Document of The World Bank
Report No: 21859 NI Public Disclosure Authorized
PROJECT APPRAISAL DOCUMENT Public Disclosure Authorized ON A
PROPOSED CREDIT
IN THE AMOUNT OF SDR 10.5 MILLION
(US$13.5 MILLION EQUIVALENT)
TO THE
REPUBLIC OF NICARAGUA
Public Disclosure Authorized FOR A
NATURAL DISASTER VULNERABILITY REDUCTION PROJECT
March 8, 2001 Public Disclosure Authorized Environmentally and Socially Sustainable Development Sector Management Unit Finance, Private Sector and Infrastructure Management Unit Central America Country Management Unit Latin America and Caribbean Region CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS
(Exchange Rate Effective )
Currency Unit = Cordoba (C) 1 C = US$0.08 US$1.00 = 12.9 C
FISCAL YEAR January 1 to December 31
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
CEPREDENAC Centro de Prevenci6n de los Desastres Naturales en America Central (Central American Center for Natural Disaster Prevention) Defensa Civil Civil Defense Agency EN Ejercito Nacional (National Army) FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency (U.S.) FISE Fondo de Inversi6n Social para Emergencia (Social Emergency Fund) INETER Instituto Nicaraguense de Estudios Territoriales (Institute for Research and Earth Sciences) INIFOM Instituto Nicaraguense de Fomento Municipal (Institute for Municipal Development) MAGFOR Ministerio de Asuntos Agricolas y Forestales (Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry) MARENA Ministerio de Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (Ministry of Environment and Renewable Resources) MED Ministerio de Educaci6n (Ministry of Education) MIDEF Ministerio de Defensa (Ministry of Defense) MIFAMILIA Ministerio de la Familia (Ministry of Family Affairs) MIFIC Ministerio de Fomento, Industria y Comercio (Ministry of Development, Industry and Commerce) MINGOB Ministerio de Gobernaci6n (Ministry of Governance) MINHACP Ministerio de Hacienda y Credito Publico (Ministry of Finance) MINREX Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores (Ministry of External Affairs) MINSA Ministerio de Salud (Ministry of Health) MTI Ministerio de Transporte e Infraestructura (Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure) NOAA National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Agency (U.S.) PN Policia Nacional (National Police) PROTIERRA Proyecto Municipios Rurales (Rural Municipalities Project) UCRESEP Unidad de Coordinaci6n de Reforma del Sector Publico (Coordinating Unit for Reform of the Public Sector) USGS United States Geological Survey
Vice President: David de Ferranti Country Manager/Director: Donna Dowsett-Coirolo Sector Manager/Director: Danny M. Leipziger and John Redwood Task Team Leader/Task Manager: Tova M. Solo NICARAGUA NATURAL DISASTER VULNERABILITY REDUCTION
CONTENTS
A. Project Development Objective Page
1. Project development objective 2
2. Key performance indicators 2
B. Strategic Context 1. Sector-related Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) goal supported by the project 3 2. Main sector issues and Government strategy 3 3. Sector issues to be addressed by the project and strategic choices 6
C. Project Description Summary
1. Project components 7 2. Key policy and institutional reforms supported by the project 10
3. Benefits and target population 11
4. Institutional and implementationarrangements 11 D. Project Rationale
1. Project alternatives considered and reasons for rejection 14 2. Major related projects financed by the Bank and other development agencies 15 3. Lessons learned and reflected in proposed project design 16 4. Indications of borrower commitment and ownership 16 5. Value added of Bank support in this project 17 E. Summary Project Analysis i. Economic 17 2. Financial 18 3. Technical 18 4. Institutional 19 5. Environmental 20 6. Social 20 7. Safeguard Policies 21 F. Sustainability and Risks 1. Sustainability 22 2. Critical risks 22 3. Possible controversial aspects 23 G. Main Credit Conditions 1. Effectiveness Condition 23 2. Other 23 H. Readiness for Implementation 24 I. Compliance with Bank Policies 24 Annexes
Annex 1: Project Design Summary 25 Annex 2: Detailed Project Description 28 Annex 3: Estimated Project Costs 43 Annex 4: Cost-EffectivenessAnalysis Summary 44 Annex 5: Financial Summary 47 Annex 6: Procurement and Disbursement Arrangements 48 Annex 7: Project Processing Schedule 57 Annex 8: Documents in the Project File 58 Annex 9: Statement of Loans and Credits 60 Annex 10: Country at a Glance 61 Annex 11: Summary History of Natural Disasters in Nicaragua 64 Annex 12: Institutional History of Disaster Management in Nicaragua 66 Annex 13: Comparative Vulnerability Among Nicaraguan Municipalities 73 Annex 14: Donor Activities 77 Annex 15: Gender and Disaster 78
Maps
2 NICARAGUA
Natural Disaster Vulnerability Reduction
Project Appraisal Document
Latin America and Caribbean Region INFDM Date: March 1, 2001 Team Leader: Tova M. Solo Country Manager/Director: Donna Dowsett- Sector Manager/Director:Danny M. Leipziger and John Coirolo Redwood Project ID: P064916 Sector(s): US - Urban Environment Lending Instrument: Specific Investment Loan Theme(s): Environment; Urban (SIL) Poverty Targeted Intervention: N
ProjectFinancing Data [1 Loan [X] Credit 1 Grant 1 Guarantee 1 ] Other: For Loans/Credits/Others: Amount(US$m): SDR 10.5 (US$13.5) ProposedTerms: Grace period(years): 10 Yearsto maturity:40 Commitmentfee: Standard: a variable Servicecharge: 0.75% rate between 0 and 0.5% of the undisbursed credit balance set annually by the Executive Directors of IDA
BORROWER 2.53 0.02 2.55 IDA 10.01 3.49 13.50
Total: 12.53 3.52 16.05 Borrower. REPUBLICOF NICARAGUA Responsibleagency: Executive Secretariat for Disaster Prevention, Mitigation and Response Address: Av. Bolivar, Busto Simon Bolivar, 1 c. al Norte, 1 c al Este, Edificio Vice-Presidencia, Managua, Nicaragua Contact Person: Arturo Harding Tel: 505-228-6490/6504 Fax: 505-278-4843 Email: [email protected] Estimateddisbursements (Bank FYIUS$M: 2 2' '~~2 3t 2 I .5 Annual 0.80 5.80 5.00 1.90 Cumulative 0.80 6.60 11.60 13.50 Projectimplementation period: 36 Months Expectedeffectiveness date: 09/30/2001 Expectedclosing date: 03/31/2005 CS PAD FI... w.I h, ZC A. Project Development Objective
1. Projectdevelopment objective: (see Annex 1) The developmentobjective of the proposedproject is to improveNicaragua's disaster management capacity by:
(a) strengtheninginstitutional capability in disastermanagement at the nationallevel;
(b) buildinginstitutional capacity for disastermitigation at the nationallevel;
(c) promotingdisaster awareness and "preventivethinking" through public sectoreducation and awareness programs;
(d) buildinglocal capacity to managedisaster emergencies, to assessrisk and to identifymitigation measures;and
(e) implementingvulnerability reduction and mitigationmeasures at the local level.
2. Key performanceindicators: (see Annex 1) Successin achievingthe project'sdevelopment objective will be assessedby trackingoutcome and impact indicatorsthat measure:increased capacity of the NationalSystem for DisasterPrevention, Mitigation and Response(hereafter "the System"or the "NationalSystem") in performingits assignedfunctions and responsibilities,improved technical knowledge, increased local government capability for disastermanagement, and reducedvulnerability of the populationin highlyvulnerable municipalities. Outcome indicators include, inter alia, a fullyoperational coordinating body for the NationalSystem, namely the ExecutiveSecretariat for DisasterPrevention, Mitigation and Response(hereafter "the Executive Secretariat"), which should have, by the end of the project,adequate human and physicalresources, full fundingof its recurrentcosts fromthe national budgetor independentsources, and clearoperational and proceduralmanuals. Performancelevels of the ExecutiveSecretariat, and the NationalSystem, will be measuredduring the life of the projectthrough the evaluationof selecteddisaster management activities (including emergency simulation exercises, management of the emergencyoperations center, organization of the localdisaster management committees, etc.), the NationalSystem's actual emergency responses (if, unfortunately,the occasionarises), and the work of the NationalSystem's intersectoral and territorial commissions.
Projectimpact will be assessedthrough evaluations to measurethe successof the nationaldisaster awareness campaignand the mainstreamingof disasterthemes in formaleducation curricula, on the one hand; andthrouglh impactevaluations of preventiveplanning exercises and mitigationmeasures carried out in the eligible municipalities,on the other. The latter will lookat indicatorssuch as the total numberof peopletargetted in rural and urbanareas, total squarekilometers of hazardousareas protectedfrom future development,total numberof schoolsretrofitted, total cost of investmentper capita,etc.
Key outputindicators by componentare detailedin Annex 1. These include,inter alia, the following:key staff of the Secretariatidentified, hired and trainedby the first year of project;new facilitiesfor the Secretariat, includingthe EmergencyOperations Center, readyby third year of project;vulnerability studies and mitigation strategiesdeveloped for Managua,key watershedsand a reviewof buildingcodes leading to developmentof a nationaldisaster mitigation plan by end of project;2000 schoolteachers trained in disasterawareness by end of project;at least 150 localdisaster management committees organized by end of project;hazard and vulnerabilityassessments, identification of mitigationmeasures and preventive planning activities undertaken in at least 25 eligiblemunicipalities by end of project;and mitigationmeasures completed in at least 15 eligible municipalitiesby end of project.
