stakeholder participation and capacity development as key ... · yacuma, san ignacio de moxos and...

The “State of DRR at the Local Level” A 2015 Report on the Patterns of Disaster Risk Reduction Actions at Local Level

1

Stakeholder participation and capacity development as key

elements for Disaster Risk Reduction in Bolivia: A framework

for early warning based on forecasting requirements

Laura Basco-Carrera1,3, Ivan G. del Callejo-Veracc 2, Eelco van Beek1,3,4,

Carolina Mendoza-Bruckner5, Micha Werner1,3

1Deltares, The Netherlands

2Centro Andino para la Gestión y Uso del Agua (Centro A.G.U.A.), Universidad Mayor de San Simón, Cochabamba, Bolivia

3UNESCO-IHE, The Netherlands

4University of Twente, The Netherlands

5Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y Agua (MMAyA) / Viceministerio de Recursos Hídricos y Riego (VRHR), Bolivia

[Email: [email protected] ]

Communities play a crucial role in Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR). However, many Early Warning

Systems (EWS) focus on the hazard, which often implies that their focus is the model without a clear

understanding of how the information provided fits with the information required by each group of

stakeholders. The understanding of the local context and particularly local needs is a prerequisite for

an effective and sustainable EWS. The authors propose a grassroots approach which analyses how

local governments implement DRR actions and the link to national initiatives. It focuses on the

understanding of local needs in terms of forecasting requirements and people’s potential for

responding to warnings, and from there develops the institutional and technical structure of the EWS.

The conceptual framework for early warning presented in this paper is useful for identifying lead times

and the accuracy needs of different stakeholders and subsequently establishing forecast needs based

on these requirements. This paper also shows that developing sustainable DRR capacities at national

and local level by means of knowledge sharing and institutional development is crucial for building

disaster resilience. Apart from literature reviews, information was collected through about 100

interviews and focus group discussions with DRR organizations and stakeholders. While this paper

focuses on Bolivia; this conceptual framework, as well as, the other findings are relevant to other

countries with similar geographical and socio-economic conditions.

Keywords: Stakeholder participation, floods, Disaster Risk Reduction, Early Warning Systems, capacity development, disaster preparedness, response, emergency communications, Bolivia

mailto:Email:%[email protected]


2

1. Introduction

Natural disasters are becoming more frequent and extreme. According to the statistics of reported

disaster data (EM-DAT1), the global trend over the last four decades shows a considerable increase in

the number of natural disasters as well as in the number of people affected. More specifically, the

number of natural disasters has more than tripled since 1975 in the world. This trend is likely to

continue as scientists are projecting global-scale changes in precipitation patterns in the future, with

more precipitation in wet tropical regions likely leading to an increase flood risk (IPCC 2013).

Research studies show that large floods might exceed historical events in size and/or frequency in

some regions having a dramatic impact on socio-economic and human development (IPCC 2013;

UN-Water 2014). This situation is aggravated by rapid population growth and the fact that the world is

becoming more urban. Evidence demonstrates that fast population expansion in urban areas in

combination with fast economic growth increases disaster vulnerability (HDN 2010; Sayers and others

2013). DRR has therefore become a central issue in the international agenda.

Disaster Risk Reduction is defined by UNISDR (2009) as “the concept and practice of reducing

disaster risks through systematic efforts to analyze and manage the causal factors of disasters,

including through reduced exposure to hazards, lessened vulnerability of people and property, wise

management of land and the environment, and improved preparedness for adverse events”.

Communities play a crucial role in DRR (UNISDR 2012). The Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA)

2005-2015 highlights that strengthening community level capabilities is essential to reduce disaster

risk at the local level (UNISDR 2005). The second priority of action (HFA2) underlines the importance

of early warning in reducing disaster risk. This research paper focuses on this priority of action (HFA2).

Particularly, in this study the flood EWS is taken as a platform that serves to link DRR initiatives at all

levels. It focuses on DRR actions implemented by communities and the local government and the link

to national DRR initiatives in the Plurinational State of Bolivia. The study is based on the project

“Development and Implementation of EWS-Beni”, which focuses on the improvement of the existing

flood EWS in the Mamoré River Basin.

