www.emi-megacities.org
DISASTER RISK REDUCTION OF MEGACITIES AND COMPLEX URBAN METROPOLISES
PREPARATORY ASSISTANCE PHASE
Summary of Activities and Accomplishments
Final Report
Submitted to UNDP/BCPR
30 June 2007
SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS
The preparatory Assistance (PA) phase of the Disaster Risk Reduction of Megacities and
Complex Urban Metropolises project was structured along three components aimed at
developing tools and methods for the management of urban risk, for testing and validating
these tools with city planners and managers, for demonstrating the value of disaster risk
reduction (DRR) in pilot cities, and for developing an impetus for urban disaster risk reduction on
a global and regional basis. The project was structured along three components: Global,
Regional, and Local. The activities associated with each of these components are indicated in
Table 1 below. This project constituted a contribution to EMI’s 3cd Program and Cluster Cities
Project (CCP), which are undertaken with several other partners, including PDC, ProVention
Consortium, World Bank Institute, Kobe University and EdM/Team 4. Thus, UNDP/BCPR financial
participation in these projects enabled a scaling up of its value and contribution to the global
urban DRR efforts. More information on the 3cd Program and CCP can be found on EMI website
(www.emi-megacities.org).
The project agreement concluded between the United Nations Development Programme
(UNDP), the ProVention Consortium and the Earthquakes Megacities Initiative (EMI) divides the
work plan of activities into two sets. The first set of activities relates to the UNDP portion of the
project and encompasses output 1.1 through output 3.2. The second set relates to the
ProVention portion and focuses on outputs 3.3 and 3.4. This report is a summary of all UNDPsponsored activities undertaken in this preparatory assistance phase of the project. However,
the accomplishments and work products such as tools, reports and other related technical
documentation mentioned in the report represent the collective contribution of al the partners
in the project.
Table 1: Project Components and Outputs
Component
1
Component
2
Component
3
GLOBAL AGENDA –
Spearheading an effort to
establish a global Forum for
urban and megacities
disaster risk reduction
Output 1.1 - Establish a global platform for urban and
megacities disaster risk reduction
REGIONAL AGENDA Strengthening and
consolidation of regional
megacities networks
Output 2.1 – Coalition building, partnerships and networking.
LOCAL AGENDA –
Mainstreaming disaster risk
management in
megacities
Output 3.1 –DRMMP schedule and strategy for Manila,
Katmandu and Mumbai
Output 1.2 - Policy paper and agenda for the Global Forum
Output 1.3 - e-learning and other tools supporting the global
forum
Output 2.2 – Increased local capacity for risk reduction.
Output 2.3 – Synthesize and report
Output 3.2 – Diagnosis and documentation of current
practices
Output 3.3 – Development of urban risk indicators
Output 3.4 – Development of risk-sensitive land-use planning
e-learning course and pilot testing.
Megacities DRR
EMI Final Report (30 June 2007)
2|Page
Activities Undertaken by the Project
Table 2 summarizes the activities undertaken by the project from October 2005 to June 2007
under each of the project outputs.