2 B. Strategic Context 1. Sector-related Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) goal supported by the project: (see Annex 1) Documentnumber: IDA/R98-32 (IFC/R98-41) Dateof latestCAS discussion: 4/9/98
The proposed project is fully consistent with IDA's emergency and recovery strategy for Nicaragua which was designed to assist the country in responding to the effects of Hurricane Mitch. That strategy, described and discussed in the context of the Hurricane Emergency Project approved following the hurricane in December 1998, set out the longer-term objective of supporting the strengthening of Nicaragua's institutionalcapacity for disaster preparedness and management, either through a freestanding technical assistance operation or through a component of an existing or future operation.
The proposed Disaster Vulnerability Reduction Project responds to the objectives of IDA's Country Assistance Strategy through supporting continued economic growth by reducing the toll in lost lives, property and infrastructure from natural disasters that set back development and cause declines in GDP growth. The most recent CAS focuses on three core themes: (i) private sector development; (ii) rural sector development and environmental protection; and (iii) development of human capital and poverty alleviation. The proposed Disaster Vulnerability Reduction Project is linked to each of these as follows: i Private sector developnent Natural disasters cause losses in property, income, and investments as well as in human lives. The frequency of catastrophic natural events in Nicaragua discourages private sector investment and hampers its growth. Measures taken to reduce the adverse impact of catastrophic events would contribute to a more conducive environment for private sector development.
* Rural sector development and environmentalprotection Like private sector development, rural development is also set back whenever natural disasters occur. Hurricane Mitch, for example, dealt a major blow to the agricultural lands, severely damaging export crops, such as bananas, sugar and affecting also the production of basic grains. Besides providing planning tools and financing mitigation measures to protect lives and property in vulnerable communities of rural municipalities, the project will also finance an initiative specifically focused on rural sector development and on environmental protection. A vulnerability analysis for a major watershed would establish a methodology for watershed management from the point of view of disaster management and would identify environmental protection measures to reduce disaster impacts.
* Poverty alleviation Poor communities are most vulnerable to natural disasters. In Nicaragua, the communities hardest hit by Hurricane Mitch directly overlap with the priority zones on the country's poverty map. It is widely recognized that vulnerability to natural disasters reinforces the "vicious circle" of poverty in Latin America. Mitigation measures can help to break the cycle and to reduce the risk of accelerated poverty in the event of natural disasters in highly vulnerable communities.
2. Main sector issues and Government strategy: Vulnerability to Natural Disasters:
Nicaragua's history has been punctuated by devastating natural disasters which have set back the country's social and economic progress. Its geographic location makes it a target for hurricanes, droughts and fires, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, and especially severe earthquakes. (Annex 11 includes a chart of recent disasters in Nicaragua and Annex 4 describes macro-economic effects of Nicaragua's recent disaster history.) Among Central American countries, Nicaragua stands out in both the frequency and severity of natural catastrophes.On average, annual deaths due to disasters in Nicaragua stands at some 3,340 between 1970 and 2000, and the number of persons injured or left homeless runs to some 60,000 per year, according to figures of the International Red Cross. Each disaster has left the country more vulnerable to the next round of natural catastrophes. Based on the history of the past 50 years, the International Institute for Advanced Systems Analysis has estimatedthat Nicaragua "should expect to lose approximately 0.4% of capital stock, that is 240 million cordobas (20 million USD) annually from natural catastrophes, with possible extreme events reaching 9,600 million cordobas (800 million in USD) in direct losses," assuming that no mitigation measures are undertaken. National vulnerability to natural disasters thus underlies sector issues listed below.
(1) Needfor Institutional Coordinationfor Disaster Prevention, Preparedness and Response
Until now, Nicaragua has had no overall system for disaster management or coordinating agency to promote disaster prevention and emergency response. It still lacks defined emergency procedures and a plan for long term disaster mitigation and prevention. Throughout the last 25 years, successive governments have established structures and laws focused on disaster response, leaving preparedness, mitigation and prevention unattended. But, as Mitch proved, even with a fairly well trained emergency search and rescue capability in Civil Defense, the lack of preparedness in the form of an overriding authority and of established procedures led to costly delays and gaps in the response of organized disaster response agencies. Moreover, the failure to maintain and train local emergency committees between disasters has resulted in unnecessary losses in even well-organized communities. While many existing agencies in public and civil sectors can and should contribute to disaster preparedness and response, from the fire departments to the church and the Red Cross, a permanently established national agency with sufficient authority has been urgently needed to assure that efforts are not duplicated, and that all agencies have a clear notion of their role when a disaster strikes. At the same time, an agency is needed with a clear mandate to promote and support mitigation and prevention activities both at national and local levels. As Chart I shows, similar disaster management agencies exist in other countries in the hemisphere. Nicaragua, with a record of 3-4 major natural disasters occurring per year (as of this writing, 2000 saw major floods in two areas, a volcanic eruption, and an earthquake) has yet to build up a permanent disaster management capability as its neighbors have.
Chart 1 - Disaster Response Agencies - Basic Cost and Performance Indicators
Country Org. Since Total Total Staff/ # of # of # of # of munici- (Pop. Year Annual cost/ prof. disasters national exercises palities trained '000) Oper. citizen Support handled simulation carried out and equipped Budget /year (2000) exercises locally for disaster (US$ /year /year emergencies
000) ______Barbados Central 4-6 (inc. (247) Emer. 1940 $500 $1.82 3/2 Few 2-3 central) + 28 Relief Regional Org. exercises
(CERO)______British Office of 10- 15 Virgin Disaster 1983 $525 $26.77 8/2 (hurrican 6 6 10 Islands Prep. es & oil (19.6) (ODP) spills) _ Costa Comisi6n Rica Nacional 1969 $2,470 $0.67 55/45 4 1 50+ 97 (3,710) de Emer.
(CNE) ____ Jamaica Office of (2,653) Disaster 1979 $1,800 $0.68 44/21 2 - 4 5-7 7+ 40-45 Prep. and up Regional Emer.Mgt 13/year exercises (ODPEM)
4 (2) Needfor a National Disaster Mitigation Program and Strategy
Nicaragua has no disaster mitigation programs. This stems in part from the lack of a coordinating disaster management agency, as mentioned above, but it is reinforced by the fact that sector agencies such as INETER (Institute for Research on Earth Sciences), MAGFOR (Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry), MTI (Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure) and MARENA (Ministry of Environment and Renewable Resources) have limited technical capacity to forecast, gather, analyze and share information on natural hazards. Furthermore, basic studies (vulnerability and policy assessments) need to be carried out in key areas of: watershed management; building codes; seismic risk (particularly for Managua) and involuntary resettlement. These studies could lead to development of a national mitigation strategy and programs.
(3) Public Awareness of Disaster and of Prevention Limited
Notwithstanding the frequency and impact of natural disasters in Nicaragua's national history, disaster awareness and a "culture of prevention" is largely absent from the formal education system and from the media. By the same token, few national agencies and ministries take natural disaster emergencies into account either in their outreach programs or in their internal planning.
(4) Emergency Preparedness, Hazard Analysis, Vulnerability Assessments not Carried out at Local Levels.
Despite their vulnerability to disasters, local governments do not include hazard analysis or emergency preparedness in municipal planning exercises. Local governments in Nicaragua are currently assuming more responsibilities for their own development planning and, with support from different agencies, are increasingly identifying and carrying out priority investments for social and environmental needs through participatory methodologies. Vulnerability analysis, and mitigation actions, however, have yet to be included in the planning process or among priority investments, as emergency response plans and preparedness have been relegated to the national agencies. Lacking technical capacity to evaluate risks and to specify appropriate measures, local governments have not been able to take needed steps to identify areas at risk and to avoid the growth of settlements in these areas, or to encourage appropriate land use and building standards.
(5) Lack of Financing for Disaster Mitigation Measures at Local Level
Nicaragua's municipalitiescontinue to depend on national budget transfers and on national programs to finance investments. Thus, investment financing generally conforms to sector programs set by line Ministries. To date, these have not included disaster mitigation. Although FISE and INIFOM work closely with local governments to encourage responsible development planning and a municipal development fund (FONDEM) has recently been established by INIFOM to assist with income transfers, neither agency includes risk analysis in its planning procedures. While funding from either institution could be used for disaster mitigation purposes, the traditional focus on social investments for FISE and environmental and economic development through INIFOM has tended to undercut possible investments in disaster mitigation measures.
Government Strategy
Following Hurricane Mitch, the Government took decisive measures to reduce Nicaragua's vulnerability to natural disasters. To deal with the short term, the Government, with help from IDA, identified specific critical areas endangered in the aftermath of Mitch, and carried out priority mitigation measures through two on-going projects implemented by FISE and INIFOM (PROTIERRA).
Looking to the long term, the Nicaraguan Government decided to develop a national disaster management system. With help from UNDP, the Governments of Spain and Colombia, a task force headed by the Vice President designed a plan for a National System for Disaster Prevention, Mitigation and Response. The plan led
5 to the passage of Law 337 of 2000, published in the National Gazette April 4, 2000 which created the Sistema Nacional para la Prevenci6n, Mitigaci6n y Atencion a los Desastres (hereafter "the System"). To coordinate the System's members, the Law established the Executive Secretariat for Disaster Prevention, Mitigation and Response (hereafter "the Secretariat") lodged within the Office of the Vice-Presidency and appointed an Executive Secretary, who at the moment is the same person who managed the national response effort during and immediately after Hurricane Mitch. The regulatory framework required to apply and execute Law 337 was established through Decree 53/2000, which became effective on June 28, 2000. At the same time, the detailed responsibilities of all entities comprising the National System were assigned officially through Decree 98/2000 (effective since October 5, 2000). Among the priority actions identified under the Law #337, the Secretariat is charged with: * making the System operational, ensuring appropriate staffing of the Secretariat and of member agencies; * preparing and activating a National Emergency Plan, clarifying policies, procedures and standards to be applied, and training System members in the Plan and, specifically, in their respective roles in disaster response, prevention and mitigation; * establishing a Disaster Management Fund to assure sustained financing for emergency response and relief; + establishing and maintaining a data base, supported by geographical information systems (GIS), relevant to disaster management, including information on hazard and vulnerability assessments, as well as on programs, projects and actions relevant to disaster prevention, mitigation and response; and * establishing and coordinating working committees on sector issues and on territorial issues to support disaster prevention and mitigation through national agencies and local governments respectively.
