Natural
disasters: adaptability and mitigation of losses
By Sunil Karunanayake
The incidence of natural disasters has shown an alarming
increase in recent times with Asia in particular taking a heavy
toll. This increase is perhaps attributed to population explosion,
living in vulnerable areas and increasing environmental damage.
According to the Center for Research on Epidemiology of Disasters
(CRED) based in Belgium during the period between 1992 and 2001
Asia has gone through 1,057 natural disasters, resulting in 420,867
deaths (80 per cent of the world total) affecting two billion people
at an estimated cost of US$684 billion. What is most disheartening
is that the probability of disasters is high in poorer countries
that are also under the IMF PRGF facility.
Sri
Lanka, generally familiar with floods, droughts and landslides,
has now learnt through the tsunami how destructive such natural
disasters could turn out to be. As per the CRED definitions the
recent Asian tsunami devastation falls on to a "great natural
disaster" category as the disaster killed thousands of people,
made millions homeless and caused economic losses of great magnitude,
forcing nations like Sri Lanka to seek international assistance.
During
the recent crisis it was evident Sri Lanka as a small island is
highly vulnerable in the face of natural disasters due to the size
and nature of its economy. Though in GDP terms fisheries, retail
trade and tourism may not sound significant many other factors such
as employment and linkages indicate the greater dependence on them.
These sectors constitute a major part of the informal private sector
even affecting the tax base and the spending power of consumers.
Sea related disasters would continue to threaten these little islands
mostly in the not so developed world.
Developed
countries have the strength and flexibilities to counter disasters
and its consequent damage, for example they could even raise the
required revenue through taxation to make up for losses.
Disasters
have a tendency of going beyond macroeconomic indicators to affect
the whole business sector. According to the World Bank developing
countries have made fewer efforts to adapt themselves to reduce
the impact of natural disaster damages or to seek insurance cover
against such known risks.
This
is true even in our home soil and one wonders what efforts have
the agencies such as coast conservation, urban development and environment
taken to regulate construction in risky areas. Apart from natural
disasters no efforts have been made to move people living under
the bridges and along rail tracks. These are clear symptoms of politics
overriding the public service.
Unfortunately
it is mostly the poorer sections of the population who will be seriously
affected, as it is they who live closer to vulnerable locations.
Their livelihoods will be directly affected, recovery will be rather
hard for them owing to savings limitations and lack of insurance
facilities.
The
tidal wave has hit in a strange manner with no uniformity and some
areas away from the coast too being severely affected. This was
evident in Payagala, Kosgoda, Akurala, Telwatte, Hikkaduwa and Magalle
in Galle. Perhaps research will produce explanations. The disappearance
of the houses even in the non-coastal side of the road is depressing.
The most critical need of the hour is housing which traditionally
accounts for 50 per cent of the post disaster funding. Whilst the
road transport has now come back to normal, due to vast damages
to the rail track train transport in the southern province is still
at a standstill. Given the lack of experience and resource limitations,
the Sri Lankan government will obviously need to rely heavily on
foreign resources for this massive rebuilding effort which follows
the relief process.
The
present disaster has also shown the need for compulsory national
service which could be an effective tool for rebuilding on a continuing
basis. Extraordinary measures are required to get over difficult
situations.
(The writer could be reached at -
suvink@eureka.lk)
|