Table 2: Summary of Activities Undertaken by the Project
Date
Activity
October 06-08, 2005
Nov 29-Dec 05, 05
Output
Bogota, Americas Cluster Cities Meeting
2.1, 2.2, 2.3
Metro Manila Fieldtrip/Workshop No. 4
3.1, 3.3, 3.4
November, 2005
Megacities Sound Practice Knowledge Base
Prototype Completion
1.3, 3.2
April, 2006
Megacities Sound Practice Knowledge Base
Update I
1.3, 3.2
May 22-26, 2006
Metro Manila Fieldtrip/Workshop No. 5
Oct 2005 - May 2007
Policy/Advocacy Paper for Global Forum
3.1, 3.3, 3.4
1.1 1.2
June 08-09, 2006
Quito, Americas Cluster Cities Meeting
2.1, 2.2, 2.3
July 03-07, 2006
Katmandu Fieldtrip/Workshop No. 2
1.3, 3.1, 3.2
July, 2006
Megacities Sound Practice Knowledge Base
Update II
August 29, 2006
1.3, 3.2
International Conference on Disaster Reduction
Davos, Switzerland
October 11-17, 2006
Metro Manila Fieldtrip/Workshop No. 6
3.1, 3.3, 3.4
November 3-4, 2006
Asia Megacities Forum 2006. Kobe, Japan
2.1, 2.2, 2.3
November 14, 2006
Katmandu Fieldtrip/Workshop No. 3
1.3, 3.1, 3.2
Global Forum Organizational Meeting, Kobe, Japan
1.1, 1.2, 1.3
Side Event, Global Platform on DRR, Geneva,
Switzerland
1.1, 1.2, 1.3
April 12-13,2007
June 6, 2007
Tools Produced by the Project
An e-learning platform MEGA-Learn and related four original tools specific to the management
of disaster risk in megacities and major urban metropolises were developed during the course of
the project:
9
MEGA-Learn: Prototype e-learning platform (www.emi-megacities.org/megalearn)
9
MEGA-Plan: an e-learning training package for risk-sensitive urban planning that was
developed with the input of planners, and local officials from Metro Manila (www.emimegacities.org/megaplan)
9
MEGA-Index: a series of indicators to benchmark and measure progress in disaster risk
reduction in megacities, which was developed in cooperation with the National
University of Colombia.
9
MEGA-View: a web-based map viewer technology which was developed in partnership
with PDC (Pacific Disaster Center) and was completed in Metro Manila together with
training of more than 100 professionals (www.emi-megacities.org/mapviewer - password
protected)
Megacities DRR
EMI Final Report (30 June 2007)
3|Page
9
MEGA-View: a web-based Knowledge Base of city profiles, sound practices and a library
dedicated to megacities disaster risk reduction and also developed in partnership with
PDC (www.emi-megacities.org/megaview)
More information on these products is provided later in this report. Documentation related to
each of these products is posted on EMI website.
Reports and Documents Produced by the Project
Several documents such as reports, proceedings, etc. were developed during the course of this
project from the collective contribution of all the partners. They are available for download
online from EMI website (www.emi-megacities.org). The most relevant documents include:
•
Urban and Megacities Disaster Risk Reduction – Manual of Sound Practices, Companion
Manual to MEGA-Know, EMI Topical Report TR-07-02, 2007, 84 pages.
•
Application of Indicators in Urban and Megacities Disaster Risk Management – A Case
Study of Metro Manila, EMI Topical Report TR-07-01, 2006, 30 pages.
•
Disaster Risk Reduction in Mega-Urban Regions, Proceedings of the Asia Megacities
Forum 2006, EMI Report and CD PR-06-03, 2007, 36 pages.
•
Stakeholders’ Evaluation of the 3cd Program in Metro Manila, Philippines, Phase 1 20052006, EMI Report PR-07-01, 2007, 36 pages.
•
Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction through Land Use Planning and Enhancing Risk
Management Practices, EMI Report PR-06-01, 2006, 94 pages.
•
Enhancing Local Partnership and Stakeholders’ Ownership: Implementation of Disaster
Risk Management Master Plan in Metro Manila, EMI Report PR-06-02, 2006, 54 pages
•
3cd – Cross Cutting Capacity Development Program, EMI Brochure.
•
MEGA-Plan is published online at http://www.emi-mlearn.com/main.php
Many of these documents represent unique contributions to the field. For example, the Manual
of Sound Practices (TR-07-02) and its companion product MEGA-Know represent the first
combined e-learning Tool-Manual combination available on the application of disaster risk
reduction to urban metropolises.
COMPONENT 1 ACTIVITIES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS
Output 1.1: Global Forum for Urban and Megacities Risk Reduction
Through a sustained effort of advocacy and consultation, the Global Forum for Urban Risk
Reduction was endorsed by a wide range of stakeholders as a thematic cluster of the United
Nations Global Platform for Disaster Reduction during its first meeting on 5-7 June 2007.
