ANNEX 1 HISTORY OF ESTABLISHMENT OF ADRC

History of Establishment of ADRC
1990s: International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR)At its 42nd General Assembly in December 1987, the United Nations (UN) designated the 1990s as theInternational Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR). It adopted a resolution aiming to sharply
reduce the damage caused by natural disasters around the world, particularly in developing countries,
through joint international action.

1994: World Conference on Natural Disaster Reduction
In May 1994, the UN held the World Conference on Natural Disaster Reduction in Yokohama, Japan, toconduct an interim review of the decade-long IDNDR initiative and to propose an action plan for the future. At
the meeting, the “Yokohama Strategy for a Safer World” was adopted, highlighting the importance ofinternational cooperation in regions that share common types of disasters and disaster reduction measures.
Since then, disaster reduction activities have been promoted throughout the world based on this strategy.

1995: Ministerial-level Asian Natural Disaster Reduction Conference
As the first step toward regional cooperation under the Yokohama Strategy, the IDNDR Secretariat organizeda meeting in Kobe in December 1995 to formulate a policy on disaster reduction cooperation in Asia. Cabinet
members in charge of disaster reduction from 28 countries attended the meeting, which concluded with theadoption of the Kobe Disaster Reduction Declaration. This declaration consists of ideas for promotinginternational cooperation in disaster reduction, including a Japanese proposal to launch a feasibility study ona system for coordinating disaster reduction efforts in the Asian region.

1996: Asian Natural Disaster Reduction Experts Meeting
The Government of Japan and the IDNDR Secretariat jointly organized an expert meeting in October 1996 tomight be created for the Asian region. The meeting was attended by key personnel in the disaster reduction
bureaus of 30 countries, and they agreed to study the creation of the tentatively named “Asian DisasterReduction Center (ADRC)” to serve as a secretariat for promoting activities under the proposed system.

1997: Asian Disaster Reduction Cooperation Promotion Meeting
Again, the Government of Japan and the IDNDR Secretariat jointly organized a meeting in Tokyo in June
1997 to discuss activities to be undertaken by the proposed center for disaster reduction system. Likewise,
the key personnel from the disaster reduction bureaus of 23 countries attended the meeting with an overall
goal of promoting cooperation in disaster reduction efforts through specific actions. A proposal was made atthe meeting to establish a center in Japan to serve as the secretariat for the proposed system.

77

Annexesthresh out how a central disaster reduction system, as stated in the Kobe Disaster Reduction Declaration,

ANNEX 1 HISTORY OF ESTABLISHMENT OF ADRC

1998: Establishment of ADRC
Gaining momentum from these series of meetings, the Government of Japan discussed the organization,budget, and other aspects of the proposed office with the other countries involved. With the cooperation ofHyogo Prefecture, ADRC was officially established in Kobe on 30 July 1998.

Annexes78

ANNEX 2 OVERVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL RECOVERY PLATFORM

Overview of International Recovery Platform
IRP was established following the Second UN World Conference on Disaster Reduction in Kobe, Hyogo,
Japan in 2005 to support the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) by addressing thegaps and constraints experienced in the context of post-disaster recovery. After a decade of functioning as
an international source of knowledge on good recovery practice, IRP refocused its role as an "international
mechanism for sharing experience and lessons associated with build-back-better".
IRP is not an operational body. So, it does not directly implement project activities. Instead, it functions as aplatform for interested partners to periodically meet to exchange lessons and ideas that will promote recovery
best practice and learnings as well as capacity building. Its activities are governed by a Steering Committee
and supported by a small Secretariat based in Kobe Japan and hosted by the Japanese Government, theHyogo Prefectural Government, ADRC, and UNDRR.
IRP works towards supporting greater advancements in the field of resilient recovery and build-back-betterby:·bringing together a broad range of senior policy makers and practitioners to exchange experiences andfacilitate discussion on resilient recovery challenges and build-back-better opportunities at the annual

International Recovery Forum·

advocating for closer cooperation with development partners, regional intergovernmental organizations,regional organizations, and regional platforms for disaster risk reduction in promoting and building
capacity for achieving effective build-back-better outcomes·sharing of information through its inter-active website

IRP is governed by the Steering Committee, where membership is decided by consensus. SteeringCommittee members contribute towards the approved activities of IRP, by means of commitment of funds orin-kind contributions. The Steering Committee members can request the Chair for technical experts ornecessary. The members of IRP Steering Committee are: ADB, ADRC, Cabinet Office Japan,

CEPREDENAC, Hyogo Prefectural Government Japan, ILO, MOFA-Italy, SDC-Switzerland, the World Bank,
UN-Environment, UNCRD, UNDP, UNESCO, UN-Habitat, UNDRR, UNOPS, and WHO (Figure 1 Logos ofIRP SC members)

