Smoke and mirrors: deficiencies in disaster funding
http://www.100md.com
《英国医生杂志》
Peter Walker, director1, Ben Wisner, research fellow2, Jennifer Leaning, professor of international health3, Larry Minear, director, humanitarianism and war project1
1 Feinstein International Famine Center, Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, Tufts University, Medford MA 02155, USA, 2 Crisis States Programme, Development Studies Institute, London School of Economics and Political Science, London WC2A 2AE, 3 Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02215, USA
Correspondence to: P Walker peter.walker@tufts.edu
Disasters such as the recent tsunami, which derail development can no longer be viewed as short term blips from which society readily recovers
Introduction
The present system of tallying aid flows distorts the apparent generosity of different parts of the world, playing up that of Western governments and playing down that of the general public and smaller nations of the world. The figures for funds pledged and spent usually derive from the UN's financial tracking system and, for historical data, from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development's development assistance committee. These sources systematically underestimate global humanitarian giving. Public donations to non-governmental organisations are not reflected fully. Estimates suggest that Western nongovernmental organisations may raise as much as $2bn annually from the public. Analyst Abby Stoddard estimates that globally some 75% of the humanitarian resources of non-governmental organisations come from the general public.6 Funds from Islamic agencies and Islamic government to government funding also tend to be minimised in normal aid reporting. Another undercounted source is the considerable funding from diaspora groups around the world. In early 2001, after the earthquake in Gujarati, expatriate Gujaratis provided hundreds of millions of dollars above and beyond their normal remittances from overseas.7 Finally the investment made by disaster survivors themselves in rebuilding their own communities is rarely calculated.
One of the promising and noteworthy developments from the tsunami response has been the contributions from middle class people in India to relief efforts there and in neighbouring countries.8 On the government side, the first ever contribution by the government of China to an international relief mobilisation also bodes well for more inclusive and participatory international arrangements. The present system, however, will not necessarily capture these figures.
Meeting longer term needs
The global picture on natural disasters is changing. Data compiled by the Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters at Louvain University, Brussels, paints a disturbing picture. Over the past two decades, the annual deaths from disaster have fallen by around 30% whereas the number of people affected by disaster has gone up by 59%.10 The data also show that the number of disasters, almost all meteorological in nature, is steadily rising year on year, from an average of 150 a year in 1980 to over 450 a year today. Although some of this increase may be due to better reporting, a substantial part represents a very real phenomenon.
Even more striking is the relation between development and disaster vulnerability. Analysng 2557 disasters between 1991 and 2000, the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Federation found that in countries with high human development indices there were 23 deaths per disaster, whereas in countries with low indices 1052 people died per disaster.11 In other words, development is an investment in disaster mitigation.
The fall in deaths from disasters is partly explained by better warning systems and preparedness for predictable flooding. The data also signal the reluctance of governments to sustain high death tolls in disasters. In the past (for example, Ethiopia in the 1970s), high death rates in natural disasters have led directly to uprisings and the overthrow of regimes. Organised attempts to reduce death rates immediately after disasters have characterised relief work over the past 30 years.12
The rise in the number of people affected, and therefore the numbers needing to rebuild and facing future disasters, is concerning. The increase may reflect three factors. The first is climate change, which is producing more frequent extreme meteorological events and an inexorable rise in sea level. The second is the global trend of urbanisation, with most growth being in shantytowns and marginalised areas of cities and most large cities being located in coastal areas. Thirdly, the complexity of the development process tends to increase vulnerability to disaster. Miserable local and national governance (as seen in Haiti in last year's floods and landslides), debt policies, the structure of donor aid, the dynamics of population growth and forced displacement, and the growing effect of economic globalisation all have their effect.
High profile pleas for public donations do not lessen the need for long term state funding
Credit: RON EDMONDS/AP
Reforming disaster management
Patrick S. The check is in the mail: improving the delivery and coordination of post-conflict assistance. New York: Center on International Cooperation, 1998. www.nyu.edu/pages/cic/pubs/TheCheck.html (accessed 12 Jan 2005).
Reynolds P. Delivering the promise: aid problems. BBC News website 6 Jan 2005. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4152285.stm (accessed 12 Jan 2005).
Reliefweb. UN-OCHA financial tracking system. Global summary data. http://ocha.unog.ch/fts/index.aspx (accessed 12 Jan 2005).
Clay E. The Indian Ocean tsunami: what are the economic consequences? www.odi.org.uk/tsunami.html (accessed 13 Jan 2005).
US Agency for International Development. Tsunami relief page. www.usaid.gov/locations/asia_near_east/tsunami/ (accessed 12 Jan 2005).
Stoddard A. Humanitarian NGOs: challenges and trends. Humanitarian Policy Group Briefing Paper No 12. London: Overseas Development Institute, 2003. www.odi.org.uk/hpg/papers/hpgbrief12.pdf (accessed 12 Jan 2005).
India Together. The earthquake in Gujarati. www.indiatogether.org/relief/quake.htm (accessed 12 Jan 2005).
Deutsche Presse Agentur. India sends aid to Sri Lanka, other affected countries. Dec 2004. www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf /480fa8736b88bbc3c12564f6004c8ad5/cc687322786491f dc1256f7b003dfe87?OpenDocument (accessed 12 Jan 2005).
Revkin A. How scientists and victims watched helplessly. New York Times 2004 Dec 31: A15.
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. Disaster data: Key trends and statistics. In: World Disasters Report 2004. Geneva: IFRC, 2004: 163-4.
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. World Disaster Report 2001. Geneva: IFRC, 2001: 161-4.