Consultation and Advocacy Process
The Global Forum was proposed initially by UNDP/BCPR and EMI in early 2005. An advocacy
and consultation phase was undertaken with a broad set of stakeholders including OECD, the
World Bank, the Secretariat of the ISDR, UN-Habitat, OCHA, ProVention Consortium, IFRC, the
Government of Japan, METROPOLIS, ICLEI, CityNet, and other concerned organizations. Side
discussions also took place during the May 2006 meeting of the UN-IATF, and during several
other international forums. Early in the consultation process, it was suggested to hold a High
Level Meeting (HLM) at the OECD headquarters in Paris. Later on, it became apparent that a
Megacities DRR
EMI Final Report (30 June 2007)
4|Page
HLM was too premature, instead during a consultative meeting held in Geneva in September
2006, it was agreed to hold an Organizational Meeting of a broadly representative group of
stakeholders to further discuss the Why, What and How of the Global Forum .
Kobe Organizational Meeting
On November 2006, the Government of Japan gave its agreement to participate and endorse
the Organizational Meeting. EMI’s partner, Kobe University hosted the Organizational Meeting in
Kobe, Japan on 12-13 April 2007. The Organizational Meeting constituted the opportunities for
the organizing agencies (i.e., UNDP, ISDR and EMI) to further explain the goals and agenda of
the GF, and to collect input from representatives of governments, cities, local government
organizations, other UN agencies, and civil society organizations. The participants endorsed the
creation of the (GF) with the objectives 1) promote and support disaster risk reduction in cities
through advocacy, knowledge and tools development, knowledge sharing, at the local level; 2)
mobilize resources; and 3) serve as an avenue for the implementation of the HFA at the local
level.
Participants agreed that the GF vision, agenda and activities should be city-focused, practical,
and experience-based; they should add value to the sustainable development of cities. They
recognized that a “localized” HFA specifically addressing cities and local institutions will benefit
the mission of the GF. Additional partners should be identified (including private sector,
academia, media and others) to help provide sustainability to the GF. Existing resources and
initiatives should be mapped to provide an initial knowledge base for local action, avoid
duplication of efforts and sharpen strategy. Linkages with major forums such as WUF, the UCLG
congress, Metropolis congress and other similar events should be established as mechanisms to
reach local government policy makers and decision makers and other relevant local institutions.
The participants recommended that the GF should be integrated within the ISDR system;
however, its structure should gradually and progressively move towards being an independent
legal entity in order to avoid influence from any particular organization and preserve and
enhance its mission of serving cities. The governing structure of the Global Forum should have
representation from a broad set of stakeholders who have a stake in urban issues, including local
government representatives
Geneva Side Event
Following the recommendations from the participants of the Kobe meeting, a side event was
organized on 6 June 2007 as part of the activities of the e ISDR’s Global Platform for Disaster Risk
Reduction (GP/DRR). It was organized by METROPOLIS with the cooperation of UN-Habitat,
UNDP, and the Secretariat of the ISDR, EMI, ICLEI and UCLG. During the side event, input was
received from various constituencies in terms of role and agenda of the Global Forum as well as
its priorities and governing structure. Overall, the participants endorsed the creation of the GF,
and provided a clear indication to move forward with its structuring and organization. A report
from the Side Event was filed as part of the official transcripts of the GP/DRR and can be
obtained from the ISDR Secretariat.
Output 1.2: Development of a policy/position Paper
An initial Concept Paper was developed to facilitate the consultations, and successively
modified and improved based on the input received. The paper was circulated broadly, and
feedback incorporated.