Bolivia is taking the HFA 2005-2015 as a reference framework for DRR to water-related disasters. At

the national level, Disaster Risk Management (DRM) is addressed in the Constitution, and specifically

in two general DRM laws and in a framework act: Law 2140, which includes the reduction of risk and

prevention of disasters and/or emergencies; Law of Regional and Local Autonomies (Law 031); and

Framework act of Mother Earth and integrated development for wellbeing (“Para Vivir Bien”) (VIDECI

2013). The Ministry of Environment and Water (MMAyA) is promoting the development of National

River Basin Plan (Plan National de Cuencas) among other national plans. Nevertheless, in most

cases DRM is assumed as “Emergency attention” rather than “Risk Prevention. According to HFA

VIDECI (2013) at national level 80% of the financial resources for DRR are allocated to disaster

response and recovery. This percentage can reach 90% at regional level. Despite the existence of

this legal and institutional umbrella under which prevention and DRR measures are encouraged,

technical, financial, administrative and political factors seem to force current state actions towards

emergency responses rather than to risk prevention. Effective implementation of DRR plans is

significantly dependent on taking timely response actions by DRR organizations and stakeholders,

and the communities at risk (Werner and others 2011; Shah and others 2012). A critical prerequisite

for achieving timely response is disaster risk assessment (FUNDEPCO 2013 a, b) based, among

others, on different tools to improve for instance the existing flood EWS by means of establishing a

forecasting and warning system. This has been assumed by MMAyA as a key tool for improving DRR

in Bolivia and in the Mamoré River Basin in particular.

1 EM-DAT. International Disaster Database, accessed from www.emdat.be on 2013


3

In this paper we present a framework for early warning based on understanding the local context.

DRR actions taken at household, regional and national level are presented and extensively analyzed.

It also provides evidence that the involvement and cooperation among stakeholders as well as

capacity development helps to better achieve DRR actions. Finally, we provide conclusions and

recommendations.

2. Methodology: Framework for early warning based on the understanding of the local context

Although EWS have been established in many basins, many of these focus on the hazard itself, with

monitoring and forecasting considered the most relevant elements of the warning system. These

forecasting systems focus on running the model without a clear understanding of how the information

provided fits with the information required by each stakeholder. Little attention is given to the other

“flows” (e.g. flow of knowledge, decision, action, resources) as are part of the other components of the

EWS chain. However, the acceptance and sustainability of this type of EWS is not ensured unless it is

based on the thorough understanding of the local context by ensuring stakeholder participation.

(Molinari and Handmer 2011; Shah and others 2012).

The success of an EWS largely depends on whether the local communities and organizations make

use of the information provided for implementing timely DRR actions (Carsell and others 2004;

Molinari and Handmer 2011, UNISDR 2004). In these terms, the main challenges faced by an EWS

include: providing reliable forecasts at lead times sufficient to take action (Werner and others 2011);

timely dissemination of warning information (Tapsell and others 2004; Anderson 2006) and people’s

perceptions and behavior in response to warnings (Molinari and Handmer 2011; Terpstra 2009; Shah

and others 2012). In this paper we apply a framework for early warning, based on the framework

originally developed by Carsell and others (2004), and extended by (Werner and others 2011) in

applying the framework in the Zambezi. This framework takes a grassroots approach to

understanding the needs of the local communities, and DRR organizations and stakeholders, as well

as their potential for responding to warnings. This understanding is considered a prerequisite for

developing the institutional and technical structure of the EWS in the basin. The understanding of

local needs has to be determined by analyzing DRR actions implemented by local governments and

at community level. The timely dissemination of warning information as well as their potential for

responding to these warnings has to be evaluated by assessing their capabilities and the underlying

risk factors influencing disaster preparedness and response. On the basis of the evaluation of these

primary results, the institutional and technical structure of the EWS can be developed. This structure

will be based on a general conceptualization of EWS as a warning chain as depicted in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Framework for early warning (source: Werner and others 2011, after Carsell and others 2004)

The framework for early warning consists of six main activities: (i) Monitoring, (ii) Evaluation and

Forecasting, (iii) Notification, (iv) Decision making, (v) Warning, and (vi) Response (Mitigation). An

essential requisite for this warning chain to be effective and constitute an actual EWS is that the

whole chain is completed before the event manifest itself. The framework can be seen as a

forecasting and warning decision time line (Carsell and others 2004; Anderson 2006; Werner and


4

others 2011). Prior to an event starting, information needs to be gathered through monitoring

networks and communication systems so that forecasters are able to recognize the potential

occurrence of the event. Once the information from the monitoring network is available, time is

required to analyze the data obtained and perhaps to run one or more hydrological models, so that

some guidance on future evolution of the event can be provided. The amount of time required varies

according to the local context. In the case that a threat is recognized, it needs to be communicated to

decision makers, who will need to take a decision whether to issue a warning based on the

information provided. After taking the decisions to issue a warning, stakeholders, including the

population, initiate the pertinent disaster response activities. To be effective these should ideally be

complete before flooding starts to occur.

3. The case of Disaster Risk Reduction in Bolivia

3.1 The Mamoré River Basin

This study focuses on the floodplains of the Mamoré River Basin in the department of Beni in Bolivia,

which is a tributary of the Amazon River. The Mamoré River Basin is the biggest catchment in Bolivia,

covering 6 of the 9 departments of the country (see Figure 2). Besides the physiographic and

hydrological diversity and complexities (the area is mostly flat and easily flooded), an entrenched

institutional setup characterizes the DRM governance. Within this study region, a detailed study was

conducted on the flood vulnerability and flood hazard of three pilot municipalities; Santa Ana del

Yacuma, San Ignacio de Moxos and Loreto. However, seven other municipalities are considered as

secondary beneficiaries of the study, including Trinidad, San Javier, San Andres, San Joaquín,

Exaltación, Puerto Siles and Guayaramerin (VRHyR 2010).