3. Sector issues to be addressed by the project and strategic choices: The project will assist the Nicaraguan government to address the five major sector issues outlined above. At the national level, it will strengthen disaster prevention, preparedness and response, through support to the National System and the Executive Secretariat, which will include technical assistance, equipment, key studies and initial operating costs.
To address the need for a national mitigation strategy, the project will support the System's inter- institutional commission (which include technical agencies such as INETER, MAGFOR, MARENA and MTI) through provision of an information management system and through financing of key studies to define both mitigation policies and future mitigation activities.
Regarding the need to bring disaster awareness into public practice and to civil society, the project will finance the development and implementationof curricula for the formal education system. It will also finance a disaster awareness campaign for the general public through the media.
At the local level, the project will support emergency preparedness by assuring the organization, training and equipping of emergency response committees in all municipalities. In addition, the project will provide mitigation help to twenty five municipalities, selected as most vulnerable to natural disasters, by carrying out technically supported risk assessments and vulnerability analyses and subsequently developing "preventative" land use plans and specific disaster mitigation programs.
Finally, the project will provide financing to implement a small number of high-impact, priority mitigation measures identified in the twenty five target municipalities. In the process the project will leave a capacity in place to review such projects technically and environmentally.
Three strategic choices should be mentioned. First, the decision to support a relatively short (three year) project as a first measure in the longer term goal of making the National System operational, reflects a measured approach. While a longer project (both as an APL and standard format) was considered, the project team elected a strategy of attending urgent start up needs, while the System and the Secretariat are still new, with
6 vulnerability assessments and studies which could lead to further support under a possible follow-on operation. The project strategy also calls for development of plans and studies which could lead to future activities, or projects, and for an evaluation of the Secretariat's performance at the beginning of the final year of the project. This evaluation should indicate whether the Secretariat needs additional fortification in disaster management, particularly disaster preparedness and response, and whether it is ready to undertake major new activities in mitigation and prevention.
Second, the project has been designed to complement the work of other donors, based on careful review of the technical assistance for disaster management currently being provided to or planned for the country. In particular, investments in sophisticated weather and flood monitoring and early alert systems (with the exception of simple, community managed, systems), which have relatively high operation and maintenance costs, are not included in the project since several donors - notably Spain, the United States (through USGS and NOAA) and Finland - have made or will be making contributions in these areas. A matrix in Annex 14 shows donor support by sector.
Finally, regarding the local vulnerability reduction component, project coverage has been defined following a careful study of comparative vulnerability among Nicaragua's 151 municipalities (see Annex 13), and an assessment of institutional capacity within the National System. While a key objective is to cover all the municipalities in the country in terms of emergency preparedness and response, the complementary but more costly activities associated with prevention and mitigation will initially be focused on the twenty five most vulnerable of the country's municipalities. Coverage of the remaining municipalities would be carried out under a follow-on project or through other donor support.
C. Project Description Summary 1. Project components (see Annex 2 for a detailed description and Annex 3 for a detailed cost breakdown):
A. Strengthenina of National System Capacity for Disaster Management
This component would be carried out by the Executive Secretariat through its Planning Department. It would assure the sustainable establishment of the National System while strengthening its capacity to respond to, prevent and prepare for natural disasters through the following sub- components:
A. 1. Institutional Strengthening of the Executive Secretariat through: (a) Organizational Development and the Establishment of Capabilities in Planning and Project Management, which will finance: consultancies to carry out specific tasks for organizational development and project management; training for Secretariat and System personnel in disaster management and in the maintenance and use of specialized equipment; and operating costs of the Secretariat on a declining basis; (b) Improvement of Physical Plant and Equipment which will finance: engineering designs and the civil works involved in refurbishing a building donated to the National System; purchase and installation of furnishings and equipment for the Secretariat's use, including computer and communications systems; purchase and installation of specialized equipment for an Emergency Operations Center (EOC); and training in the use and maintenance of the EOC.
A.2. Strengthening of the National System through: (a) Development of National Emergency Plans, (b) Improving National Emergency Response Capability; and (c) A National Program of Emergency Simulations. The sub-component will finance consultancies to design procedural guides, to work out legal agreements, to carry out diagnostics of emergency response equipment, and to prepare plans and programs under (a) and to assist in design and implementation of simulation exercises under (c). It will also finance purchase and distribution of emergency response equipment
7 for the National System and of supplies for emergency simulation exercises under (b) and (c). Finally, it will include training activities in emergency procedures, including disaster simulations, in the use and maintenance of equipment.
B. Development of National Miti!ation Proaram and Strateg
This component will be the responsibility of the Inter-Institutional Commission of the Executive Secretariat, which will work closely with technical agencies such as INETER, MAGFOR, MARENA and MTI. The objective is to improve the capacity of key technical agencies to gather, analyze and share scientific knowledge and to develop studies leading to the development of mitigation policies and strategy. In addition to a Sectoral Coordinator to manage the component, the following sub-componentswould be financed:
B. I Mitigation Information System through: (a) consultancies to design and set up an information management system linking key technical agencies of the National System; and (b) acquisition and installation of needed hardware and software, and training to staff from the participating agencies.
B.2 Development of a resettlement policy for application in cases of homes at risk from natural disasters.
B.3 Strategic Mitigation Studies to define a national mitigation program through consultancies to: (a) prepare a Seismic vulnerability assessment for Managua; (b) Assess watershed vulnerability overall and to carry out a pilot mitigation plan in a priority watershed; and (c) Review and update the national building codes.
B.4 Preparation of a long term National mitigation program and strategy based on findings of other studies.
B.5 Provision of Expert Technical Assistance in local vulnerability analyses and identification of mitigation measures in support of sub-component D.2.
C. Building Public Awareness of Disaster Prevention
This component is focused on making disaster prevention a part of daily life and culture and will be managed by the Public Relations Department of the Executive Secretariat. In addition to a Public Relations expert to manage the component, various activities under the following sub-components would be financed:
C. 1 Mainstreaming Disaster Awareness into Formal Education: In conjunction with the Ministry of Education (Direcci6n Didactica) this sub-component would include: (a) consultancies to update methodological guides for teachers to design and produce instructive materials for application in formal school programs; and to evaluate the incorporation of disaster awareness into the formal education system; and (b) training for teachers in the use of the new methodological guides and teaching plans.
C.2 Public Awareness Program, covering (a) consultancies to design a public awareness campaign, including information on disaster management and the National System and to design graphic, radio and visual programs to promote disaster knowledge; and (b) production of multi- media materials and disseminationthrough the media.
8 C.3 Strengthening Disaster Knowledge in the Communications Media through: (a) training for journalists and communications employees; and (c) consultancies to review and propose reforms in the education curricula for communicationsprofessionals.
D. Strengthenina Local Capacity for Disaster Risk Management
The Territorial Commission of the Executive Secretariat will be responsible for the implementation of this component, in coordination with local governments, FISE, Civil Defense, and supported by an advisory group from INETER. In addition to financing a Territorial Coordinator to manage the component, the sub-componentslisted below would be financed with the objective of reducing vulnerability at the municipal level:
D. 1 Consolidation of Committees for Disaster Management. Responsibility for disaster response in Nicaragua rests with local governments.The objective of this subcomponent is to organize, equip and train committees for disaster emergency response throughout the country's municipalities. The Executive Secretariat will work with the Civil Defense in the purchase of emergency response and disaster prevention equipment (first aid needs, search and rescue materials, communications equipment and uniforms). It will also finance the Civil Defense to carry out training of two kinds: (a) organization of the committees, including distribution of equipment for emergency response; and (b) training in use of equipment and in emergency response including development of local emergency response plans, and local simulation exercises.
D.2 Promotion of "Preventive Planning." With the objectives of strengthening municipal planning and technical units in disaster prevention, this component will introduce techniques of vulnerability assessments and mitigation planning to a pilot group of 25 municipalities, identified as the most vulnerable to natural disasters. (See Annex 13). Financing under this sub-component will support consultancies for teams which combine technical expertise in disaster assessmentswith experience in participatory planning and community development to (a) carry out hazard analyses, vulnerability mapping, identification of mitigation measures and prioritization of these measures in each selected municipality; and (b) prepare long-term land use plans which identify areas at risk and actions to avoid inappropriate land use in future developments.
E. Implementationof Local Vulnerability Reduction Measures
This component would be the responsibility of FISE, but would be supervised by the Territorial Coordinator of the Executive Secretariat. Support to FISE for project financial management will be provided through Component F. FISE will develop annual operating plans in conjunction with the Territorial Coordinator for municipalities participating in subcomponent D.2 (see above) and will carry out activities described under the following sub-components:
E. I Selection of Sub- Proiects and Preparation of Municipal Investment Plan: Following FISE's normal planning sequencing this component will finance consultancies to supplement FISE's work with local governments on municipal investment plans (MIP), to prioritize and to incorporate the mitigation measures identified earlier (under Subcomponent D.2) into the "MIP." FISE's consultants will also review proposed mitigation measures according to agreed on economic, technical and financial criteria (see Annex 2 and also Summary Analysis) and select those which are eligible for implementation.