Input obtained during the Kobe Meeting and related discussion
provided additional input to improve the Concept Paper. On this basis a final Concept/Policy
Megacities DRR
EMI Final Report (30 June 2007)
5|Page
paper was developed and submitted to UNDP as part of this project deliverables on 30 May
2007. Finally, excerpts from this report were used to develop a Concept Note for the Side Event.
Output 1.3: Tools for the Implementation of Sound Practices
The strategy of the 3cd Program implementation agenda is based on the development of tools
that are specific to the management of disaster risk in cities and that are developed with the
direct involvement of local practitioners and city managers, and which are tested in a city-level
environment. Training material is web-based to enable reaching a maximum number of
practitioners and to lower the cost of distribution. EMI goal is to serve as a “test bed” for the
development of knowledge and the testing of the practices. However, the dissemination and
distribution of the tools should be undertaken through local government organizations, by which
hundreds of cities and local government institutions can be reached, potentially training
thousands of professionals and practitioners in the long term. With the support of UNDP and
other partners including ProVention Consortium, PDC, the World Bank Institute, Kobe University,
EdM/Team 4 and the EMI partner cities, EMI developed several tools and products. Among them
is an e-learning platform named MEGA-Learn (www.emi-megacities.org/megalearn) to serve as
the key training and capacity building tool for the implementation of sound practices in urban
and megacities DRR as well as four related tools as indicated below. A beta version of MEGALearn was developed and tested.
9
MEGA-Plan: an e-learning training package for risk-sensitive urban planning that was
developed with the input of planners, and local officials from Metro Manila
9
MEGA-Index: a series of indicators to benchmark and measure progress in disaster risk
reduction in megacities, which was developed in cooperation with the National
University of Colombia.
9
MEGA-View: a web-based map viewer technology which was developed in partnership
with PDC (Pacific Disaster Center) and was completed in Metro Manila together with
training of more than 100 professionals (www.emi-megacities.org/mapviewer)
9
MEGA-View: a web-based Knowledge Base of city profiles, sound practices and a library
dedicated to megacities disaster risk reduction and also developed in partnership with
PDC (www.emi-megacities.org)
Reports and documentation related to each of these products is posted on EMI website. The
reports were also disseminating widely and provided in international forums including the Global
Platform for Disaster Reduction and others. Copies were provided to UNDP and other sponsors
and partners of the project.
COMPONENT 2 ACTIVITIES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS
This component included three outputs that complemented each other.
Output 2.1 – Coalition building, partnerships and networking
Output 2.2 – Increased local capacity for risk reduction.
Output 2.3 – Synthesize and report
These outputs were accomplished through the undertaking of three regional meetings, two in
the Americas (Bogota and Quito) and one in Asia (Kobe). Further, the project team
participated in several international forums including organizing a special session on Megacities
Disaster Risk Reduction at the International Conference on Disaster Reduction (Davos, August
2006), and the 100-Year Anniversary Conference in San Francisco. Posters and brochures were
Megacities DRR
EMI Final Report (30 June 2007)
6|Page
produced during these events and distributed. Consultations were also undertaken with
partners and other stakeholders as an integral effort for coalition building, partnerships and
networking activities. A summary of the three regional activities is provided below. Complete
reports and proceedings are available for each of these meetings from the EMI website.
Bogota, Americas Cluster Cities Meeting, October 06-08, 2005
The objective of the meeting was to enhance knowledge sharing mechanisms between the
partners cities, and to identify both the impediments to, and the mechanisms for, the
implementation of the disaster risk reduction (DRR) measures in each the cities. Another theme
that was discussed related to planning, recovery and reconstruction after a major urban
disaster. The meeting was also an opportunity for EMI to report on the progress of EMI’s 3cd
Program and to advance its core relationship with the Americas Cluster Cities Program (CCP).
The following key factors for disaster risk reduction were collected from the meeting:
1. Digital and accurate documentation on the geographical distribution of the hazards in
the city, including knowledge of soil data, topographic data and urban zoning and
land-use data is important in planning for recovery and reconstruction after a major
disaster
2. Involvement of local experts and participation of the local community are essential
components in planning a sustainable reconstruction;
3. Legal, social, and technical issues related to the reconstruction could be very complex,
developing good information on housing, including number of occupants and number
of families living in each dwelling could simplify the process of compensation; further
urban tissue of neighborhoods need to be preserved in the reconstruction process.
