Emdv8124 Disaster Risk Reduction And Assessment Answers

Imagine you have been asked to write a detailed review of an incident for a response and relief agency. The questions posed are; “

1. Were they prepared
   
   
2. Did they manage it welland

3. Did they recover well?

Choos of the following disasters

• 2017 Malaysia Floods
• 2017 Chile forest fires
• 2016 floods and severe weather Turkey
• 2016 Earthquake Italy

Students will undertake an examination of the event.  A commentary of the event should be prepared including:

1. A description of the event .
2. An analysis of how the event was managed and if that management accorded with the principles of effective disaster management throughout the cycle of preparedness, response and recovery.
3. A discussion of how the lessons learned (both what went well and what did not go well) may be applied in the future

In addition the assignment should be presented to a high standard of academic wriit9nmg with appropriate use of references

The assignment should demonstrate your analytical abilities, an understanding of the basic principles and the ability to identify and critically analyse the issues.

Introduction

A flood is a mass of water that exceeds the capacity that can be held by river banks in any water body. It is logical that when water from a river gets blocked; the plain gets surrounded with water, that is flood dominated that has the effect of being a hazard to the community. The occurrence of floods impacts terribly on the people as it has the effect of disrupting the day to day tasks and the effects can last for weeks. Climatic changes have the effect of making the situation worse in future. Flooding as a natural event is unstoppable despite the efforts from the government to stop or minimize such occurrences.

The worst natural disaster that gets experienced in Malaysia is flooding. Malaysia has 187 basins from rivers with the main tributaries heading to the sea located in China. More than 29800 km² that is directly proportional to the 9% of the total area in Malaysia is vulnerable to the floods. Approximately 482 million people get affected; this is just twenty two percent of the entire population in Malaysia. Malaysian floods can be categorized in two forms from the  Malaysia Drainage and Department of Irrigation that is flash floods and monsoon floods (Shah, Mustaffa, & Yusof, 2017). The difference between the two disasters is the period taken to rise above the ordinary level by the river. Flash floods only take some hours to get back to the normal level. On the other hand, the monsoon floods take more than a month. Changes in the local weather are some of the causes that bring the flash flood whereas the human-made causes are poor drainage systems and an influx in the number of buildings towns and most cases results in flash floods in the Klang valley. As a result of increased roads, buildings and parking places, urban centers are prone to floods.

The repercussions of floods always result in an economic downfall for most low-income earners who feel the impact more than the high-income earners. With the little income, there is a little effort that can be done by the low-income earners to mitigate the floods. Since 1920s Malaysia has experienced some floods and one of the worst was in December 2006 and 2007 floods. It forms such experiences that the rescue and recovery departments have learned to handle the condition.

Description of the Event

One of the most devastating natural disasters that has brought so much pain into the lives and the families of the Malaysian people are the floods. This study reveals some of the causes, effects, and mitigation of floods. According to one of the comparative studies, it was shown that people perceived poor drainage as one of the factors that led to floods. The others believed that evacuating people to safe zones from prone areas is the best way of reducing people affected by victims. The review reveals further that the government and other relevant stakeholders should take initiatives meant to improve the drainage before and during the rainfall period. The report also suggested that people should avoid constructing buildings along waterways so as to reduce frequent flooding and the government should ensure that people are evacuated from prone areas and that no buildings should be built in such areas.

The Lunar year celebrations were disrupted in Peninsular Malaysia after flooding that was triggered by the heavy rains that are seasonal and have seen more than 15000 people in six states become victims (Davies, 2017). As of January, close to 7800 people remained in the centers of evacuation. The states of Johor and Pahang were the most affected as compared to other states. According to Hamilah one of the victims, he narrated that he had been out of his house for four days and could not get access and had been camping at this sisters house that had been built on a hill that is safe from the floods. However, Hamilah was worried that the floods could have worsened if the rains continued. In some districts, the waters from the floods rose above 1.5 meters making it impossible for the vehicles to access the main roads. In the previous month, the floods had been severe in the northern state of Kelantan. According to another victim Nurain, a villager who had taken refuge from one of the 32 evacuation centers reported that the flood was in the second wave and the third wave was expected as the flows from Pahang went down to Johor. The seasonal rains that started from December caused flooding in states such as Kelantan and Terengganu(LEONG, 2017).