E.2 Implementation and Evaluation of Mitigation Measures. Measures to be implemented under this sub-component will be limitedto an agreed upon amount in each municipality. Projects should focus on preventive planning, i.e., limiting future losses by avoiding construction on areas at risk and on retrofitting key buildings and infrastructure before considering protective works. As such,
9 protective works would be chosen after comparison of costs versus the number of persons and constructions directly protected. As per FISE's standard implementation practices, this subcomponent would finance: (a) consultancies to develop engineering designs and bid packages for mitigation measures and to evaluate the proposed mitigation measures, from technical, financial and environmental point of view, (including contracting of specialists in the case of protective works, to assure that adequate standards are applied); and (b) implementation of mitigation measures which are not on the "negative list" (see Annex 2).
F. Proiect Financial Management
This component refers to the development of project financial administrative capacity to take responsibility for procurement, contracting and acquisitions, flow of funds, disbursements, payments, internal and external auditing and financial reporting to IDA. As shown in Annex 6, Chart 6-1, financial administration will be shared between the Public Sector Reform Project Unit - UCRESEP (components A-D) and FISE (component E), both of which will report to the Planning Department in the Executive Secretariat, which is charged with project management. Both UCRESEP and FISE are experienced in financial management and in implementationof IDA projects. Under this component, the project will finance their additional needs for staffing, office equipment, hardware and software, and training. Financing will cover costs of: (a) consultancies to cover additional procurement and accounting needs for UCRESEP; (b) acquisition of software, computers and office furnishings; and (c) consultanciesto cover additional procurement and accounting needs for the Executive Secretariat.
A projected sequence of activities for each Component and Subcomponent is presented in Annex 2, Chart 2-2.
ComponIent Sect ~~ t A. Strengthening of National System Capacity for Institutional 4.82 30.0 3.59 26.6 Disaster Management Devetopment B. Development of National Mitigation Program and Other Environment 1.65 10.3 1.50 11.1 Strategy C. Building Public Awareness of Disaster Prevention Other Environment 0.97 6.0 0.88 6.5 D. Strengthening Local Capacity for Disaster Risk Urban Environment 3.69 23.0 3.34 24.7 Management E. Inplementation of Local Vulnerability Reduction Urban Environment 4.16 25.9 3.56 26.4 Measures F. Project Financial Management Non-Sector Specific 0.76 4.7 0.63 4.7 Total Project Costs 16.05 100.0 13.50 100.0 Total Financing Required 16.05 100.0 13.50 100.0
2. Key policy and institutional reforms supported by the project: The principal institutional reform supported by the project concerns the establishment of the National System for Disaster Prevention, Mitigation and Response, and of the Executive Secretariat as its coordinating authority. The creation of a new institution under the Law #337 of 2000 represents an important policy change insofar as the Executive Branch of National Government has taken responsibility for disaster managementand made preparation and mitigation issues a matter of public sector mandate. Consequent institutional and policy reforms, as affecting local governmentjurisdictions and procedures, public sector performance, incorporation of disaster
10 awareness into on-going programs, and private sector involvement will also be promoted through an effectively established system for disaster prevention, mitigation and response. Annex 12 summarizes a longer institutional analysis done of the National System as part of project preparation. Chart 2 below shows the conceptual organization of the National System with the Executive Secretariat at its center. Chart 2 Organization of the National System for Disaster Prevention, Mitigation and Response
LinkageEntities -National Committee Members President *Presidentof the Repmbie -CCy DC Psidenicef-Peesidenti DGDCB,CBB, y CR Vice-President -MNGOB y PN *ENITEL *NREX .INIFOM / vINHACP *AMUNIC .FIC *CNONGNU / *NSA .FISE MTI a WVork Commissions Executive Secretariat ArFANULIA
-Educat operaionCommission gINETER .Phenomena Commission ll .Securnsy Commsssoon I o o *HealthComnmission CODE dNtoa Commission iEnvironment N ResosteC .Inputs Commission gFn AInfeastructure Commission a smllogai ation withsi p Defense)a Ospecial Opewlbes Com k tssion focused o Iv c o t existing ------1------J RegionalCommittees t; l *Gove~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Coordinator ~~mmemt ce a NabonalComniettee Reprsffentatives support persons after project completion, asexplainedinGovernorsg LocalGovemment Repr1entatives2 Plicy reforms willhavegreatestimpactatthelocallevel.TheincorporationofvulnerabilityannSocdety Representativs
r ------___ -_ - __ - ---__ - -___
T | i *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~SecuntyCommission disaster planning into landuseanL d Municipal Presidentspa reputsrCommissaoa >; * *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Infnrastructureand Transportation Commission 1 ::r s~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~HeathCommission of *lnerabilityanalysesandmitigationmeasuresintomunicipalaEnvironmentid Natural R aourcesComnoission 1Custoner Support C1mmission
At present the Secretariat is a small organization with six permanent professional staff and 5 support persons. One project goal will be to keep the Secretariat small and focused on effective coordination of the existing agencies that comprise the National System. During project implementation staff will increase to a maximum of 17 professionals, including consultants, and 9 support persons but will drop to a total of I11professionals and 7 support persons after project completion, as explained in greater detail in Annex 12.
Policy reforms will have greatest impact at the local level. The incorporation of vulnerability analysis and disaster planning into land use and municipal development plans represents a mnajorreform, as will the adoption of vulnerability analyses and mitigation measures into municipal planning practices as promoted by FISE.
I1I 3. Benefits and target population: Populations at risk from natural disasters are the target beneficiaries of the project. Given the pattern of natural events in Nicaragua, most groups living at risk occupy marginal urban settlements and rural communities and are poor. The selection process used to identify highly vulnerable municipalities included a poverty analysis as well as hazard risk mapping. (See Annex 13.)
4. Institutional and implementation arrangements: The Executive Secretariat will be responsible for overall project management and, ultimately, for its successful implementation. Within the Secretariat, project management will be the direct responsibility of its Planning Department, as shown in Chart 3, below. The Planning Department of the Secretariat will also be responsible for the implementationof Component A, relying on its various units, on the Secretariat's Department of Finance and Administration and on Civil Defense for implementationof specific sub-components as shown in Chart 3.
The remaining project components are each the responsibility of different Departments of the Secretariat or agencies of the System, as follows: Component B, Sectoral Coordination Department of the Secretariat; Component C, Public Relations Department of the Secretariat; Component D, Territorial Coordination Department of the Secretariat; Component E, FISE and Component F, UCRESEP. These departments and agencies together form the Technical Committee for Project Implementation, which is headed by the Planning Department of the Executive Secretariat.
Technical Committee members will prepare annual operating plans and budgets, and project progress reports for submission to the Planning Department of the Secretariat, which will pass them to UCRESEP for use in financial management. Technical Committee members will also prepare terms of reference for contracts financed under the project and submit them to the Planing Department of the Secretariat for approval. The Planning Department will, in turn, pass them to UCRESEP which will obtain a "no objection"' from IDA and carry out the appropriate procurement process. The Planning Department of the Secretariat is responsible for passing on approved operating plans, budgets, and terms of reference to UCRESEP in a timely way so that UCRESEP can manage procurement and financial reporting. The Planning Department of the Secretariat will receive PMRs (Integrated Project Management Reports) from UCRESEP, review them and share them with IDA and with the Technical Committee and will also be responsible for presenting semi-annual progress reports to IDA.