Figure 2. The Mamoré River Basin (red) and departments

The department of Beni is located in the northeast of Bolivia in the Llanos region. After Santa Cruz de

la Sierra, Beni is the second largest department in the country, with an estimated population of

450.000 (INE2) in an area of 213.564 km2. According to data reported by INE and Albo and Romero

(2009), the indigenous population living in this department is approximately 22% of the total

population in Beni belonging to more than 18 native ethnicities3. The primary economic activity and

land use practice in Beni is ranching, particularly extensive livestock farming, which suits the agro-

ecology conditions of the region. Agriculture is the secondary economic activity. Crops are mostly

intended for home and community consumption. Fishing, hunting and chestnut gathering are

additional economic activities that complement the livelihoods of local communities. The local

2 INE. (Bolivian) National Institute of Statistics, accessed from www.ine.gob.bo on 2013 3 Meneses E.J. “Características de las 36 Etnias identificadas del Estado Plurinacional de Bolivia”, personal e-mail dated March 2014


5

economy, mainly in rural areas, is therefore extremely dependent on climate conditions. In this regard,

Bolivia and in particular the department of Beni is facing a complex and uncertain situation as a result

of climate variability and change (CEPAL 2007). DRR in the basin is thus critical for citizens’ well-

being. According to data from the Vice Ministry of Civil Defense (VIDECI) and reported by the INE for

the period 2002 to 2009, the hydrological regime is changing due to deforestation, changes in land

use, and erosion and land degradation. These factors increase the vulnerability in the Mamoré River

Basin. As a consequence, Bolivia, and Beni in particular, is facing greater risks of flooding, with

consequent loss of human lives and biodiversity and constrained socio-economic development

(CEPAL 2007, 2008). The use of a flood EWS has been proposed as a cost-effective non-structural

measure for mitigating risk in the basin (VRHyR 2010).

Although some previous DRR programs had been implemented, the dramatic effects of the 2007 and

2008 floods (CEPAL 2007, 2008) showed the weaknesses of the existing people-centered flood EWS

in the department of Beni. As a consequence, the improvement of the warning system was demanded

by the regional government. At national level, the European Union DRR program “DIPECHO VI”, led

by OXFAM-FUNDEPCO, was started in order to support this local initiative (FUNDEPCO 2013). The

main purpose of this program was the development of a flood EWS for the department of Beni mainly

based on local capacity development including risk awareness training for communities and

institutional development. Stakeholder participation was central to the development of the flood EWS.

Some DRR initiatives implemented at local level included the development of municipal DRM plans,

contingency plans as well as the creation of DGR4 and COED in Beni. The program also focused on

the improvement of the early warning and emergency communication system. Due to the relative

success of this program, DRR initiatives gained political support from all levels of government and a

new program component was planned for strengthening a local hydrological forecast system (VRHyR

2010).

3.2 Data and assessment methodology

Data collection in the field was carried out from November 2012 to April 2013. Prior and during these

months an extensive stakeholder analysis and communication network analysis was carried out in

order to gain an understanding of the EWS and the needs of the stakeholders involved (Basco-

Carrera 2013). This analysis included the identification of the target groups, the assessment of their

roles and responsibilities, their socio-economic and cultural characteristics as well as their respective

interests and needs. Information regarding the local context required for the framework, which

included the DRR governance, institutional setup, characteristics of the communities and local needs

as well as the evaluation of the existing flood EWS, was collected through literature reviews, including

disaster preparedness plans and contingency plans, and about 100 interviews and focus group

discussions. The language used and the form of asking questions were tailored to the factors

pertinent to the group in question. The target groups considered in the study were local and national

DRR organizations and individuals. These included disaster management organizations, businesses,

national and local governments, NGOs, community organizations, community leaders, citizens living

in communities at risk and in protected areas, and disadvantaged minorities (e.g. remote populations,

ethnic minorities, youth, women, disadvantaged socio-economic groups). Data regarding local needs

and factors influencing flood preparedness and response was collected through personal interviews.

The interview questionnaire contained a total amount of 132 questions based on 38 indicators (Mileti

1995; Tersptra 2009; Molinari and Handmer 2011; Tapsell and others 2005; Anderson 2006). The

thematic coverage of these indicators included: (i) people characteristics, (ii) risk knowledge,

perceptions and experiences, (iii) warning - lead time, (iv) warning dissemination methods, (v)

4 See the caption of Figure 3 for a description of these new institutes.


6

warning - agents, (vi) warning message, (vii) warning contents, (viii) disaster preparedness and

response, and (ix) emergency measures5.