4. Public information strategies and dialog with survivors are essential component of
effective recovery and reconstruction planning.
5. Continuing training and practice of the city’s emergency plan among by responsible
agencies are fundamental for building capacity for effective post-disaster action.
6. ICT represents a major investment by cities as they develop their DRR strategies
7. Financial support from international organizations helps overcome the financial
limitations experienced by cities and help them implement a comprehensive program of
DRR that incorporates ICT as a core component. Current EMI Megacities Knowledge
Base could serve as a platform for information sharing between the cities as well as a
resource.
8. As cities mature in their proficiency in using ICT, they build cumulative knowledge bases
regarding disaster risk that inform their priorities and action plans
9. Informed DRR actions at the city level attracts attention and support from national level
policy makers
10. Cities can draw significant expert resources from their local universities and integrate
local knowledge efficiently in their DMM practices by building collaborative agendas
with their local universities and research institutions as demonstrated by the Cluster Cities
Project.
11. Multiple methods of communicating risk are essential for effective public education in
cities with populations that have varying levels of economic capacity, social
organization, and education.
12. Developing collaborative relations among megacities in the conduct of DRR programs
can extend the practices of DRR and DRM to wider regions of risk.
Megacities DRR
EMI Final Report (30 June 2007)
7|Page
13. The concept of Disaster Risk Management Master Plan (or DRMMP) used by the 3cd
Program can serve as a method of setting priorities and developing a comprehensive
disaster risk reduction for the city.
Quito, Americas Cluster Cities Meeting, June 08-09, 2006
The Quito meeting continued on the themes and objectives of the Bogota meeting, which is to
serve as a forum for experience and information exchange between the cities, and to support
the cities in implementing sound disaster risk management practices. Two special themes were
also incorporated: 1) Organizational and institutional arrangements for disaster risk
management; and 2) Building coalitions and mobilizing resources for disaster risk reduction.
The following key factors for disaster risk reduction were collected from the meeting:
1. Introducing models for disaster risk management from other cities broadens the
perspectives and show realistic options for sound operational and organizational
structures; however, each city needs to tailor the organization of its institutions according
to its own local realities and risk profile.
2. There is a gap between those who generate the knowledge and those who implement
and design instruments for risk reduction.
3. The private sector is a key player who needs to be brought to the table. This is a
partnership that, if well conducted, will report clear benefits to all involved parties.
4. The need to promote systematic processes of documentation of both technical and
social programs and projects that cities are undertaking is crucial to favor information
sharing and data collection (important to continue EMI’s local internship program).
5. Mechanisms for a more active exchange among the cities in the EMI Americas Cluster
need to be devised. Quarterly progress reports, hosted by member cities in turn, would
provide continuity between the annual meetings. These reports could be posted under
the News section of the EMI web-site. Each quarter one city would prepare the report
and contact the other member cities for updated information. This iterative exchange
would make the learning process of risk reduction more dynamic.
6. Putting together different local, regional and international initiatives was a valuable
exercise for local officials who often feel an overwhelming pressure to work
simultaneously with different groups. This was an excellent opportunity for knowledge
exchange and resources sharing.
Asia Megacities Forum 2006, Kobe, Japan, November 3-4, 2006
This meeting grouped 12 cities from Asia as well as several regional and international multi-lateral
organizations. It was organized along two one day workshops:
Workshop 1: How to implement competent DRM in a megacity: Model, Process, Technology
and Training. In this first workshop, participants learn how EMI’s city partners
participating in the 3cd Program are implementing the Disaster Risk Management
Master Plan (DRMMP) model; and how the DRMMP model can be used by their
own cities to put in place competent strategies and action plans to manage and
reduce disaster risk. The participants hear from experts as well as from
representatives of cities where the DRMMP model is being applied such as Metro
Manila and Kathmandu.