The floods displaced more than 25000 souls temporarily and rendered some villages inaccessible as a result of bridges damaged and roads getting blocked. The total number of people that were affected as of January 27 stood at 14000.The situation, however, improved after the Lunar weekend after the floodwater dropped significantly in some of the affected districts enabling families that were in centers of relief return home (LEONG, 2017). As per the media reports, 80 percent of the evacuees from the affected areas had returned home. 54 families were in relief centers as of February in Perak. Whereas the situation had improved, the Malaysian Department of Meteorology had projected that more rains would affect the Malaysian Peninsular in February in the second week. Such a condition had the effect of affecting the major rivers such as Johor and Perak that still had water at critical levels. In response to the floods that may occur, the response teams and organizations were preparing for the floods that would occur in the second phase of flooding. In the last weeks of February, some rivers in Sarawak such as Baram and Limbang had flooded as a result of torrential rains (LEONG, 2017).

An Analysis of how the Event was Managed

In accordance with the Malaysian context, managing a disaster is not fixed to a particular kind of disaster. Any measure that is issued applies to any disaster inclusive of the floods. In one of the directives in 1997, some policies were developed to combat natural calamities under the department of national management and relief services. The instructions state clearly on the policies that should be adopted, and there are clear guidelines on the responsibilities and the roles that should be adopted by the agencies involved in such operations that entail disaster management (MKN, 2012). Also, the policies involve controlling the activities of the organizations and all the stakeholders involved in the managing a catastrophe. Therefore, in Malaysia, management of natural calamities is under the Committee on Disaster and Relief that got initiated and consists of districts that are Cosmopolitan and district levels and manages disaster at every level to ensure effectiveness (Lindell, 2011).

The management of floods in Malaysia before they occurred followed the Standard Operating Procedure that worked closely with the Department of Irrigation and Drainage, Meteorology, and public works and involves two steps, structured and unstructured. Structural measures included activities like the dams and the dikes that controlled the level of water flowing and non-structural on the other hand entailed activities such as planning for land use and forecasting for the floods and also giving warning systems that ensure negative impacts of floods get mitigated(Chan, 2012; Khalid, & Shafiai, 2015). Measures that are structural were effected with the aim of controlling the danger of flooding more so in the plains where there are more hazards to people.

Agencies implemented the policy measures as mentioned earlier included the department of irrigation and drainage, department of public works and the local authorities. On the other hand, the agencies that were involved in ensuring the unstructured measures got implemented the department of the meteorological activities in Malaysia and also the department of public works. According to the records, dissemination of warning services began in 1925 when a disaster struck along Perak and Sungai Klang. The warning systems for floods is given depending on the water level in the river in Sungai Kelantan in a bid to shun the people who had occupied the downstream Kota since 1900.Police were empowered to check the level of water of the rainfall and therefore was responsible for sending messages to the committee of warning flood that was to respond in Kota Bharu (Jabatan Pengairan dan Saliran, 2013).

After the floods in 1971, the warning mechanisms in the main rivers that experienced extreme floods got reviewed. In 2009, department of irrigation and drainage had placed more than 335 rain gauges and 206 stations that checked the water levels around the 40 basins in the main rivers to ensure monitoring of floods. Also, 400 river gauges are available in centers of observation, and in many observatory stations some sirens developed and installed (Jabatan Pengairan dan Saliran, 2013).The websites also serve in providing information on rain and the water levels. Information about the floods is readily available for the general public and the government officials(Jabatan Pengairan dan Saliran, 2013).The short message system, on the other hand, has been employed by government related agencies such as the police and the meteorological department.