3.3 The flood early warning and emergency communication system in Bolivia

Although in many countries of the world the administration and management functions of regional

flood EWS are commonly centralized in the national headquarters, possibly with regional

implementation offices, this is not the case in Bolivia, where there are several institutions that have

similar responsibilities. The communication network of the Bolivian EWS is presented in Figure 3. The

figure makes a distinction between the stakeholders involved at national, regional and local level. It

also differentiates between the elements that compose the warning chain. Hence, a precise view of

the stakeholders involved, including their functions is obtained. Furthermore, the figure gives

information about the flood warning information dissemination network including technologies

currently used.

In terms of monitoring and forecasting, SENAMHI, AASANA, ENDE, SNHN 6 are the competent

authorities at national level. In the department of Beni, SEMENA is the major responsible authority.

SEARPI also plays an important role due to its flood EWS in Santa Cruz de La Sierra. DGR and

UGRs (at regional and municipal level) are not specifically responsible for monitoring the river basins

located under their jurisdiction but they consider that owning monitoring stations is necessary for a

greater accuracy in the hydro-meteorological forecasts. This perception is related to the low quality of

the general monitoring system that results in inaccurate forecasts being produced by the national

organizations. DGR is the responsible institution for DRM at regional level. Therefore, when an event

is imminent the institutions responsible for the evaluation of monitoring data and forecasting inform

DGR and, as a result, COED is activated. COED monitors the event and starts taking DRR actions as

preparation, as well as informing the regional government of Beni, responsible for taking decision with

COED’s support. Simultaneously, COED cooperates with national and local institutions including Civil

Defense (VIDECI), and COEMs from municipalities to take DRR actions. At national level, VIDECI

convene other ministries and DRR organizations in order to articulate national actions.

Simultaneously, at local level COEMs from municipalities, composed of local municipalities and their

respective UGRs, convene meetings with NGOs and community organizations to coordinate joint

tasks. Unfortunately, most organizations work independently rather than collaborating with local

institutions. At community level, UGRs from municipalities disseminate warning information to local

communities using communication media (Lindel and Perry 2004). More specifically, they use two

mass notification methods for warning dissemination (Tapsell and others 2004; Anderson 2006):

conventional radio and television. Commonly newspapers also inform about the event. Updates and

emergency instructions are also transmitted by these communication media. Unfortunately,

frequencies of the radio stations do not reach further than the capital and the communities near the

urban districts. Amateur radio is thus the communication technology used by community peasants to

disseminate intercommunity warning information if available. Finally, door knocking is the main

method used to warn citizens in a community. Addressable notification methods (Tapsell and others

2004; Anderson 2006) are the most common communication technologies used at community level.

5 The 38 indicators used are: gender, age, disability, ethnic minority, language, educational attainment level, social ties, socio-

economic group, work and resources, risk knowledge-previous experiences, environmental cues, lead time, warning levels, experience with warning technology, knowledge about warning technology, manner in which technology is introduced, reputation of technology, perceived benefits and disbenefits, warning source, reputation of DRR agencies, structure of governance, structures of other DRR agencies, annual costs, warning frequency, risk location information, warning clarity, sufficient information, message accuracy, certainty of message, warning message consistency, confirm the threat, guidance, psychological characteristics, disaster preparedness, response, estimated losses, personal damage, and behavioral consequences. 6 See the caption of Figure 3 for the full names of these authorities


7

Figure 3. The early warning and emergency communication system (source: Basco-Carrera 2013). SENAMHI, Servicio Nacional de Meteorología e Hidrología; SNHN, Servicio Nacional de Hidrografía Naval; SEARPI, Servicio de Encruzamiento de las Aguas y Regularización del rio Piraí; ENDE, Empresa Nacional de Electricidad; AASANA, Administración de Aeropuertos y Servicios Auxiliares a la Navegación Aérea; DGR Beni, Regional Risk Management Unit of Beni; SEMENA, Servicio al Mejoramiento de la Navegabilidad Amazónica; UGR, Municipal Risk Management Unit; GAD Beni, Provincial government; GAM, Municipal government; COED Beni, Emergency Operation Centre (EOC) of Beni; COEM, EOC from municipalities; NGO, non-government organizations; VIDECI, Ministry of Civil Defense.