Megacities DRR
EMI Final Report (30 June 2007)
8|Page
Workshop 2: How to advance and improve knowledge and experience sharing among
megacities partners. During the second day invited speakers from EMI’s Asia
Cluster Cities share recent and relevant experience from their cities and more casestudies on megacities disaster risk reduction are presented including projects
related to the implementation of the Istanbul Earthquake Master Plan by the
Metropolitan Municipality of Istanbul. The theme of recovery from a major urban
earthquake is illustrated in a presentation by Kobe City on the city’s recovery and
reconstruction following the devastating1995 Great Hanshin Earthquake.
A structured discussion provided a forum to get input on how EMI’s tools, technologies, and
training packages can be enhanced to best suit the needs of megacities, and on how
knowledge sharing between cities can be improved. Further, a round table discussion informs
participants about relevant initiatives and opportunities from EMI’s partners such as Kobe
University, PDC, UNDP/BCPR, ProVention Consortium, and WBI, and from several disaster risk
reduction organizations based in Kobe. A complete set of proceedings and a report are
available from the 2006 Kobe Megacities Forum.
COMPONENT 3 ACTIVITIES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS
Component 3 of the project pertains to the implementation of the 3cd Program in Manila and
Kathmandu. Discussions were also undertaken with the Greater Municipality of Mumbai for
initiating the implementation of the 3cd Program in that city. An initial workshop was
undertaken, but due to the devastating floods of July 2006, the city’s institutions were too
preoccupied by the recovery from the floods to be able to accommodate the intense activities
of the 3cd Program. Instead more effort was invested in Manila and Kathmandu and also in the
development of the tools.
Metro Manila Disaster Risk Management Master Plan (DRMMP)
Three field trips and related workshops were undertaken in Manila:
9 Fieldtrip No. 4, Nov 29-Dec 05, 2005
9 Fieldtrip No. 5, May 22-26, 2005
9 Fieldtrip No. 6, October 11-17, 2006
The Metro Manila Disaster Risk Management Master Plan (DRMMP) consisted of five (5)
Implementation Work Outputs (IWO) as indicated in Table 3 below. The table also indicates the
accomplishments against each of these IWO’s. Note that these accomplishments represent the
sum of the contributions from all the partners in the project. Detailed reports were developed
from each of these field trips and are available on the EMI website (www.emimegacities.org/3cdProgram). Progress reports on the implementation of the 3cd Program are
also available from the website. Because of the complex nature of the 3cd Program, it is difficult
to provide a fair representation of all the activities in this summary report. The reader is
encouraged to review the field trip proceedings and the other available documentation on the
implementation of the 3cd Program in Metro Manila.
The Metro Manila 3cd Program is currently undertaking an evaluation by the stakeholders and
the government agencies in Metro Manila to define its structure and its components for a
complementary Phase 2 of the program. This evaluation is being undertaken under the
auspices of the UNDP country office and is lead by Metro Manila Development Authority
Megacities DRR
EMI Final Report (30 June 2007)
9|Page
(MMDA). Under an on-going Memorandum of Cooperation with MMDA, EMI is provided
technical support to the evaluation process.
