
countries where large-scale disasters occur frequently, many
resources have to be allocated to relief and recovery
activities, leaving little left to prepare for futureemergencies).
・ Existing MoUs and plans that stipulates strong cooperation
between related agencies

・ Capacity of personnel at the local
level in disaster management
・ Need to prioritize the disasterrisk management and allocate
more budgets at the local
government
・ More clear mechanism forcoordination and information
sharing at project/activity level・ Securing qualified personnel at
the local level, as many roles areplayed by a small number ofprominent members of thecommunity (such as schoolteachers)
・ Activity monitoring, datacollection and analysis, outcome
measurement
・ Further promotion of the ASEAN
Regional Drawing Competition,including active participation ofmember countries andpartnership with other agencies

Based on the above observation of the "strengths" and "weaknesses" of Thailand, the reviewer
team provided the following recommendations to Thailand.
1.

Maintain and develop the pace of efforts at the central government level2.

Strengthen efforts at the local and community level3.

Set priorities (for example, types of hazards, regions, or target groups)

4.

Further promote partnerships and cooperation with relevant organizations

5.

Monitor activities and measure outcomes

6.

Explore ways to further promoting the ASEAN Cooperation

BhutanAnother reviewer team comprised of Dr. Koichi
Shiwaku of the Earthquake Disaster Mitigation
Research Center of the National Research Institute for
Earth Science and Disaster Prevention (EDM-NIED),
Mr. Arshad Nawaz Chheena from Pakistan's National
Disaster Management Authority (NDMA), and one ofADRC staff member visited Bhutan on 25-26

4

Fig.2-1-2 Interview survey in Bhutan

2. Highlights of 2009/2010
November 2009. They learned about ongoing efforts and policies in the field of disaster educationand public awareness by visiting the Department of Disaster Management (DDM, ADRC'scounterpart in Bhutan), the Department of School Education, the Department of Geology andMines, the Standard Quality and Control Authority, and UNDP Bhutan office.
The Department of Disaster Management, which was upgraded from a division in 2008, hasbeen actively promoting disaster risk reduction including disaster education and public awarenessas a lead coordinating agency in Bhutan. Although disaster risk reduction has been a new area for
Bhutan, various unique policies and activities were observed during the survey. The below are thestrengths and weaknesses identified by the review team.
Strengths

Weaknesses

・ Strong leadership of the DDM in coordinating all disaster-related
activities and programs in Bhutan
・ Promotion of the philosophy of Gross National Happiness, which
contributes to promoting disaster risk reduction
・ Richness of human resources in Bhutan
・ Existence of National Disaster Risk Management Framework andNational Disaster Management Bill・ Provision of finances: establishment of a relief fund, mitigation andpreparedness fund, and emergency response fund・ Coverage of all phases of the disaster management cycle (withDDM divisions managing Preparedness and Mitigation, Responseand Early Warning, and Relief and Reconstruction)
・ Full commitment of the country to prepare a National DisasterManagement Plan by initiating workshops for the development oflocal Disaster Management Plans
・ Promotion of Community-Based Disaster Risk Management(CBDRM)・ Participation of communities in preparing local plans for specificor relevant hazards
・ Establishment of an awareness campaign for schools through thedevelopment of a School Disaster Management Plan
・ Masonry training for selected areas
・ Relationships with international organizations

・ Needs for more linkagebetween regular teachingsystem and disastereducation
・ Need for greater
enforcement of laws toensure community safety
against disasters
・ Strength of school buildings
has not been checked.
・ Few staff in disaster-related
departments (DDM is fully
aware of this issue.)・ Multiple hazard situations
have not been wellconsidered.
・ Information gap between
rural and urban areas.

Bhutan faces harsh reality of increasing risks of natural disasters such as GLOF. However,relevant agencies have been accelerated their efforts to prevent and mitigate the impact of suchdisasters, promoting public awareness and school disaster education activities. Their efforts willbear fruits rapidly in light of strong leadership of the government, accumulated human resources,
diligent Bhutanese, and the size of the country.
School safety and community safety are interrelated issues. Integrated plans for community
safety that include schools are expected to be developed. The government has a responsibility topromote and achieve community and school safety through the active participation andcooperation of both community and schools.
The following are the findings and recommendations of the mission based on the strengths
and weaknesses identified, although some of the points are fully recognized by the government.

5

1.

School Safety and Education
Though some efforts have been made to conduct awareness campaigns in the schools, morework can be done to include disaster risk reduction in the regular teaching system, such asincorporating it as a subject in the curriculum of schools/colleges.
Extra-curricular activities should be also utilized for school disaster education. These
activities can provide more active and exercise-based learning experiences to schoolchildren, which helped them learn how to cope with natural disasters in a natural way.
Teacher guidelines for disaster risk education should be developed. The guidelines will
help teachers promote disaster education in schools.
Hazard maps can be utilized for school disaster education so that students will learn thehazards that exist in the areas where they live and where their schools are.
The strength of school buildings should be examined for emergency planning and todetermine their level of disaster resistance.

2.

Community
Hazard maps are expected to be used to create evacuation plans and to identify evacuationsites at the community level.
Hazard maps indicating evacuation sites are expected to be developed for/with communitymembers.

3.

Link Between School and Community
Community should be involved in school projects since schools are core communityinstitutions.
Hazard maps are expected to be developed with the community, and also widely sharedwith the community, school teachers, and students.

4.

Government
Relevant authorities require more commitment to the dissemination of legal frameworks
and national policies that can lead to raising awareness of people and protect thecommunity from natural disasters.
More capacity development of national/local government officials who are in charge ofdisaster management in Bhutan. The DDM can focus more on coordinating work, notconducting programs by themselves.
The pilot project taught us that this project could provide us a great opportunity to share goodpractices and lessons learned among ADRC member countries, rather than reviewing each other.
In the pilot project, reviewers learned a lot from the efforts and experiences of Thailand andBhutan and were stimulated by their unique policies and activities of these two countries.
Utilizing the inputs from these two target countries and reviewers, the ADRC intends to makea better program for next fiscal year. The ADRC would like to express its sincerest gratitude to allof those who have made valuable contribution to the pilot project.

6