12 Chart 3 Executive Secretariat Organization and Project Management
EXECUTIVESECRETARIAT - ProiectManagement
EXECUTIVESECRETARY National Systemfor Disaster ADVISORS Prevention, MItigationand ADMrN& FINANCE Response
*Technical and Legial Adsisors |._-Assists with sub-componentA2
PLANNING DEPARTMENT UCRESEP |
C N _ CCOrPONi TA PDee ManaMmnanm COMPONENTF NNaionalDsas ter Plan FPronecMranain ient
SETOA PUBsL5IC SCOORMATM RELAT1110IS_TERRITORI^L
COMiPONENTSB COMPONENTC CoMPONENTD COMsPONENTE CeglatonoStwith the STEnm ExNeatolRhimesns Rbron l CoordNtlbon i e mPlamentroon oM poCytiqDSe_rem t Copenaionwith RCommurttw FISE m igatbnworn u Coordhattonvith Cmif Weensefor ManrNtmen of th. EOC _
Oek tnofLog r Poje l or tIlrenn Offloe ofdIr; mlemn Oficetf an Oi Of Affsksof n n Cooperafn andiFinartrial inbtrinsttufiJnai | Normnsanri Matttnent SuSiainrXily Tralninfig Procedumbs
-I"NlntDisatster Fund GIS ONETEr e *Agrneements TrrBhhogPet"r m for Operational fOF;i hfomaodonrExchngo FundRsaisng Exsc4stheSescivtariet Admrnistratbw FRtriguatonofSyxtem with INETrERand Ncefon Membersof theNationa System PublicationOfManuals commissins System Regional preparationofProcedures * EOC
-TeOnctlk ConirnFte for Projec imnplamentant^on
13 D. Project Rationale 1. Project alternatives considered and reasons for rejection:
Longer Time Frame and Broader Project Scope: Both a longer time frame (five to six years) and broader project scope (disaster management activities in a majority of Nicaragua's municipalities) were considered before opting for a short project period (three years) and a more focused approach (helping to start up the Executive Secretariat on a sustainable path while targeting the country's 25 most vulnerable municipalities for local mitigation / prevention activities). The alternatives which made for a larger project were rejected, as explained earlier, due to the fact that consolidation of the System has just begun, and the Secretariat, as its coordinating body, has not been fully established. In addition, overriding short and medium-term needs must be attended first in order to improve disaster management capacity effectively. For example, a national disaster management plan and basic emergency plans and procedures should be prepared, and pilot mitigation and prevention efforts at the local level must be piloted, before moving into a full-scale mitigation and prevention effort. There is also the need to consolidate and complement existing scientific knowledge and technical information currently dispersed across key agencies, to feed into a long term mitigation program and strategy. The final choice reflects the team's assessment that this first experience will provide an opportunity for the Secretariat and the System to become firmly established, to learn through various emergency preparedness and response activities, as well as small scale mitigation experiences, and to evaluate its performance and incorporate any required changes. This way, the System will progressively become capable of undertaking a sustainable long range mitigation and prevention program. Size and Role of the Secretariat: During project preparation several alternative organizational scenarios and development strategies were developed and analyzed for the National System, and in particular, for the Executive Secretariat for Disaster Prevention, Mitigation and Response. The model which has been chosen rejects an initial proposal which called for the creation of regional offices of the Secretariat, plus permanent information and technical departments for a total of about fifty permanent staff. Instead the project as proposed designates the Secretariat as coordinator of other agencies and of local governments, comprised of a small core staff and supported by consultants as needed. On completion of the project, however, the Secretariat will have developed capability to coordinate disaster response and sectoral and local mitigation and prevention efforts. Technical Assistance without Civil Works: The decision to include limited financing for civil works in the project, in addition to technical assistance, responds to several factors. In the first place, Mitch altered river courses and weakened hillsides in many areas of the country. Adequate reparations have not been taken and many communities remain vulnerable to a new round of disasters. A second argument comes from both national and local government representatives in Nicaragua, asking what benefit can come of analyzing risks if prevention and mitigation measures (structural and non) are not implemented. To this it should be added that experiences with local planning and investment, even in the recent wake of Mitch suggest that unless funds are specifically targeted, local governments will postpone investments in disaster mitigation and prevention. Finally, the proposed project's development objectives will be better served by piloting the National System in its full role as promoter of disaster mitigation.
2. Major related projects financed by the Bank and/or other development agencies (completed, ongoing and planned).
Implementation Development IDA-financed . Progress(IP) Objective(DO) PostMitch EconomicRecovery HurricaneEmergency Project S S (completed) LocalGovernance and Planning RuralMunicipalities I S S LocalGovernance and Planning RuralMunicipalities II In preparation In preparation
14 SectorIssu_e Pr_jc [atestSnpenisio
Public Sector Reform EconomicMgt T.A. (UCRESEP) S S Social Investment Fund FISE III S S Social InvestmentFund FISE IV In preparation In preparation Other LACDisaster Mitigation Projects Honduras Disaster MitigationProject S S Dom. Rep. Hurricane Georges S S Emergency RecoveryProject Bolivia - El Niffo Emergency S S AssistanceProject Colombia -Armenia Earthquake S S RecoveryLoan Guyana -El NiffoEmergency S S AssistanceProject Granada DisasterManagement S S Project Paraguay -Private Sector S S Development- El Nifio Emergency Assistance Project Other developmentagencies ______.:,__ IDB Institutionaland technical support for CEPPREDENAC- US$0.3 mil UNDP Legal framework- US$60,000 -- ' US-OFDA Identificationof mitigationworks - US$5.6 mil; Rapid response training
US-USGS Hazard mapping 1:10,000- -ft US$2 mil, 2 years US-USDA Watershedprotection project US-FEMA Assess and build emergency management capability- US$1 mil COSUDE (Swissdisaster agency) Rehabilitation/reconstructiononly -, US$4 mil :, RED CROSS Housingrelocation and -, t reconstruction US-USGS Pilot programto train local . . governmentsin reading hazardmaps US-FEMA Pilot 'buy-out" -reallocation or elevation programto reduce risk OAS Pilot early communitymanaged warning systemsUS$25,000; Rio San Juan Watershedmanagement f v r Z e' , 't^U,s is. project - GEF sponsored US$3 mil GTZ Local early waning systems and emergencypreparation in Corinto and Chinandega -US$0.26 mil ASDI Managua early warning project - US$0.5 mil Norway Earthquake preparedness for Managua- US$0.5 mil ______IP/DORatings: HS (HighlySatisfactory), S (Satisfactory),U (Unsatisfactory),HU (HighlyUnsatisfactory)
15 3. Lessons learned and reflected in the project design: Project design and content draw on several lessons learned from the Bank's experience in emergency disaster operations as well as IDA experiences garnered under the thirteen project portfolio in Nicaragua.
In terms of disaster response operations, ex-post evaluations emphasize the importance of investing in measures which enable the borrower to better nmtigatethe effects offuture disasters. This project will focus significantly on mitigation and prevention, as distinct from reconstruction (the traditional focus of the Association's post- disaster projects) and relief (the focus of emergency assistance agencies like the Red Cross). It should result in a mainstreaming of disaster awareness and disaster prevention measures in local planning and in future IDA operations as well. Ex-post reviews have made two other strong recommendations for local ownership and for strong government commitment in project design. In this case, the project has been developed on the basis of the Nicaraguan government's proposed National Plan for Risk Reduction and in response to a law enacted by the Congress. The components for municipal investment call for participatory planning to build local ownership of measures identified and implemented.
A final lesson which emerges from the post-disaster reviews concurs with Association experience in Nicaragua: strengthening existing institutions rather than creating new ones. In this case, while the National System and the Executive Secretariat clearly constitute new institutions, the project components for national and local support will be carried out through existing agencies, through the Executive Secretariat's working groups for sector issues and for territorial issues. The fortunate existence of strong institutions like FISE, INETER and Civil Defense working successfully with and through local governments means that the Secretariat can rely on experienced support and focus on a role as coordinator or emergency response and promoter of long-term mitigation.
4. Indications of borrower commitment and ownership:
The recent passage of a Law #337 of 2000, creating the National System for Disaster Prevention, Mitigation, and Response, underlines the Nicaraguan Government's long term commitment to prioritize risk reduction and natural disaster preparedness. Subsequent to passage of the law, the Secretariat has presented a budget to the Ministry of Finance for first year operations. In a recent letter to the World Bank of December 14, 2000, The Minister has reconfirmed Government's intentions to support the full establishment of the National System and of the Secretariat, and emphasized the importance of the project in a letter to the Country Director (see letter, Annex 12). The Executive Secretary for Disaster Prevention, Mitigation, and Response has made three trips to Washington to meet with Bank officials and to discuss project content and scheduling. He and his management team has also visited Washington and the Bank informally while consulting with other agencies (FEMA, NOAA, NASA, among others.) During his second visit (November 13 - 17) the Executive Secretary was joined by the Director of the Planning Department, as well as by the Sectoral and Territorial Coordinators, as well as by planning directors from FISE, Civil Defense, INETER and UCRESEP.
5. Value added of Bank support in this project: The Bank will be able to bring technical expertise from other countries and experiences from involvement with other disaster management projects to help the Nicaraguan government orient its policies and investments. In addition, IDA support will foment overlap and transference of disaster concerns into other IDA supported projects related to themes of local development and environmental protection.
16 E. SummaryProject Analysis (Detailed assessments are in the project file, see Annex 8)
1. Economic (see Annex 4):
The economic benefits of investments in disaster mitigation and prevention are perceived in reduced losses when catastrophic events occur. While no empirical data is maintained which quantifies the relationship between investments in preparedness and mitigation and reduced disaster losses, comparisons of the experiences of developed versus undeveloped countries tends to confirm that prior investments in response capability and in vulnerability reduction disasters yield extensive returns in terms of lives saved and property damage avoided. Investments in mitigation, (structural and non- structural measures) and in emergency response have been identified under the project according to their high impact on avoided losses of life and property, as discussed below and in Annex 4. Additional investments, to be proposed by municipalities, would be analyzed individually in terms of costs versus disaster insurance premiums.
The history of Central America and, in particular, Nicaragua, repeatedly attest to the high cost of natural disasters, and to the fact that losses and impact is heightened by lack of investments in preparedness and mitigation. Nicaragua, in particular, has been hit by two major hurricanes in the past five years (Joan and Mitch, classified as catastrophic or one hundred to one thousand year events), by a volcano, and forest fires. Recovery will be difficult in a country still feeling the combined effects of a debilitating earthquake and war during the 1970s and 1980s respectively. The actual price paid by Nicaragua for not investing in disaster management is detailed in a "Case Study of Natural Catastrophe Risk in Nicaragua" by Paul K. Freeman, Landis MacKellar, Leslie Martin, Reinhard Mechler and Koko Warner of the International Institute for Advanced Systems Analysis, commissioned as part of project preparation on file. As mentioned earlier in section B.2, the study concludes that annualized exposure to catastrophic events represents a total value of US$20 million/year or 0.4% of capital stock. It also concludes that failing to account for natural catastrophes means overstating GDP levels each year by 240 million Cordoba or by 0.4%. Failing to account for natural catastrophes also leads to underestimating future debt service payments each year by US$300 million.
Summary of Benefits and Costs:
Investment in mitigation can take two forms: structural measures and non-structural measures. The benefits of certain structural measures have been analyzed in the Caribbean. A draft OAS review of the return on investments in disaster resistant structures implies that the payoffs from investment in mitigation are high. In a recent study of natural catastrophes in the Caribbean, John Pollner cites estimates from civil engineering experts to the effect that, on average, an increased investment in vulnerability reduction measures of 1% of a structure's costs will reduce the "probable maximum loss" from wind damage by at least one third. Detailed data suggests that retrofitting residential buildings at costs running from 1.8% to 3.4% of total building value, will reduce "probable maximum loss" by 50%. For commercial buildings the same impact is expected from investments of 2.0% - 3.8% in structural retrofitting.