3.4 Making Beni resilient: Improvement of the flood Early Warning System in Beni

By analyzing the local situation regarding the existing EWS in the department of Beni, several

shortcomings were identified and it was clear that the main problems lie in DRR was perceived as

“Emergency attention” rather than “Risk Prevention, low participation of local communities in risk

reduction planning processes, insufficient collaboration among stakeholders and low institutional

capacity, mainly because of the concentration of resources and capacities at national level. The

program “Living with Water” (Vivir con el Agua) for Beni, which is part of the National River Basin Plan,

started at the end of 2012 in order to address these challenges (VRHyR 2010). This program aims to

minimize the adverse effects of floods by increasing adaptive capacities of the population settled in

the middle basin of the Mamoré river. The public sector is the main sector covered in this program;

although other economic sectors are included such as agriculture, farming and environment. One of

the main components7 of the program is the improvement of the existing EWS. It seeks to minimize

the adverse effects of floods in the region of Beni through the development of an EWS based on

modeling and hydrologic simulation and transferring these technologies to the appropriate Bolivian

institutions. This component aims to address the challenges of the current EWS by considering early

warning, stakeholder participation and capacity development as key elements for ensuring DRR and

local development in Beni.

The concept of Early Warning System

Early warning is of key importance for the reduction of disaster risk (HFA 2). However, in Bolivia and

7 The program consists of five components: EWS, Territory Order, DRR Management, Validate experiences of Hydraulic

cultures and Environment and Biodiversity Conservation (VRHyR 2010)


8

particularly in Beni DRR is mostly perceived as emergency attention (FUNDECPO 2013 a; Basco-

Carrera 2013). As a result, most of the financial resources for DRR are allocated to disaster

preparedness and response, and recovery (VIDECI 2013). Understanding the concept of EWS is

crucial for changing people’s perception and stakeholder’s actions regarding DRR. Multiple elements

are implicit within the concept of flood Early Warning System. The analysis of the existing flood EWS

in Beni, in particular the different levels in the institutional setup, the different roles played by the

stakeholders involved and the approach adopted in the project, allowed to identify and visualize the

multiple elements that are implicit within the concept of EWS. The understanding of these elements

and their implications in terms of technical and organizational requirements helped assessing the

conditions and actions for institutional development.

Early warning implies firstly to be aware of the perceptions, meanings and impacts of floods for

different stakeholders. However, urban neighborhoods, suburban communities, ranchers, farmers,

local and regional DRR organizations do not perceive and face floods in the same way. Just as an

example, for an isolated community in the Benian flood plains, recurrent flooding does not necessarily

mean a serious threat in terms of economic loses. On the contrary, besides the risk to survival, it can

represent an opportunity to be supported by NGOs and government offices as part of the emergency

response (e.g. building new infrastructure, donations, and improvement of health services, amongst

others). In contrast, for a rancher a flood without a timely warning may represent the loss of hundreds

or even thousands of cattle, causing huge economic losses. The different perceptions and interests

will therefore influence the way in which every stakeholder gets involved in the DRR process. The

second implicit element of the EWS is “early”. Monitoring and forecasting are key factors but also the

timely communication and decision making related to issuing the warning. This “early” requisite will

also be linked to local perceptions, interests and specific needs. In terms of capacity development, a

strong technical capacity is a prerequisite for producing reliable forecasting information. This technical

capacity includes the equipment required for monitoring and forecasting, software requirements and

its adequacy to local capabilities, and well trained technical personnel. A third element implicit in the

EWS is the “warning” itself. Warning implies communication facilities, the pertinent (negotiated and

agreed) protocols to define the type of warning as well as the political power and commitment to

disseminate the warning and to act accordingly. Finally, an EWS implies a “system”. This means

various levels of organization and coordination requirements, with various types of flows (information,

resources and decisions) with specific outputs. The understanding of these elements and their

implications in terms of institutional and technical requirements helps assessing the DRR conditions

and actions for local development.

The involvement of vulnerable local communities in risk reduction planning processes

The HFA 2005-2015 highlights the importance of understanding and reducing disaster risk based on

public participation (UNISDR 2005). The framework applied in the Mamoré River Basin helps

transforming disaster preparedness and response actions implemented by the local communities into

forecasting requirements, required for the planning processes. As a result, the needs of vulnerable

local communities become a main pillar of the EWS.

The first step of the framework focuses on identifying the needs of vulnerable local communities for

early warning to floods. The likelihood of flooding in the Mamoré River Basin is very high (CEPAL

2007, 2008). Almost every year some municipalities suffer from this event and suffer the dramatic

consequences that flooding involves (VRHyR 2010). As a result, DRR actions such as operating

evacuation shelters and assisting evacuation are conducted almost yearly by community-based

organizations, NGOs, COE Beni8 and/or municipalities and Defense Civil. Not only DRR organizations,

8 Based on “Law of Decentralization”, “Law of Municipalities” and recently on the “Law of Autonomies”, local and regional

governments are encouraged to operate a Risk Management Unit (DGR and UGR respectively). Once a hazard occurs, COED


9

also local communities play a crucial role in disaster preparedness and response (UNISDR 2004,

2012). Safeguarding family members and temporary removal of property from floodplains by moving

them to a safe elevation are the main protective DRR actions carried out by all community members if

there is sufficient lead time. Both actions are mainly carried out between one and five days before the

event occurs. The construction of ‘lomas’, ‘camellones’ and ‘chapapas’ (artificial high lands)