The wing of Meteorology provides forecasts on their website so that the public can be aware of the changes in the weather conditions. In 2001; Manual Saliran Mera Alam was introduced as a tool for flood management. The methods that are employed in Malaysia indicate that there are efforts of managing the flood in a bid to reduce the magnitude of the effects of the flood on human life (Chan, 2012; Musa, Chan, Ku Mahamud, Karim, & Zaini, 2013).

The handling of people from the floods during and after the floods in Malaysia is also based on the policies contained in the directive. The directive states, a number of rescues agencies were on the ground during the floods such agencies included, Armed Forces of Malaysia and the Ministry of Health just to mention a few. The Social Welfare Department handled the evacuees after the floods, and it was the responsibility of the agency to handle the victims. After the season was over, the agencies took responsibility for according material and spiritual support to the victims of the floods. The Social Welfare Department worked in collaboration with other agencies such as JPAM and worked by the Directive No.20 that involved preparation and organizing evacuation centers for the victims of the floods. (Khalid, & Shafiai, 2015).

After the disaster, long-term and short-term recoveries were accorded to the victims of the floods by response agencies such as JKM that helped victims resume their normal daily lives. The department distributed relief that was short-term by providing basic needs such as food and water in the initial phases of the floods for a couple of days (dan Saliran, 2013). For the recovery that is based on long-term, it entailed compensation and financial assistance for the losses incurred and relied on the permission from the committee of National Disaster and the management committee for State Disaster. Bantan Pemulihan was provided to the victims of disaster who had not received assistance in any form (JKM, 2013/2014).However, in the case of resettlement, the government did not provide any guideline as to the type of the house that should be constructed for the victims. The reason behind not constructing the houses for the victims was because the higher authorities were responsible for deciding the type of home for the victims(Balcik, Beamon, & Smilowitz, 2008).

In one of the studies that were focused on the policies of flooding in Malaysia, it was concluded that the directives were developed with the aim of managing a flood was based on a traditional theory and failed in meeting needs and the demands of the affected people (Hamin, Othman, & Elias, 2013). In another study that was conducted again, it revealed that studies in risk management of floods that employ and adopt the top-down theory were not effective since the government acted only after a disaster occurred with no earlier preparations that integrate policies that are community-related. (Grisez Kweit, & Kweit, 2007). It was due to the fact the top-down strategy was not effective, and a more proactive approach that involves the use of bottom-up theory should be engaged so as to obtain feedback from the victims’ view  regarding the formulation of the policy and the repercussions of the floods to their daily live. From the bottom-up theory, the collection of data that involves the necessities of the victims gets accessed from the primary victims and is dependent on the complaints and the views of those involved in a catastrophe (Chan, 2012; Roosli & O,Brien, 2011). Also, it is argued that the decision to distribute disaster relief is more effective and gets more comprehensive using the bottom-up approach.

Lessons Learnt

Disaster recovery is a process that assumes three different but related meanings. It can be defined as an objective that entails restoring the activities of the people that were stopped by the effects of the disaster in the minds of the people before the occurrence of the catastrophe. Also, it is a stage in the cycle of managing emergency that starts with ensuring that the conditions surrounding disaster get stabilized and the process ends after the community returns home and the daily routine of activities. The third meaning states that it is a process where the community returns home and resumes daily chores (Hamin, Othman, & Elias, 2013).

The process of recovery entails incorporating activities that had been planned prior to the occurrence of a flood and also after the disaster occurred and also those that were developed after the disaster occurred. As such the development of a policy that is post-disaster is crucial to the victims that need urgent help from the government (Chan, 2012; Said, Abdul Gapor, Samian, & Abd Aziz, 2013; Zaiton, Mohd Bahrin, & Zaharah, 2013). It is in such circumstances that the victims’ quality of life and welfare gets improved (Roosli, 2010). There are misunderstandings with the policies after a disaster has occurred as the government is reluctant on ensuring the effectiveness of such policies.