Logos of IRP SC Members

79Annexes

specialist to attend meetings on an ad-hoc basis to provide specialist inputs as and when deemed

ANNEX 3 NOTES ON SOURCES OF DATA FOR THE NATURAL DISASTER DATABOOK

Notes on Sources of Data for the Natural Disaster Databook
Natural Disaster Data
All disaster data are based on EM-DAT: The Emergency Events Database - Université catholique de Louvain(UCL) - CRED, www.emdat.be, Brussels, Belgium. Data set was obtained on 7 July 2022, unless otherwise
stated.
EM-DAT Criteria:For a disaster to be entered into the database, at least one of the following criteria must be fulfilled:·Ten (10) or more people reported killed·Hundred (100) or more people reported affected·Declaration of a state of emergency·

Call for international assistance

Databook 2021 follows the EM-DAT definitions of “people killed” as persons confirmed as dead and persons
missing and presumed dead; “people affected” as the sum of injured, homeless, and affected requiring
immediate assistance during the period of emergency and requiring basic survival needs such as food,water, shelter, sanitation and immediate medical assistance.

Disaster Terms:
Drought includes an extended period of unusually low precipitation that produces a shortage of water for
people, animals and plants.
Earthquake includes ground shaking and tsunami.
Epidemic includes bacterial and viral infectious diseases.
Extreme Temperature includes heat wave, cold wave, and extreme winter conditions.
Flood includes general flood, and flash flood.
Insect Infection is pervasive influx and development of insects or parasites affecting humans, animals,
Annexes

crops and materials.
Landslide includes avalanche, debris, and rockfall.
Storm includes local storm, tropical cyclone, and winter storm.
Volcanic activity means volcanic eruption.
Wildfire includes bush/brush fire, forest fire, and scrub/grassland fire.
Classification of EM-DAT:EM-DAT distinguishes between two generic categories for disasters: natural and technological. The natural
disaster category is divided into 5 sub-groups, which in turn cover 15 disaster types and more than 30 subtypes. The technological disaster category is divided into 3 sub-groups which in turn cover 15 disaster types,
https://www.emdat.be/classification

80

ANNEX 3 NOTES ON SOURCES OF DATA FOR THE NATURAL DISASTER DATABOOKCOVID-19 Data
All COVID-19 data used in the Databook 2021 is based from the World Health Organization Coronavirus(COVID-19) Dashboard, https://covid19.who.int/ accessed on 7 July 2022.
Data from the WHO COVID-19 Dashboard are from the official reporting to WHO through regional offices andalso from public websites, not official reported to WHO. Member States select the reporting system they
prefer to use and data from different reporting systems. Individual countries, area and territories may decline
to allow country-level disaggregation.

Some ADRC member-countries have no record of COVID-19 data in the WHO COVID-19 Dashboard.

Annexes81

ANNEX 4 KEY DETERMINANTS FOR CONSIDERED IN ANALYZING THE DATABOOKKey Determinants for Considered in Analyzing the Databook
In analysing the natural disaster data, ADRC is mindful of these four key determinants.
Population. It is clear that population affects the presentation of disaster profile of a country, region, orcontinent. EM-DAT’s criteria for a disaster is when an event kills 10 or more people or affects 1,000 or more.
If it is considered that a disaster occurs at the intersection of a natural hazard and a vulnerable population, akey facet of both of these parameters is the number of individuals exposed. Therefore, countries with larger
populations would see a higher probability of disaster occurrence. Therefore, it would be logical for China

and India to have the greatest weight on the parameters (e.g., total affected and total deaths), which the datasupports.
Level of development. Countries that belong to the higher level of the development spectrum (usuallycorrelated with GDP) accumulate capital and assets of higher value. This exposes them to heightened
economic risk. Therefore, developed countries usually top the list when assessing total damages. The data
supports this in such a way that the top three most damaging (USD value) disaster events to date were theGreat Hanshin Awaji Earthquake of 1995, Hurricane Katrina of 2005, and the Great East Japan Earthquakeof 2011.
Socio-political condition. Another EM-DAT criterion for a disaster is when the government declares a stateof emergency and calls for international assistance. However, since there are different bases and thresholds
for national governments to declare state of emergency and call for international assistance, it is likely thatthe socio-political condition comes into play. Therefore, it possible that the inclusion of some events isdependent on value judgements in a given socio-political condition.
Statistical timestamp bias. In this Databook, disaster data of 2021 is compared with the annual average ofdisaster data from 1990-2020. While valuable conclusions may be made from the 2021 disaster data, it issusceptible to disproportionate representation of individual events. On the other hand, the average data ofAnnexes

1990-2020 is susceptible to under-representation of disaster events.

82