(Saavedra 2009; Baars 2013) is the most common mitigation action because almost 100% of citizens

living in remote communities feel reluctant to leave their houses and household goods during flooding

seasons (which typically last between two weeks and three months) as a result of burglary. In this

regard, the government, NGOs and private ranchers have constructed ‘camellones’ and ‘lomas’

during the last seven years. This approach is based on the ancient knowledge of the ‘Hydraulic

cultures of Moxos’ (Culturas Hidráulicas de Moxos). Hence, although some of the population moves

to temporary shelters, around 70% prefer to stay in the flood areas despite the high risks of economic

and social damage. Ranchers use these permanent or temporary infrastructures for removing their

livestock from floodplains. Despite these measures it was found that many farmers, ranchers, or in

general people facing recurrent floods, frequently do not take any preventive action to save their

crops, cattle, domestic goods or even their lives. This is maybe because of the insufficient lead time

but may also be because most of them are used to apply for national and international donations as

emergency aid.

The second step transforms the DRR actions in terms of flood preparedness and response into

forecasting requirements. Results of the research confirmed a variety of information and lead times at

which forecasts are required. Hence, adaptation of forecasting information to customization needs is

crucial. In order to carry out protective DRR actions, flood response agencies, NGOs, cattle ranchers

and the population in general are interested in water levels, discharges, flood duration and expected

flooded areas at a lead time of between two and five days. Medium range forecasts of about two to

four weeks are mainly demanded by cattle ranchers and farmers. DRR organizations also make use

of this forecasting information as a pre-warning. Finally, farmers and DRR agencies also need

extended range forecasts with a lead time of seasonal forecasts. Table 1 summarizes the required

lead times by each relevant stakeholder involved in the flood EWS.

Forecasts Lead time Variables of interest Responsible stakeholders

Short range 0-10 days

Water levels

Flood duration

Discharges

Flooded areas

DDR organizations like DGR-COED, UGR-COE municipalities, NGOs: community organizations, cattle ranchers and population

Medium and extended range

5-10 days 1-3 months

Expected water levels

Expected flood duration

Expected discharges

Volumetric forecasts

Expected flooded areas

DDR organizations like DGR-COED, UGR-COE municipalities, NGOs: community organizations, cattle ranchers and farmers

Seasonal 1-3 months 1 year

Expected departure from normal Farmers and other sectors depending on water sources

Table 1. Lead time requirements (source: Basco-Carrera 2013)

Strengthening DRR organizations through technical capacity development and partnerships

The effectiveness of an EWS is very much dependent on political commitment, the institutional and

technical capacity of DRR organizations as well as the willingness of the involved stakeholders to

cooperate in reducing the impacts of flooding (UNISDR 2012, VIDECI 2013).

An EWS is a warning chain. This means that a weakness or failure of any element of the EWS can

cause the failure of the whole system. As shown in Figure 3, a large set of agents play a role in the

implementation of the EWS. The institutional capacity of DRR organizations is therefore dependent on

and COEM (Centre of Operation of Emergencies) are “activated” as institutional platforms to assist in emergencies by regional and local governments respectively.


10

the cooperation among agencies. In this regard, the study showed that failure in the inter-institutional

communication and coordination between mainly those stakeholders with similar roles (involved in the

early stages of the warning chain; monitoring and forecasting), on the basis of their strong

competiveness, is a major issue and has a substantial negative impact on the success of the entire

warning chain. Joint capacity development in terms of collaborative learning is considered as the best

tool to assist this process of reaching consensus and enhancing cooperation among involved DRR

organizations in the Mamoré River Basin (UNISDR 2004, 2012). Specifically, the strengthening of the

technical capacity of municipal, regional and national DRR organizations is carried out by on-the-job

training. The analysis showed a good technical capacity of some of the personnel at regional and

national DRR organizations such as SENAMHI, SEARPI, AASANA, SEMENA, SNHN and DGR Beni.

Despite technical differences among them, each of the organizations has its area of expertise.

Because low institutional capacity of DRR organizations is mainly caused by the concentration of

resources and capacities at national level, a process of decentralization and strengthening of local

organizations has been launched by MMAyA. For these two reasons, a scientific committee

composed of technicians of all organizations including experts from international and national

research institutes has been established in Beni. The main role of this committee is the improvement

of the flood EWS through information and knowledge sharing and the acquisition of collective

technical skills by working jointly. The project also assumes that a strong technical capacity also

includes the equipment required for monitoring and forecasting and software requirement. In this

regard, information and knowledge sharing is addressed by making use of the Delft-FEWS system9

(Werner and others 2013). The fact that Delft-FEWS allows all involved organizations to share real

time data and this information can be visualized by all, helps building mutual trust and by doing so,

cooperation is reinforced (UNISDR 2004). Finally, the study corroborated that one of the main

problems that most of the DRR organizations in Bolivia face is their high dependence on political

support, which creates a permanent state of instability (FUNDEPCO 2013 a, b). The creation of

alliances between DRR organizations was identified as a proper initiative for strengthening

institutional capacity as well as to improve access to financial resources to implement risk reduction

activities. In this regard, some alliances between national and regional DRR organizations are formed

(SENAMHI-SEARPI-DGR; and SENAMHI-UGRs), as well as between regional and local

governmental organizations (DGR–UGRs). This is intended to be a preliminary step towards the

setting-up of a Mamoré River Basin Organization.