According to the directive, it does not explain the kind of establishment that a victim should be given. As a result, the higher authority are involved, and it consumes much time for them to generate a concrete  decision and as a result, the higher authority are involved, and it takes a lot of time for them to come up with a concrete decision (Grisez Kweit, & Kweit, 2007). Involving a community in the formulation and implementation of policies helps individuals discover their potential and as such makes implementation process a more comprehensive tool (Sharma, 2013).

The agencies involved in dealing with disaster management responded accurately in the most affected areas. The victims of the floods were evacuated, and as a result, fewer lives were lost as compared to the previous years where death tolls were high. In some places, helicopters were employed as a way of saving lives faster where accessibility of vehicles was a problem. Children are the most affected in times of disaster due to their nature of handling a situation. As such the quest for missing children and mothers involved in the floods meant that more teams were deployed to save the persons missing (Hamin, Othman, & Elias, 2013).

Availability of food and water is another important thing that was looked at well. The stakeholders and the government played a critical role in ensuring that the families of the persons had the basic needs satisfied. In most cases of floods most victims starve to death in the event where there is no immediate help from either the government or the response team, and as such in the Malaysian case the victims were well looked after and the food was sufficient for them in the camps. Clean water was also provided preventing the many cases tied to waterborne diseases such as Cholera as result of taking contaminated water (dan Saliran, 2013).

Provision of items such as blankets, clothing and mosquito nets was a success. Cold is dangerous more so where there are children who in most cases have low immunity. In the event of a flood like the Malaysian case, there were blankets that were distributed to the victims more so the expectant mothers and the children to prevent them from the dangers that emanate from cold-related diseases such as pneumonia (Altay, 2008).Mosquito nets were also distributed to reduce the effects of malaria that claims more lives compared to any other disease under the sun. As such, in the cases of floods, the Malaysian government played a critical role in ensuring that the victims were safe with enough clothing to prevent them from the cold at night and also the nets for the mosquitos (Balcik, Beamon, & Smilowitz, 2008).

However, in some areas, there is the need for improvement so as to reduce the effects of floods. The role of government in ensuring that people do not construct houses near the major rivers is a total failure. It is the responsibility of the government to ensure that the lives of the citizens are always protected through implementing policies that enhance the lives of the citizens. The government has failed in evacuating people from the plains that are known for floods (Hanumantha Rao, & Subba Rao, 2008).

Conclusion

In Malaysia, floods are common phenomena and impact negatively on the victims in areas that are prone to flooding. The management of floods is contained in the Directive No.20 that has preparedness for the floods in the initial stages. Based on the directives, there are clear set guidelines and responsibilities that are initiated by the response team at each level for both the government and the private sector. However, as shown in the Malaysia floods, problems are emanating from the stage during and after the floods have occurred. It was revealed that the relief policies were ineffective and unsatisfactorily in the way the victim perceived the implementation (Wehn, Rusca, Evers, & Lafranchi, 2014).

However, there were tremendous efforts that were made by the government and the relevant stakeholders to ensure that the victims were receiving adequate help. The role of some agencies such as meteorological department played their part in ensuring that there were forecasts that had been given in advance informing the nation of the expected floods. On the other hand, there are short-term and long-term plans that need to be incorporated in the overall Malaysian planning. The issue of having buildings constructed in flood plains is something that needs urgent action. Poor drainage is also another major contributor of floods. Proper channels of drainage should get constructed to ensure in the times of heavy rains; all the water can get channeled in an appropriate place. Investing in infrastructure that can be used by the meteorological department to assist and help in forecasting is necessary more so in Malaysia where there are frequent floods. It is thus important that the government of Malaysia employ the necessary strategies and mechanisms to assist in mitigating floods.

References

Altay, N. (2008). Issues in disaster relief logistics, 120-146.

Balcik,B.,Beamon, B.,& Smilowitz,K.(2008).Last mile distribution in humanitarian  relief.J Intell Transp Syst 12, 51–63

Chan, N. W. (2012). Impacts of Disasters and Disasters Risk Management in Malaysia:  The Case of floods. In Sawada, Y. and S. Oum (eds.), Economic and Welfare Impacts of Disasters in   East  Asia and Policy Responses. ERIA Research Project Report 2011-8, Jakarta: ERIA. Pp.497-545.