Two planning workshops have already been
undertaken; in addition an independent stakeholders’ evaluation workshop was also
undertaken (see report TR-07-01)
Kathmandu Disaster Risk Management Master Plan (DRMMP)
Two field trips and related workshops were undertaken in Kathmandu:
‰ Fieldtrip No. 2, July 03-07, 2006
‰ Fieldtrip No. 3. November 14, 2006
The two field trips in Kathmandu represented an opportunity to understand and document the
process and activities related to DRM and DRR in the Kathmandu Valley, to discuss these
activities with various agencies and stakeholders and to hold a series of workshops and
discussions to define a consensus DRMMP for the city in connection with the Kathmandu
Municipal Corporation and NSET (National Society of Earthquake Technology, Nepal), which are
EMI’s partners in the implementation of the 3cd Program in Kathmandu. Following these
discussions, a consensus DRMMP agenda was developed and included the following four
Implementation Work Outputs (IWO):
‰ IWO No. 1: Incorporation of Risk Reduction elements in the long term urban planning
project of the Katmandu Valley
‰ IWO No. 2: Options for the Building Code Implementation and incorporation of risk
reduction options through land use and planning,
‰ IWO No. 3: Strengthening preparedness and response capabilities at the ward level, and
‰ IWO No. 4: Development of appropriate risk communication tools consisting of internet
accessible map viewers, dissemination of sound practices through DRM knowledge
base, and land use and planning e-learning modules among others.
These four elements represent a unique strategy for influencing the practice of disaster risk
management in the city and the country, and for making substantial reduction of risk in the city
in the long term. With a very motivated administration in the city and country, and an
exceptionally high state of awareness among the stakeholders and the communities, the KMC
DRRM could become a powerful instrument in making long term gains in DRR.
Currently, EMI and its partners discussed the continuation of the program with the UNDP Country
office, and submitted a draft Concept Note for Phase 2. This proposal is being evaluated by
UNDP country office.
Megacities DRR
EMI Final Report (30 June 2007)
10 | P a g e
Table 3. Metro Manila DRMMP and Accomplishment on Each Implementation Work Output (IWO)
(IWO)
IWO No. 1
Description
Develop and Institutionalize
technologies for Risk
Communication and
Preparedness
Accomplishments
1.1 MEGA-View (Map Viewer technology) completed for all Metro Manila with functionality
defined by local users
1.2 Training of more than 100 potential users on MEGA-View
1.3 MEGA-View implementation Plan developed with MMDA and PHIVOLCS
1.4 MEGA-Know (Megacities Knowledge Base) developed with direct involvement of Focus
Groups members
1.5 MEGA-Index methodology reviewed and tested
IWO No. 2
Incorporate risk reduction
criteria in land-use and urban
planning
2.1 Prototype MEGA-Plan, a web-base course on Risk Sensitive Land Use Planning
2.2. Two trainings of urban and environmental planners from various governmental agencies
and Local Government Units
2.3 Review of the urban planning “Cookbook” to include DRR parameters
2.4 Overall awareness-building of planners about DRR into the practice of their profession
through the continuous work of Focus Group No. 2
IWO No. 3
Training Needs Assessment
and Capacity Building for
DRM
3.1 Identification and evaluation of existing training events provided by key government
agencies for their relevance to DRR in Metro Manila
3.2 Develop a plan for DRMMP to focus on Land-Use and Urban Planning
3.3 Creation of target audience through planners and key officials of MMDA, the 3 pilot
cities of Makati, Marikina and Quezon, and the 17 Local Govt. Units
3.4 Reach agreement with World Bank Institute for the delivery of its Disaster Risk
Management distance learning package for the Philippines
3.5 Successfully launch the first nation-wide distance learning
3.6 Undertaking of several participatory workshops/training
IWO No. 4
Mobilizing Resources among
NGO's, Professional
Organizations and Private
Sector in DRM Agenda
4.1 Discussion of partnership with key civil society organizations in Metro Manila involved in
DRR
4.2 Creation of FG #4 and initial workshop with representatives of civil society organizations
and governmental agencies
4.3 Development of the Terms of Reference for the Focus Group
4.4 Agreement with PICE on focusing on training of professionals to improve building code
understanding and implementation
4.5 Initial discussion with CNDR for joint program involving the private sector
IWO No. 5
Improving Legal and
Institutional Arrangements for
Improved DRM Delivery
5.1 Collect and review of all national bills related to disaster management and state-of-theart legislation from the rest of the world.