4. Conclusions and recommendations

A framework for identifying the needs of local communities for early warning to floods was applied in

the Mamoré River Basin in Bolivia. This framework describes an Early Warning System as a warning

chain. It comprises six activities that follow the process of course of an event through to the response

that should be complete once for example flooding manifests itself. This framework is useful for

identifying lead times and the accuracy needs of different stakeholders and subsequently establishing

forecast needs based on these requirements. This understanding is considered a prerequisite to

developing the institutional and technical structure of the EWS in the basin.

The results of the study show that early warning, stakeholder participation and capacity development

are key elements for ensuring Disaster Risk Reduction and local development. This paper addresses

two critical issues related to DRR in Bolivia: understanding the concept of Early Warning System, as

well as transforming the “emergency culture” of both government (national, regional and local) and

community level. For this it presents a framework for early warning based on stakeholders’

forecasting requirements by making use of the hydrological forecasting and warning system called

9 Delft-FEWS forms the modeling environment that brings together the real-time hydro-meteorological data collection and the

hydrological modeling using the WFLOW rainfall-runoff model. WLFOW is an in-house product of Deltares and includes a flood inundation tool for the forecasting of the extension of the flood events in the Beni


11

Delft-FEWS, developed by Deltares. In particular, the proposed framework helps transforming

disaster preparedness and response actions undertaken by vulnerable communities at risk in

forecasting requirements. This study demonstrates that stakeholder participation in risk reduction

planning processes increases the chance that various stakeholders are willing to lend their

cooperation to solving the problem. Finally in terms of capacity development, flood EWS to be

effective requires technical capabilities including resources like technical infrastructure, equipment

required for monitoring and forecasting, specific software packages as well as technical and

permanent staff. Other capacities are organizational, coordination mechanisms and to know the

prerogatives, duties and resources that are immersed in DRR processes in Bolivia. No all local

municipalities and communities know what to do and how to act (politically, technically and

administrative). This paper shows that apart from strengthening technical and emergency

management capacities, joint collaboration between national and regional water agencies, knowledge

institutes, local stakeholders as well as public awareness are key factors for DRR.

Unfortunately, the dramatic consequences of the recent floods in 2014 in Beni have demonstrated

that, as mentioned in the local progress report on the implementation of the HFA (FUNDEPCO 2013),

there is still much to be done in improving the existing flood EWS. In terms of disaster preparedness

and response, there is the need to really change people’s perception and public servant’s actions

about DRR from emergency attention to risk prevention. Awareness rising, education and improving

communication facilities is essential for addressing this need. However, by internalizing

(institutionalizing) DRR in local, regional and national state institutions based on planning processes,

public budgetary previsions, administrative mechanisms and improving technical capabilities in public

service staff is where the main challenges and the real change lie. The second main issue refers to

the limited understanding of the local context and the need for decentralization. Bolivian DRR

organizations need to assume that an effective flood EWS can only be achieved if the EWS is

implemented through all levels (local, regional and national), and not only from the central office. The

insufficient cooperation between DRR organizations and stakeholders on the basis of their strong

competiveness was identified during the research in 2013 and has been corroborated during the 2014

floods as the major shortcoming of the existing EWS. These organizations need to bridge their

differences (in power, visions, interests and capabilities) and really start working jointly since the

safety of human lives is at stake. For this, information and knowledge sharing as well as capacity

development is a prerequisite condition. Finally, the 2014 floods have also shown insufficient political

commitment. On the one hand, the national and regional governments need to consider DRR as a

priority. The consequences of the floods have a dramatic impact on socio-economic and human

development of the region and the country. On the other hand, the institutional capacity needs to be

strengthened by closer strategic alliances and partnerships among DRR organizations.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank MMAyA, particularly VRHyR, the provincial and municipal governments of

Beni, and the Dutch Embassy for supporting the program “Living with Water”. We also acknowledge

the support of the Bolivian and Dutch organizations involved in the EWS component. Last but not

least, a special thanks to Ron Passchier and all interviewees, without your help this research would

not have been possible.

