disaster risks and capacities in central asia

Disaster Risks and Capacities in Central Asia

Michael Thurman

Regional Disaster Risk Reduction Advisor, ECIS

"Improving Regional Coordination in Managing Compound Risks in Central Asia“ 14-15 April 2011

Contents

1. Risk = hazard exposure x vulnerability

2. Capacity Averages (from CACDRR Capacity Assessment)

3. Capacity Gaps and capacity Development Priorities (from Group Work for HFA 1, 3, and 4)

Geophysical Hazards

• All major cities are highly exposed and contain a high concentration of population and economic activity.

• Secondary effects include landslides, mudflows, and GLOFs. Not enough is known concerning the triggering effect.

• Landslides triggered by geological, seismic, and meteorological processes

• Landslides will become more frequent and intensify with climate change.

• Transboundary hazards in Ferghana Valley and northern Tien Shan.

Meteorological Hazards

• 1991-2007: hydrological variability increased.

• Downstream exposure to floods and hydrological drought often due to poor management at all levels.

• Ferghana Valley and upper Amu Darya basin highly exposed to transboundary mudflow and GLOF hazards.

• GLOFs are a growing concern, due to glacier melt.

• Climate change will amplify exposure to all meteorological hazards.

Compound Hazards

• Hydrological drought and extreme cold:

o “Compound crisis” of 2007-08: natural and man-made factors contributed to exposure

o Climate change expected to result in warmer winters, but hydrological drought more severe

• Technogenic hazards: Mayli Suu and other toxic waste particularly a concern in the Ferghana Valley

Economic Vulnerability

• Lack of adequate data, due to collection and analysis procedures for global and national datasets.

• Potential for losses as % of GDP highest for Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan.

• Absolute amount of potential losses for other countries are higher.

• Vulnerable to meteorological hazards: weather-dependent sectors account for 40-60% of GDP.

Structural Vulnerability

• Intense earthquake in a major city in Central Asia would collapse or severely damage around half of the residential building stock.

• Water infrastructure deteriorated and vulnerable to flood hazards

• Outdated building codes and lax enforcement attenuate structural vulnerability

Socioeconomic Vulnerabilities

• Poverty, income disparities, and social status significantly lower resilience.

• Poor municipal and land use planning place populations, infrastructure, and livelihoods in the way of hazards.

• Unsustainable operations and maintenance of infrastructure, especially for water, increases both exposure and vulnerability.

• Agriculture requires development to lower vulnerability to drought and floods.

• Environmental degradation contributes to exposure and vulnerability.

CACDRRR Capacity Assessment Averages

DRR Overview Course – Presentation 02 – Disaster Risk & Development (Block 01) – Slide9/15 – 13 April 2023

KAZAKHSTAN KYRGYZSTAN TAJIKISTAN

HFA1: Enabling environment & institutions

3.00 2.66 3.01

HFA 2: Risk assessment & early warning

2.75 2.44 2.51

HFA 3: Awareness and education

2.80 2.33 2.23

HFA 4: Prevention and mitigation

3.09 2.02 2.02

HFA 5: Preparedness & response

3.36 2.03 2.20

Capacity indicators per priority areas of the Hyogo Framework for Action Assessment of the existing capacity level 1 …… 5 Desired capacity level/priority (low, medium, high)

Capacity Gaps and Priorities: Group Work for HFA 1

Ensuring Commitment, Enabling Environment and Institutional Development

Capacity Gaps and Priorities: Group Work for HFA 3

Public Awareness and Education

Capacity Gaps and Priorities: Group Work for HFA 4

Disaster Prevention and Mitigation

THANK YOU!