5.2 Consolidate the most comprehensive bills into a single bill that incorporates the
principles of disaster risk reduction
5.3 Undertake a process of consultation with key stakeholders, LGU’s, legislators to
provide a sound basis for the proposed bill
5.3 Document finding and provide recommendations to be submitted to appropriate forums
to promote the proposed DRM bill
5.4 Introduction of a section concerning DRM into the Mid-term National Economic and
Social Development Plan of the Philippines
Megacities DRR
EMI Final Report (30 June 2007)
11 | P a g e
NEXT STEP: SCALING UP THE ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THE PREPARATORY PHASE
The Preparatory Assistance Phase made a tangible contribution to urban disaster risk reduction.
Among many other contributions, the support from UNDP/BCPR contributed to:
9 Higher visibility and awareness on the issue of urban risk
9 The creation of a global mechanism for promoting and supporting urban DRR
9 The development of tools and methods that were developed jointly with city
practitioners and tested and validated by them, and
9 The investment in human potential through the development of a coalition of city
managers, policy makers and professionals who are informed and engaged in reducing
risks to their cities and their communities.
The work undertaken with the cities (i.e., Manila, Kathmandu, Mumbai and others) has not only
consolidated the engagement of these cities but created a demand from other cities. In fact,
during the course of the preparatory phase, a new project on the implementation of the 3cd
Program was launched in Amman, Jordan under the coordination of the UNDP-Jordan office,
and the involvement of several Jordanian institutions and experts. At the same time, specific
demands were submitted by other cities such as Quito (Ecuador), Lima (Peru), and Dhaka
(Bangladesh) to get engaged in the 3cd Program. The demand from constitutes the best
indicator for the value added of this project.
Disaster risk reduction of cities, metropolises and megacities is a long term endeavor. At the time
where urban population has, for the first time in the history of humankind, exceeded rural
population and where many of the cities in developing countries are developing rapidly with
little or no attention to disaster, the task of reducing urban risk requires vision, strategy, attention
and resources. With the continuing support of UNDP/BCPR and other partners this program can
continue to make its contribution by working directly with cities and to dedicate its resources
and attention to their problems and issues. This evidence-based, practical and sustained
approach has led to gaining the trust of city policy makers and managers and to the change in
attitude among the professionals who run, manage and govern cities and contribute to the
welfare and safety of their communities. By linking DRR to development and to governance, this
project has made headways in the goal to mainstream DRR in city planning and operations.
All along its implementation, the project closely engaged a broad range of stakeholders
including academia, private sector, professional organizations, civil society organizations,
government organizations at all levels, and multi-lateral agencies and regional agencies. The
project also directly involved the UNDP country offices in the undertaking of the project, further
contributing to their internal capacities and programs. The components of the next phase of the
project for both Manila and Kathmandu are now being evaluated and facilitated by these
country offices. The Amman project is undertaken directly with the country office.
As the same time, renewed engagements from partners are confirming the value of the project.
The ProVention Consortium and WBI recently renewed their investment in the project, and the
Secretariat of the ISDR has been very closely involved in the development of the subsequent
phase. With these commitments in place, UNDP/BCPR investment for the subsequent phase will
provide further contribution to an area where risk reduction is most needed. A subsequent
phase will further enhance the suit of training and DRR implementation tools that help build local
Megacities DRR
EMI Final Report (30 June 2007)
12 | P a g e
competency and empower city managers, planners and practitioners in engaging their
institutions and communities in the mainstreaming of DRR through their internal planning,
operations and policy making processes. It will also improve current knowledge bases,
knowledge sharing mechanisms and provide more evidence on local implementation of sound
practices in urban disaster risk reduction.
EMI is grateful for UNDP/BCPR contribution on the Preparatory Phase of the project and looks
forward to further consolidating its partnership with UNDP/BCPR for the benefit of urban and
megacities disaster risk reduction.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------Submitted by EMI on 30 June 2007
Authors: Dr. Fouad Bendimerad, Project Director
Dr. Khalid Bouzina, Project Manager
Megacities DRR
EMI Final Report (30 June 2007)
13 | P a g e