References

Albo X. and Romero C. (2009). “Autonomías Indígenas en la Realidad Boliviana y su Nueva Constitución”. (Bolivia, GTZ/PADEP)

Anderson P. (2006). “British Columbia Tsunami Warning Methods. A Toolkit for Community Planning”. (Canada, Telematics Research Lab. Simon Fraser University)

Baars G.J. (2013). “Implementation of Camellones, Beni”. (Bolivia, MMAyA, VRHyR)


12

Basco-Carrera L. (2013) “Stakeholder oriented optimization of a Flood Warning System”. (Germany, Technical University of Darmstadt)

Carsell K.M., Pingel N.D. and Ford D.T. (2004). “Quantifying the benefit of flood warning system”. Natural Hazards Review 5: 131-140

CEPAL (2007). “Alteraciones climáticas en Bolivia: Impactos observados en el primer trimestre de 2007”. (Mexico, CEPAL)

CEPAL (2008). “Evaluación del impacto acumulado y adicional ocasionado por La Niña, Bolivia 2008”. (Mexico, CEPAL)

FUNDEPCO a (2013). “Local progress report on the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action (First Cycle). Santísima Trinidad, Bolivia”. (Bolivia, FUNDEPCO)

FUNDEPCO b (2013). “Local progress report on the implementation of the 10 Essentials for Making Cities Resilient (First Cycle). Santísima Trinidad, Bolivia”. (Bolivia, FUNDEPCO)

HDN (2010). “Emerging Challenges for Early Warning Systems in context of Climate Change and Urbanization”. (Switzerland, ISDR, DKKV and Humanitarian & Development Network)

IPCC (2013). “Climate Change 2013. The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2013. Summary for Policy Makers”. (USA, IPCC)

Klingberg P. (2011). “Implementation of flood early warning systems in Mozambique. A stakeholder involved process?”. (Sweden, University of Gothenburg)

Mileti D. (2005). “Factors related to Flood Warning Response”. Paper presented at the US-Italy Research workshop on the Hydrometeorology, Impacts and Management of Extreme Floods (USA, University of Colorado)

Molinari D. and Handmer J. (2011). “A behavioural model for quantifying flood warning effectiveness”. Journal of Flood Risk Management 4:23-32

Saavedra Arteaga O. (2009). “Culturas Hidráulicas de la Amazonia Boliviana. Ecología Cultural Sofisticada y Manejo del Paisaje”. Ensayo sobre filosofía, ciencias y desarrollo para la construcción de la perspectiva histórica (Bolivia, AC publicaciones, OXFAM)

Sayers P., Yuanyuan L., Galloway G., Penning-Rowsell E., Fuxin S., Kang W., Yiwei C. and Le Quesne T. (2013). “Flood Risk Management. A Strategic Approach”. (Paris, UNESCO)

Shah M.A.R., Douven W.J.A.M., Werner M. and Leentvaar J. (2012). “Flood warning responses of farmer households: a case study in Uria Union in the Brahmaputra flood plain, Bangladesh”. Flood Risk Management 5:258-269

Tapsell S.M., Burton R., Parker D.J., Oakes S. (2004). “The Social Performance of Flood Warning Communication Technologies”. Environment Agency Technical Report W5X-016. (Enfield, Flood Hazard Research Center, Iddlesex University)

Terpstra T. (2009). “Flood Preparedness. Thoughts, Feelings and Intentions of the Dutch Public.” (The Netherlands, University of Twente)

UNISDR (2004). “Living with Risk. A global review of disaster reduction initiatives”. (Geneva, UNISDR)

UNISDR (2005). “Hyogo Framewotk for Action 2005-2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters”. Extract from the final report of the World Conference on Disaster Reduction (A/CONF.206/6) (Japan, UNISDR)

UNISDR (2009). “Terminology on Disaster Risk Reduction”. (Geneva, UNISDR)

UNISDR (2012). “ How to Make Cities More Resilient. A Handbook for Local Government Leaders”. (Geneva, UNISDR)

UN-Water (2014). “A Post-2015 Global Goal for Water: Synthesis of Key Findings and Recommendations from UN-Water”. (United States, UN-Water)


13

VIDECI (2013). “Informe Nacional del Progreso en la Implementacion del Marco de Accion de Hyogo (2011-2013). Bolivia”. (Bolivia, VIDECI)

VRHyR (2010). “Programa de Gestión de Riesgos de Inundaciones en el Beni “Vivir con el Agua”. (Bolivia, MMAyA)

Werner M., Winsemius H.C. and Robinson B. (2011) A Framework for Establishing Flow Forecasting Requirements: Application in the Zambezi River Basin. (The Netherlands, Deltares)

Werner M.G.F., Schellekens J., Gijsbers P., van Dijk M., van den Akker O. and Heynert K. (2013). “An introduction to the Delft-FEWS flow forecasting system”. Environmental Modelling & Software 40: 65-77

stakeholder participation and capacity development as key ... · yacuma, san ignacio de moxos and...

Documents