Dr. Paradzai Pathias Bongo1 Community-based disaster risk reduction in the context of climate change: The case of rural Zimbabwe INTRODUCTION This paper is based on a current Department for Overseas Development (DFID) funded Community-Based Disaster Risk Management project in the semi-arid Southern part of Zimbabwe, entitled ‘Mainstreaming Livelihood Centred Approaches to Disaster Management’.2 The paper posits the need for building, supporting and strengthening communities’ livelihoods so that they become more resilient during and after a hazard as they mainly use their local resources, institutional arrangements and own conceptions of risk. It is envisaged that community based risk reduction plans could inform meso and macro policy levels, thereby shaping the current disaster management regime prevailing in the country. Since time immemorial, human beings have been faced with various types of hazards, most of which turned into disasters. In such cases, mainstream and official prescriptions have focused on response and relief aid, without paying due regard to the need for reducing the vulnerability of affected communities by increasing their resilience through building their capacity. With the effects of climate change worsening globally, communities will be called to be even more responsive to these changes, as they affect them in newer and unique ways. They will therefore have to be supported in their adaptation measures, considering that most developing world governments are already cash-strapped to fund development and investment, let alone disaster management projects. Yet at the same time, risks that communities face dictate that livelihood-centred approaches be mainstreamed into 1 Projects Manager Livelihoods and Disaster Risk Management, Reducing Vulnerability (RV) Programme, Practical Action Southern Africa, Zimbabwe. 2 The project is based initially in 4 countries (Bangladesh, Peru, Zimbabwe and UK), and is being co- ordinated by a project co-ordinator based in the UK. The project is managed through a core team consisting of the project co-ordinator, project managers from participating countries and a disaster mitigation specialist from Sri Lanka. This team meets at least once a year to review progress and agree on outputs and work plans for the coming months. 1 disaster management and development plans. Disasters and hazards greatly reverse the gains of development, and ignoring Disaster Risk Reduction in development projects is self-defeating. WHY FOCUS ON DISASTER RISK REDUCTION IN DEVELOPMENT? Disaster risk reduction is defined as, “The systematic development and application of policies, strategies and practices to minimize vulnerabilities, hazards, and the unfolding disasters impacts throughout a society, in the broad context of sustainable development”, (UNDP, 2004). There is convincing evidence that the frequency and magnitude of disasters is increasing, and that poor countries and poor communities are disproportionately affected. More than half of disaster deaths occur in low human development countries even though only 11% of people exposed to hazards live there. These countries also suffer far greater economic losses relative to their GDP than richer countries (DFID, 2004: 1). Death, disablement or migration of key social actors leads to an erosion of social capital. Disasters are known to hold back development and progress towards attainment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Among other repercussions, recent studies indicate that both governments and donors tend to fund disaster relief and rehabilitation assistance by reallocating resources from development programmes. This affects the poor disproportionately through adverse effects on poverty reduction efforts. Many developing countries have economies based on rain-fed agriculture. This makes development in these countries particularly sensitive to weather extremes and climatic patterns (Karimanzira, R.1999: 19). The severity of the 1991/2 drought alone underlines the importance of taking into account hazards such as meteorological drought in future economic development policies. According to Karimanzira (1999), in Zimbabwe poor planning resulted in national strategic grain reserves being sold off. Other services such as health, education, and water provision came under severe pressure and this reversed much of development gains achieved in Zimbabwe in the preceding decade. Development can also cause disaster risk. This happens through unsustainable development practices that create wealth for some at the expense of unsafe working or 2 living conditions for others or degrade the environment (see Madeley, J, 1999; Low and Gleeson, 1998; Leach and Mearns, 1996). Vandana Shiva3 argues that local seed varieties and traditional cropping patterns are being rapidly replaced by hybrid varieties and monoculture. With the growing economic policies of deregulation, liberalisation and privatisation, states are advised by International Financial Institutions (IFIs) to withdraw subsidies and cut social spending to balance fiscal deficits. In the absence of protection mechanisms for the poor and marginalised against this ‘free market’ mechanism, the vulnerability of disenfranchised communities is greatly increased. At a social level, some development paths can generate cultural norms that promote social isolation or political exclusion (Bongo, P.P, 2003). Development can also reduce disaster risk. Access to adequate drinking water, food, waste management and a secure dwelling increases people’s resilience. Trade and technology can reduce poverty. Investing in financial mechanisms and social security can cushion against vulnerability. At a social level this can be seen in building community cohesion, recognising excluded individuals and providing opportunities for greater involvement in decision-making. Enhanced educational and health capacity increases resilience. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT The Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) pilot project runs for an initial five years spanning from January 2006 to December 2010. It is partly premised on the Hyogo Declaration and Hyogo Framework of Action 2005 – 2015.4 In implementing this project, Practical Action is working in partnership with two local NGOs, Organisation of Rural Associations for Progress (ORAP) and Hlekweni Friends Rural Service Centre, which has a strong Quakers grounding. The project focuses on the roles and linkages between 3 Shiva, Vandana, Poverty and Globalization www.biotech-info.net/poverty_globalization.html 4 This is a reference document which underscores disaster-development linkages, pledging that “We build upon relevant international commitments and frameworks, as well as internationally agreed development goals, including those contained in the Millennium Declaration, to strengthen global disaster reduction activities for the twenty-first century. Disasters have a tremendous detrimental impact on efforts at all levels to eradicate global poverty: the impact of disasters remains a significant challenge to sustainable development.” (ISDR, WCDR, 2005) 3 vulnerable communities, district and national level government institutions and humanitarian agencies in regards to disaster preparedness and mitigation. It examines how these agencies can be made more responsive to the needs of poor people by adopting a livelihood-centred approach to disaster management. There are four main aims: 1. To establish models in at least 3 locations (Bangladesh, Peru, Zimbabwe) where livelihood-centred approaches to disaster management are combined with other methodologies such as participatory action development planning in order to link communities better with wider institutional structures involved in disaster and development planning. The locations selected encompass areas and communities with exposure to a mixture of disaster risks including drought, flood, disease and conflict. 2. To develop guidelines and training materials on livelihood-centred disaster management for use by local and national service providers, planners and humanitarian agencies. 3. To learn lessons from experiences in implementing this approach, including an analysis of best practice in building consensus amongst stakeholders on how to link most effectively with and support communities’ own disaster planning in a sustainable way. We are also reviewing how the approach can be applied in different contexts, e.g. in fragile states where institutions are weak and where community/state relations may be antagonistic. We will undertake peer reviews and share learning on risk reduction interventions with other NGOs active in disaster risk management. 4. To influence policy makers at all levels involved in disaster management and development planning to adopt a livelihood-centred approach to disaster risk management. This will be done through: o Providing evidence of the positive impact of a livelihood-centred approach to disaster risk management on the livelihood assets of poor people through collation and analysis of past and current projects; o Working in partnership with regional networks, such as Duryog Nivaran and LaRed, and international networks such as ALNAP to disseminate project findings and provide a platform for policy discussion and advocacy; o Forming strategic alliances with other NGOs active in disaster management to promote joint actions in support of regional or international policy developments. 4 The area of operation (Matabeleland South Province of Zimbabwe) is plagued with recurring droughts and is the province with