Non-structural measures were the subject of a second study undertaken as part of project preparation. Using data from losses after Mitch in Central America Professor Harold Cochran of the University of Colorado at Boulder proposed three damage functions: property damage, lives lost and casualties, examined in scenarios with and without mitigation measures and concluded that hazard mapping and land use restrictions as the areas of highest impact for investment in disaster mitigation by a rate of return on the order of 180%. His findings suggest that some US$ 800 million in property loss could be avoided over the next forty years merely by avoiding settlement on land susceptible to flooding and landslides.
17 A summary analysis of returns on project investments appears in Annex 4. It concludes that: * Because this is one of the country's first initiatives in disaster management it would address the protection measures that have the larger payoff. For instancefollowing the findings of a Cochran's study, the project investments are focused on preventative planning and avoiding growth in areas at risk, including flood prone areas, areas susceptible to landslide, and to volcanic, seismic and wind events. This measures can render an IRR of 25% or more.
* Furthermore, where amenable, the project will perform cost benefit analysis of sub-components, like in the case of protective investments for specific buildings and other investment proposals in mitigation measures (with the exception of the pre-established investments under Component 5)
* Finally considering the disaster-related indirect costs this project has the potential to reduce by '/4 Nicaragua's annual need of external financing for post-disaster reconstruction, and to cut by half the risk of setbacks in GDP growth and poverty alleviation that natural disasters entail.
2. Financial (see Annex 4 and Annex 5): The main assumptions relating to project financing of the project are described in Annex 6. Fiscal Impact: Project funds will be distributed as follows: 5 1% to local governments for risk analysis, emergency planning and mitigation measures 27% to the Executive Secretariat for investments, technical assistance and training 14% to national agencies for developing long term mitigation plans for mainstreaming disaster awareness into on-going programs 5% for Project Financial Administration 3% to the Executive Secretariat for recurrent costs The greatest portion of funds will be directed at measures which translate into avoided losses of lives and property during natural disasters. As is in the interest of developing the newly created National System for Disaster Prevention, Mitigation and Response, the project will contribute to the annual operating costs of the Executive Secretariat on a declining basis, as follows: 60% of the annual budget request presented to the Ministry of Finance during the fiscal year prior to project effectiveness, to a maximum amount equivalent to US$ 300,000; 40% of the annual budget request presented to the Ministry of Finance during the first fiscal year of project effectiveness to a maximum amount equivalent to US$ 200,000; and 20% of the annual budget request presented to the Ministry of Finance during the second fiscal year of project effectiveness to a maximum amount equivalent to US$ 100,000.
Recurrent costs represent 11% of project costs. Of these 72% will be borne by the Government as its counterpart contribution. 3. Technical:
Specialized technical expertise will be required under Components D and E (Strengthening Local Capacity for Disaster Risk Management and Implementation of Local Vulnerability Reduction Measures) to assist in vulnerability analysis and risk mapping at the local level and to assess the financial, environmental and structural feasibility of sub-projects proposed. For the vulnerability analyses and risk mapping, as well as for the review of proposed mitigation works from the point of view of structural resistance to disasters, a team of expert advisors will be provided under the project. They will work with technicians from relevant Nicaraguan institutions (INETER, MTI, MAGFOR) offering technical advice to planning teams collaborating with local governments. Regarding design and implementation of mitigation works, standard designs have been prepared for certain works and costs estimates prepared (parks, playing fields and
18 alternative uses for areas at risk, retrofitting of schools, and of medical centers), while standard procedures have been developed for technical, environmental and cost reviews have been elaborated for other works. The range of works and different review procedures are indicated in Annex 2, Table 2-1 under Component E. For the most part, however, the project will rely on standard procedures applied by FISE for technical and environmental reviews of proposed works. FISE has ample experience with local works and have received positive evaluations from the Association. As a condition of credit effectiveness, FISE will present complete guidelines for sub-project evaluation for inclusion in the project operations manual.
4. Institutional: 4.1 Executing agencies:
The principal executing agency, The Executive Secretariat for Disaster Prevention, Mitigation and Response has been in existence only since April, 2000 and will be a principal beneficiary of this project in terms of its own institutional development. Insofar as it is housed in the Vice-Presidency of the Republic with strong, experienced leadership which enjoys support from the executive branch, the Executive Secretariat's staff and position counterbalance certain risks stemming from its lack of institutional history. The Executive Secretariat will require close supervision during project implementation, although it will rely on support from other agencies: UCRESEP, in particular, will manage financial administration; FISE, will carry out civil works; INETER; and the Civil Defense which have long experience in disaster information gathering and in emergency response, respectively.
4.2 Project management:
The National System for Disaster Prevention, Mitigation and Response consists of key ministries and agencies (including NGOs and private sector companies) which participate according to their particular areas of strength. The Executive Secretariat will channel financing through key agencies. Since most such agencies are well known to the Association through other projects, the main institutional issue concerns the capacity of the Executive Secretariat to effectively coordinate and build consensus and to manage the project while also establishing its role in disaster management.
4.3 Procurement issues:
Assessments of procurement and financial management capability in FISE and UCRESEP have been carried out by Bank specialists prior to appraisal. Both FISE and UCRESEP are currently managing IDA credits and have recently had positive assessments of their work. While no major problems are foreseen, a re-assessment of UCRESEP after six months of project implementation has been recommended. Given its current commitments, UCRESEP will be supporting three IDA projects during the next three years. Financing is included for two persons to assist in the procurement process, and for training and software to upgrade to an integrated project management capability. A re-assessment should re-examine whether additional staffing or training is required to manage the financial aspects of the project. 4.4 Financial management issues:
Both UCRESEP and FISE, as financial managers of the project, have presented plans to become LACI compliant prior to loan effectiveness. The Secretariat will be responsible for receiving and reviewing project management reports and procurement of technical assistance, goods and services as prepared by UCRESEP. Flow of funds is shown in Chart 6-1 in Annex 6.
19 5. Environmental: Environmental Category: B (Partial Assessment) The project is considered to be a Category "B" project, as recommended by the QAT clearance memo dated July 6, 1999. The majority of civil works will involve restoration and protection of the environment, retrofitting of existing infrastructure, and are not expected to have any negative environmental effects. Although the project will not finance any physical resettlement, only feasibility studies and cost estimates, the Government's policy guidelines, and experience in resettlement will be analyzed in Component B as part of a study to develop a resettlement policy acceptable to the Association.
As the agency charged with implementing Component E, FISE will be charged with assuring that no adverse environmental impact results from the mitigation measures. FISE's task will be aided in part by the maximum of US$100,000. for expenditure on any one municipality, which necessarily limits the size and impact of projects. Furthermore, FISE will implement only projects which do not appear on the "negative list" (shown in Annex 2) and which are in compliance with a checklist requiring impact analysis of certain types of projects. The checklist, which appears in Annex 2, shows projects which require independent environmental assessments. As noted, the majority - expected to comprise all of the sub-projects - conform to standard works with no adverse environmental impacts.
Through experience acquired in the implementation of past and on-going operations, FISE is well aware of the Bank's policy on environmental impact and FISE has already established a capable staff and adequate procedures to evaluate environmental risks linked to sub-projects. Its Environmental Unit has been in place since 1997, staffed by three professionals (two environmental engineers and one ecologist) who are responsible for monitoring environmental issues. Among other tasks, this unit is responsible for: (a) review of a sample of projects (both desktop and in the field) to ensure that environmental impacts are identified and mitigated throughout all stages of the project cycle; (b) reviewing proposals for projects that have more significant environmental impacts (i.e., water and sanitation, roads, etc.); (c) designing and managing environmental projects (reforestation, watershed protection, and solid waste management); (d) providing training to both FISE staff and external supervisors in environmental impact assessment and mitigation; (e) producing monthly reports on the state of environmental issues related to the FISE. The Association has regularly supervised this system, such as under the Nicaragua Poverty Reduction and Local Development Project, and found it adequate, meeting IDA requirements, as provided for in OP 4.01 paragraph 9 (January, 1999).
As part of the recently negotiated FISE operation, FISE's Environmental Unit (UA) is finalizing environmental indictors to be incorporated into its overall Management Information System (MIS). The FISE credit effectiveness for the Poverty Reduction and Local Development Project (FISE V) requires further that these indicators be finalized and agreed with the Association and incorporated into FISE's MIS. The indicators would be ready in time to be used to monitor and evaluate environmental impact of the Disaster Vulnerability Reduction Project.
6. Social: 6.1 Key social issues:
No major social issues are foreseen. Ongoing research suggests that disaster impacts may be felt differently by gender and by indigenous groups. Annex 12 describes the concerns for gender impact which will be taken into consideration in participatory planning exercises. As regards indigenous people, all the components of the project, specially C and D will be developed considering the multiethnic and multicultural characteristics of the country and of each municipality. In component C, the media will be selected and the messages will be designed according to the language and cultural characteristics of target communities. In component D the strengthening of local capacity for disaster risk management will be carried out through a broad participation of all the different ethnic groups.
20 The project will foster the definition and official adoption of a policy for resettlement to reduce disaster risk, but does not at this time include resettlement. Land tenure will not be affected per se, although in providing maps, vulnerability assessments and land use plans for undeveloped land, future urbanization patterns will be affected. The results should be positive, insofar as preventive planning promotes identification and urbanization of adequate supplies of land not at risk or environmentally sensitive to accommodate new population growth.