Davies, R. (2017). Malaysia - 25,000 Evacuate Floods in Terengganu and Kelantan – FloodList. Retrieved from https://floodlist.com/asia/malaysia-floods-terengganu-kelantan-january-2017

FitzGerald,  G.,  Du,  W.,  Jamal,  A.,  Clark,  M.,  &  Hou,  X.  Y. (2010).  Flood fatalities in contemporary Australia (1997–2008). Emergency Medicine Australasia, 22(2), 180-186.

Hanumantha Rao, K., & Subba Rao, P. (2008). Disaster management (1st ed.). New Delhi, India: Serials Publications.

Hussaini, H. A. (2007). Flood and Drought Management in Malaysia. The speech on 21 June 2007,

Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur.

Jabatan Kebajikan Masyarakat (JKM). Peraturan Tetap Operasi Pengurusan Bencana. Putrajaya (2013/2014).

Jabatan   Pengairan   dan   Saliran.(2013).Pengurusan   Banjir   - Program  dan  Aktiviti. Retrieved from https://www.water.gov.my/our-services-mainmenu-252/floodmitigation-mainmenu-323/programme-aamp- activities-mainmenu-199?lang=my&showall=1 at 3 Januari 2014.

Khalid, M. S. & Shafiai, S. (2015). Flood Disaster Management in Malaysia: An Evaluation of the Effectiveness Flood Delivery System.

Kweit,M. G.,& Kweit R.W.(2007).Participation,perception of participation,and citizen support American Politics Research, 35(3), 407-425.

Lindell, M.K.(2011).Disaster studies,ISA eSymposium for Sociology. Diambil dari https://www.sagepub.net/isa/resources/pdf/Disaster%20Studies.pdf pada 24 Januari 2014

Majlis Keselamatan Negara (MKN).(2011).Isu-isu pengurusan bencana banjir musim 2010 dan 2011.

Perdana Menteri Malaysiahttps://www.met.gov.my/images/pdf/national_papers/dcm2011/dmc4.pdf

Majlis Keselamatan Negara (MKN).(2012). Arahan No.20.Dasar dan Mekanisme Pengurusan Bencana Jabatan Perdana Menteri Malaysia.

Musa,S.M.,Chan,N.W.,Ku Mahamud,K. R.,Karim, A., & Zaini, M. (2013).Faktor polisi dan tindakan pengurusan banjir dalam mempengaruhi keberkesanan pelaksanaan manual saliran mesra alam (MSMA).

Roosli, R.(2010).Managing disasters in Malaysia:the attitude of officials towards compliance with the Directive 20 (Doctoral dissertation, Northumbria University)

Said,M. Z.,Abdul Gapor, S.,Samian,M.N.,& Abd Aziz.A.M.(2013).Konflik di Pusat Pemindahan Banjir:  

Kajian Kes di Daerah Padang Terap, Kedah. Malaysia Journal of Society and Space    9(1), 69-78.

Wehn,U.,Rusca, M.,Evers,J.,&Lanfranchi,V.(2014).Participation in flood risk management and the potential of citizen observatories: a governance analysis.submitted to the International Conference on Flood Management.

Shah,S.,Mustaffa,Z.,& Yusof, K.(2017).Disasters Worldwide and Floods in the Malaysian Region: A Brief Review. Indian Journal Of Science And Technology, 10(2). https://dx.doi.org/10.17485/ijst/2017/v10i2 /110385

Sharrma, V. (2013). Disaster management (1st ed.). New Delhi: Scientific International Pvt. Ltd.

Zaiton,H.,Mohd Bahrin,O.,&Zaharah, E. (2013).Floating on a Legislative Framework in Flood in Malaysia: Lessons from the United Kingdom. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences,101, 277–283.