Wisner B, Piers Blaikie P, Terry Cannon T, Ian Davis I. At risk: natural hazards, people's vulnerability, and disasters. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2004: 75-99.
1 Feinstein International Famine Center, Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy, Tufts University, Medford MA 02155, USA, 2 Crisis States Programme, Development Studies Institute, London School of Economics and Political Science, London WC2A 2AE, 3 Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02215, USA
Correspondence to: P Walker peter.walker@tufts.edu
Disasters such as the recent tsunami, which derail development can no longer be viewed as short term blips from which society readily recovers
Introduction
The present system of tallying aid flows distorts the apparent generosity of different parts of the world, playing up that of Western governments and playing down that of the general public and smaller nations of the world. The figures for funds pledged and spent usually derive from the UN's financial tracking system and, for historical data, from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development's development assistance committee. These sources systematically underestimate global humanitarian giving. Public donations to non-governmental organisations are not reflected fully. Estimates suggest that Western nongovernmental organisations may raise as much as $2bn annually from the public. Analyst Abby Stoddard estimates that globally some 75% of the humanitarian resources of non-governmental organisations come from the general public.6 Funds from Islamic agencies and Islamic government to government funding also tend to be minimised in normal aid reporting. Another undercounted source is the considerable funding from diaspora groups around the world. In early 2001, after the earthquake in Gujarati, expatriate Gujaratis provided hundreds of millions of dollars above and beyond their normal remittances from overseas.7 Finally the investment made by disaster survivors themselves in rebuilding their own communities is rarely calculated.
One of the promising and noteworthy developments from the tsunami response has been the contributions from middle class people in India to relief efforts there and in neighbouring countries.8 On the government side, the first ever contribution by the government of China to an international relief mobilisation also bodes well for more inclusive and participatory international arrangements. The present system, however, will not necessarily capture these figures.
Meeting longer term needs
The global picture on natural disasters is changing. Data compiled by the Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters at Louvain University, Brussels, paints a disturbing picture. Over the past two decades, the annual deaths from disaster have fallen by around 30% whereas the number of people affected by disaster has gone up by 59%.10 The data also show that the number of disasters, almost all meteorological in nature, is steadily rising year on year, from an average of 150 a year in 1980 to over 450 a year today. Although some of this increase may be due to better reporting, a substantial part represents a very real phenomenon.
Even more striking is the relation between development and disaster vulnerability. Analysng 2557 disasters between 1991 and 2000, the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Federation found that in countries with high human development indices there were 23 deaths per disaster, whereas in countries with low indices 1052 people died per disaster.11 In other words, development is an investment in disaster mitigation.
The fall in deaths from disasters is partly explained by better warning systems and preparedness for predictable flooding. The data also signal the reluctance of governments to sustain high death tolls in disasters. In the past (for example, Ethiopia in the 1970s), high death rates in natural disasters have led directly to uprisings and the overthrow of regimes. Organised attempts to reduce death rates immediately after disasters have characterised relief work over the past 30 years.12
The rise in the number of people affected, and therefore the numbers needing to rebuild and facing future disasters, is concerning. The increase may reflect three factors. The first is climate change, which is producing more frequent extreme meteorological events and an inexorable rise in sea level. The second is the global trend of urbanisation, with most growth being in shantytowns and marginalised areas of cities and most large cities being located in coastal areas. Thirdly, the complexity of the development process tends to increase vulnerability to disaster. Miserable local and national governance (as seen in Haiti in last year's floods and landslides), debt policies, the structure of donor aid, the dynamics of population growth and forced displacement, and the growing effect of economic globalisation all have their effect.
High profile pleas for public donations do not lessen the need for long term state funding
Credit: RON EDMONDS/AP
Reforming disaster management
Patrick S. The check is in the mail: improving the delivery and coordination of post-conflict assistance. New York: Center on International Cooperation, 1998. www.nyu.edu/pages/cic/pubs/TheCheck.html (accessed 12 Jan 2005).
Reynolds P. Delivering the promise: aid problems. BBC News website 6 Jan 2005. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4152285.stm (accessed 12 Jan 2005).
Reliefweb. UN-OCHA financial tracking system. Global summary data. http://ocha.unog.ch/fts/index.aspx (accessed 12 Jan 2005).
Clay E. The Indian Ocean tsunami: what are the economic consequences? www.odi.org.uk/tsunami.html (accessed 13 Jan 2005).
US Agency for International Development. Tsunami relief page. www.usaid.gov/locations/asia_near_east/tsunami/ (accessed 12 Jan 2005).
Stoddard A. Humanitarian NGOs: challenges and trends. Humanitarian Policy Group Briefing Paper No 12. London: Overseas Development Institute, 2003. www.odi.org.uk/hpg/papers/hpgbrief12.pdf (accessed 12 Jan 2005).
India Together. The earthquake in Gujarati. www.indiatogether.org/relief/quake.htm (accessed 12 Jan 2005).
Deutsche Presse Agentur. India sends aid to Sri Lanka, other affected countries. Dec 2004. www.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf /480fa8736b88bbc3c12564f6004c8ad5/cc687322786491f dc1256f7b003dfe87?OpenDocument (accessed 12 Jan 2005).
Revkin A. How scientists and victims watched helplessly. New York Times 2004 Dec 31: A15.
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. Disaster data: Key trends and statistics. In: World Disasters Report 2004. Geneva: IFRC, 2004: 163-4.
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. World Disaster Report 2001. Geneva: IFRC, 2001: 161-4.
Wisner B, Piers Blaikie P, Terry Cannon T, Ian Davis I. At risk: natural hazards, people's vulnerability, and disasters. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2004: 75-99.