The primary beneficiaries: communities at risk, local authorities, and local civil society will be involved in and will sign off on local risk assessments, on emergency preparation plans, and on preventive development plans and proposals for mitigation works which are identified. Procedures have been defined to merge vulnerability mapping and risk assessment into the participatory planning exercises carried out by FISE as a key step in defining its municipal investment plans. Evaluation of the experience of the Technical Team for Rapid Response (which visited some 40 communities at risk of floods and landslidesbefore the 1999 rainy and hurricane season) has indicated that projects which were "imposed" by experts without participation from local authorities and communities were rarely and poorly maintained.
Efforts will be made to ensure a gender-sensitiveapproach to the participatory process. Studies have shown that including men and women together in the participatory process stirnulateseffective coordination between the sexes in the disaster emergency phase, and results in more effective coping strategies for disaster prevention and mitigation (see Annex 15 for additional information on gender and disaster). This gender-conscious approach has been applied to a similar disaster mitigation project in Honduras, with positive initial results.
6.2 How does the project involve consultations or collaboration with NGOs or other civil society organizations?
NGOs are foreseen as likely participants in participatory planning exercises designed to bring communities and local governments together to identify priority mitigation measures under component 4. Annex 14 lists donor agencies and relevant ongoing projects in Nicaragua.
7. Safeguard Policies:
Environmental Assessment (OP 4.01, BP 4.01, GP 4.01) Yes Natural habitats (OP 4.04, BP 4.04, GP 4.04) No Forestry (OP 4.36, GP 4.36) No _ Pest Management (OP 4.09) No _ Cultural Property (OPN 11.03) No Indigenous Peoples (OD 4.20) Yes Involuntary Resettlement (OD 4.30 No Safety of Dams (OP 4.37, BP 4.37) No _ Projects in International Waters (OP 7.50, BP 7.50, GP 7.50) No Projects in Disputed Areas (OP 7.60, BP 7.60, GP 7.60) No
F. Sustainability and Risks 1. Sustainability: Sustainability of project objectives depends on two key variables; one the successful mainstreaming of disaster awareness concerns into operations by other Ministries and agencies; and two, the ability of the National System to operate during and beyond the next two presidential administrations. Regarding the first, supervision teams from both this and other projects should review the adoption of risk analysis and disaster planning in standard municipal development plans, and in the participatory planning exercises
21 carried out by FISE and local governments in all municipalities.Continued IDA involvementin decentralization projects and in participatory planning exercises will certainly encouragethe sustained application of disaster analysis and mitigationto local governments. Regarding the second, the three year implementation period should give a clear impetusfor establishing the Secretariatand the System it coordinates.
2. Critical Risks
FrmOLtnutsto ObjectiveIil Trinedstaff does not remain in the |M | Project will provide work and opportunities for l Scetariat career advancementfor trained staff.l Public sector employees are not very S Project design ensures that all activities are widely interested in disaster issues promoted and target audiencesreached from early stages of implementation. National disaster awareness campaign does N Project design ensures that all activities are widely not reach out to all vulnerable population promoted and target audiencesreached from early ______|stages of implementation. Municipalities are not interested in S Project offers incentives for participation, such as vulnerability reduction activities training in disaster managementfor local officials; production of base maps that are useful for cadastral information and planning; and funding if mitigation measures are identifiedand prioritized following the project'smethodology. From Componentsto Outputs Government fails to contribute to operating S Operating costs of the Secretariatwill be kept low; a costs of the Executive Secretariat and fund raising strategy will be put in place to identify National System long-term sources of income for the System There is not adequate capacity in the S Staff will be trained, and the Secretariat will be Secretariat to coordinate tasks across assisted initially with expert consultants various agencies and to supervise consultants Hiring of consultants and procurement of M Both a special unit in the Vice Presidency equipment is not carried out on a timely (UCRESEP) and FISE will assist the Secretariat. fashion Both have an excellent record in terms of hiring of consultants and procurementof equipment. Both a special unit in the Vice Presidency (UCRESEP) and FISE will assist the Secretariat. Both have an excellent record in terms of hiring of consultants and l_____ |procurement of equipment. OverallRisk Rating S l_I Risk Rating- H (HighRisk), S (SubstantialRisk), M (ModestRisk), N(Negligible or LowRisk)
3. Possible Controversial Aspects: None foreseeable
G. Main Credit Conditions 1. Effectiveness Condition Operations Manual accepted by IDA
Financial management system established within UCRESEP
Agreement signed between FISE and the Secretariatconcerning FISE's role in executing disaster mitigation sub-projects (Component E)
22 Agreements signed between the Secretariat and INETER concerning INETER's role in conducting studies described in Component B.3, and for the provision of assistance from INETER to the Secretariat for the execution of Component D.2
Agreement signed between the Secretariat and UCRESEP for the assistance, by UCRESEP, in the procurement and financial management of the Project
Independent auditors have been appointed to carry out required Project audits
2. Other For disbursement of funds for goods and consultant services in subcomponent B.3, the presentation of an action plan acceptable to IDA, showing a detailed description and phasing of sub-activities and tasks, and indicating the agencies' and sub-departments of the responsible departments under INETER.
For disbursement of funds against activity (b) in subcomponent A.2, the presentation of a plan acceptable to IDA for storage, maintenance, distribution and utilization of all emergency response equipment by the corresponding agencies and members of the National System, to assure appropriate usage of the emergency equipment to be purchased under subcomponent A.2 of the Project.
For disbursement of funds for works and consultant services in subcomponent A. 1, submission of evidence of arrangements satisfactory to IDA, of ownership or long-term leasehold by the Executive Secretariat of the building which will house the Executive Secretariat's headquarters.
For disbursement of funds for goods, works and services financed under subprojects, the presentation of engineering and architecture designs, cost estimates and environmental procedures for standard mitigation subprojects to be carried out under ComponentE, and the procedures for economic and environmental analysis and the terms of reference to be applied in the case of non-standard mitigation subprojects (as defined in the Operations manual), acceptable by IDA.
H. Readiness for Implementation F 1. a) The engineering design documents for the first year's activities are complete and ready for the start of project implementation. 2 1. b) Not applicable. 3 2. The procurement documents for the first year's activities are complete and ready for the start of project implementation. z 3. The Project Implementation Plan has been appraised and found to be realistic and of satisfactory quality. [l 4. The following items are lacking and are discussed under loan conditions (Section G):
23 1. Compliancewith Bank Policies 1. This project complies with all applicable Bank policies. The following exceptions to Bank policies are recommendedfor approval. The project complies with all other applicable Bank policies.
Tova M. Solo Danny *pzi r aid John Redwood Donna Dowsett-Coirolo Team Leader Direct fs CountryManager
24 Annex1: ProjectDesign Summary
NICARAGUA:Natural Disaster Vulnerability Reduction -o sPerbce Indkators I I CrtI A mtions Sector-relatedCAS Goal: SectorIndicators: Sector/country reports: (fromGoal to BankMission) EconomicGrowth and Poverty Reduction P~oj~ct eIui_ t Om e J lct Jsktos P iiv.(from Objectiv ito Goal) To improveNicaragua's disaster ExecutiveSecretariat fully Semi-annualProject Progress Functioningof theNational managementcapacity by: operationalat end of project Reports; Systemunhindered by electoral (Performancelevels of the cycles (a) strengtheninginstitutional Secretariat,and the Systemin capabilityin disasterprevention, general,will be measuredduring Fundingcontinues to be preparednessand response at the the lifeof the projectthrough the adequate nationallevel; evaluationof selecteddisaster managementactivities) (b) buildinginstitutional capacity Copiesof plans,and to programdisaster mitigation at LongTerm Disaster Mitigation evaluationsof consultationand the nationallevel; Plan preparedand financing disseminationworkshops; identifiedby end of project (c) promotingdisaster awareness and "preventivethinking' NationalDisaster Emergency throughpublic sector education ResponsePlan developedby and awarenessprograms; secondyear of project Semi-annualProject Progress (d) buildinglocal capacity to Disastermanagement committees Reports; managedisaster emergencies, to organizedand equipped in all assessrisk and to identify municipalitiesby endof project mitigationmeasures; and Projectimpact will be assessed ImpactEvaluations of Disaster (e) implementingmitigation through: AwarenessProgram, of measuresat the locallevel. To (a) evaluationsof successof the DisasterTheme in School improveNicaragua's disaster nationaldisaster awareness Curricula,and of Mitigation managementcapacity campaignand the mainstreaming Measures.,including surveys of disasterthemes in formal of beneficiaries. educationcurricula;
(b) evaluationsof preventive planningexercises and mitigation measurescarried out in the eligiblemunicipalities (This evaluationwill lookat indicators such as total numberof people benefitedin rural and urbanareas (controllingby keyvariables such as income,gender, age, etc.), total squarekilometers of hazardous areas protectedfrom future development,total numberof schoolsretrofitted, total costof ______investmentper capita,etc.) _
25 hby#fO0j7cti~;00lQybKey rn indators0 00Monitot* & Evaluation Crit ptios Output from each Output Indicators: Project reports: (from Outputs to Component: Objective) A. hnstitutionalcapability Key staff of the Secretariat identified, Semi-annual Project Progress Trained staff remains in of National System for hired and trained by first year of project; Reports; the Secretariat disaster management at Secretariat has relocated to national level strengthened reconditioned offices with Emergency Copy of National Emergency Plan Operations Center and supplies for emergency needs over five years, by end Copy of National Disaster Fund of second year; Procedures; Legal procedures defined and adopted for National Disaster Fund by second Copies of Operational Manuals for year of project; Executive Secretariat and National Operations manuals prepared and System; published by second year of project; 4 national simulation exercises carried Evaluations of simulation exercises. out by end of project B. Institutional capacity Studies to analyze vulnerability and Semi-annual Project Progress Information sharing policy for disaster mitigation at identify mitigation programs for the city Reports agreed and maintained national level enhanced of Managua, for key watersheds and for building codes carried out by end of Copies of final study reports; Local officials and project and found satisfactory by the functionaries of technical Bank; Copy of official resettlement policy agencies involved in and Policy for resettlement of persons at risk for persons at risk of natural disaster interested in applying of natural disaster adopted by second vulnerability analysis in year of project policy and programs
Executive Secretariat remains involved in and interested in applying resettlement policy C. Public awareness of 2000 formal school teachers trained in Semi-annual Project Progress Teaching and disasters and of prevention disaster prevention and given instructive Reports; Communications heightened materials for use by 10,000 students by Copies of teaching guides and professions remain end of project; materials on disaster awareness for interested in and concerned Public Awareness Campaign on use in public schools; evaluations of for disaster prevention Disasters carried out by third year of training modules for teachers; project; Copy of the Design and Plan for National Disaster 150 communication media employees Disaster Awareness Campaign; Awareness Raising trained in disaster reporting by end of evaluations of the campaign; Campaign reaches out to project Evaluations of training results most vulnerable population D. Local capacity to At least 124 municipalitieshave Semi-annual Project Progress Municipalities are assess risks, identify prepared local emergency plans by end Reports; interested in participating mitigation measures and of project; Copies of local emergency plans; in disaster vulnerability respond to natural disasters At least 20 eligible municipalitieshave Digital files of hazard and reduction activities strengthened carried out vulnerability assessments and vulnerability maps, copies of prepared "preventive"land use plans by vulnerability assessment reports; end year of project evaluations of participatory exercises; E. Local vulnerability At least 15 eligible municipalitieshave Semi-annual Project Progress Municipalities are reduction measures implemented mitigationmeasures Reports; interested in participating implemented identified under component D by end of Copies of M'pal Investment Plans; in disaster vulnerability project impact evaluations of mitigation reduction activities measures
26 HierarehyoObjecaives Kty Performaieie Monitoring& Evaluation Crical Asumptions
ProjectComponents / Sub- Inputs: (budgetfor Projectreports: (fromComponents to components: eachcomponent) Outputs) A. Strengtheningthe National US$4.82 Semi-AnnualProject Progress Reports; Governmentcontributes SystemCapacity for Disaster operatingcosts of the Management IndependentAudit Reports; ExecutiveSecretariat and A. I InstitutionalStrengthening of NationalSystem the ExecutiveSecretariat SupervisionMission Reports; Thereis adequatecapacity in A.2 Strengtheningof the National NationalEmergency Plan the Secretariatto coordinate System tasksacross various agencies and to superviseconsultants
Hiring of consultants and procurement of equipment is carriedout on a timelyfashion B. Developmentof National US$1.65 Semi-AnnualProject Progress Reports; MitigationProgram and IndependentAudit Reports; Strategy SupervisionMission Reports; B.I MitigationInformation Studyof WatershedVulnerability; System Studyof BuildingCodes; Studyof ManaguaVulnerability to B.2 StrategicMitigation Studies Earthquakes; ResettlementPolicy; NationalMitigation Program C. BuildingPublic Awareness of US$0.97 Semi-AnnualProject Progress Reports; DisasterPrevention IndependentAudit Reports; C.1 Mainstreamingof disaster SupervisionMission Reports; awarenessinto formaleducation Copiesof TeachingMaterials developed for elementaryschool, for generalpublic C.2 PublicAwareness Program and for communicationstraining
C.3 DisasterAwareness in CommunicationsMedia D. Strengtheningof Local US$ 3.69 Semi-AnnualProject Progress Reports; Capacityfor DisasterRisk IndependentAudit Reports; Management SupervisionMission Reports; D. I Consolidationof localdisaster Local VulnerabilityAssessments for responsecommittees, selected(25) municipalities; Land Use Plansfor selected D.2 Promotionof preventive municipalities planning E. Implementationof Local US$ 4.16 Semi-AnnualProject Progress Reports; VulnerabilityReduction IndependentAudit Reports; Measures SupervisionMission Reports E.I Identificationof sub-projects
E.2 Designand Implementation of sub projects F. ProjectFinancial US$ 0.76 PMRsdelivered quarterly; Management Semi-AnnualProject Progress Reports; IndependentAudit Reports; SupervisionMission Reports
27 Annex2: DetailedProject Description
NICARAGUA:Natural Disaster Vulnerability Reduction A detailedbreakdown of costswith contingenciesis presentedat the end of thisannex.
Project Component A - US$4.82 million Strengthening of National System Capacity for Disaster Management
The need to coordinate sector and local efforts to establish and implement prevention and mitigation policies, programs and projects, and to improve disaster preparedness and response, led the Government of Nicaragua to enact Law # 337 in April 2000, which created the National System for Disaster Prevention, Mitigation, and Response (the National System). While in the past the emphasis had been disaster response and relief, the newly established System, as its name indicates, has a mandate that covers all the phases of the disaster management cycle, and a clear goal of reducing vulnerability to natural disasters. The System brings together government actors at all levels (sector agencies at ministerial level, regional and municipal authorities), and representatives of private sector and NGOs. Law 337 also created the Executive Secretariat of the National System for Disaster Prevention, Mitigation, and Response (the Executive Secretariat), a centralized coordinating body to guide and focus the work and activities of the various participants in the National System (Annex 12 describes the institutional history of disaster management in Nicaragua). The Executive Secretariat is located in the Office of the Vice Presidency, and is intended to provide the coordinating capability to mobilize the System, and to promote disaster management though varied initiatives. The Executive Secretariat is part of the central nucleus of the System, which also includes the National Committee (a political body), INETER (a decentralized entity under the Presidency of the Republic), and the Civil Defense (under the Army of Nicaragua).
The objective of this component is to strengthen the institutional and organizational capacity of the National System, to assure its sustainability and, in particular, to establish the Secretariat as System coordinator and to support selected core agencies so that they can begin to fulfill their assigned roles and responsibilities. Implementation of the component is the direct responsibility of the Planning Department of the Executive Secretariat, with support from other offices, departments and agencies as noted. The component will carry out the following activities through two sub-components.
Sub-component A.1: Institutional Strengthening of the Executive Secretariat
This sub-component will build capacity within the Executive Secretariat to coordinate the National System, including the overall planning, coordination and supervision of matters related to disaster prevention, mitigation, preparedness and response, as defined by Law 337. It will also support the Executive Secretariat's management capability to carry out the project. Under this sub-component, the project will finance consultants, equipment purchase and installation, civil works and training as noted beneath each activity.
(a) Organizational Development and the Establishment of Capabilities in Planning and Project Management
This activity, under the aegis of the Executive Secretariat's Planning Department will promote and sustain five specific programs throughout the project: Legal, International Cooperation and Sustainable Financing, Information Systems, Norms and Procedures, and Internal and Inter-institutional Training. Specific tasks for each program include, respectively: (i) Coordination of legal aspects of institutional responsibilities of the National System, including the design, setting-up and regulation of the National Disaster Fund, regulations for sector work commissions, and assistance in legal matters related to Law 337; (ii) Design and development of a Central American and hemispheric relations program, and
28 of a strategy to promote external financing; (iii) Definition of standards and procedures, including production and distribution of operations manuals, and maintenanceand evaluation of an inventory of the National System's emergency response equipment and supplies; (iv) Development of information systems, including a web page for the Secretariat, a data base on natural disasters for Nicaragua, damage assessments, and a system for management of operational information; and (v) Professional training and development, including a risk management library and data base, and preparation and supervision of training plans.
The project will contribute to costs of consultants to carry out activities (i), (ii), (iii) and data management implied in (iv). It will also cover training costs under (v).
As it is in the interest of developing the newly created National System for Disaster Prevention, Mitigation and Response, the project will also contribute to the annual operating costs of the Executive Secretariat on a declining basis, as follows: 60% of the annual budget request presented to the Ministry of Finance during the fiscal year prior to project effectiveness, to a maximum amount equivalent to US$ 300,000; 40% of the annual budget request presented to the Ministry of Finance during the first fiscal year of project effectiveness to a maximum amount equivalent to US$ 200,000; and 20% of the annual budget request presented to the Ministry of Finance during the second fiscal year of project effectiveness to a maximum amount equivalent to US$ 100,000.
(b) Improvement of Physical Plant and Equipment
Supervised by the Planning Department, but under the direction of the Department of Administration and Finance, this activity will provide the Executive Secretariat with adequate facilities and equipment for its operation, covering: (i) Rehabilitation of a building donated by the National Government to the National System, conditional on the titling (or long term leasing) by the National System, to provide office space for the National System, including, inter alia, headquarters and office space for the Executive Secretariat and for the sector working groups, and for the Disaster Management Operations Center (DMOC) (indicative cost US$0.8 million) and (ii) Provision of equipment and vehicles for the Secretariat, including office equipment, furniture, and files for a staff of 28; computers, software and printers; and 6 small trucks.
Under (i) the Project will provide financing for the necessary engineering designs and civil works. Under (ii) it will finance purchase and installation or distribution of goods.
Sub-component A.2: Strengthening the National System
The activities included in this sub-component aim at improving the National System's operational capacity, especially its emergency preparedness and response capacity. Although the Executive Secretariat's Planning Department is directly responsible for implementation of this component, it will receive support from other agencies and Departments as noted.
This sub-component will finance: consultants to develop a National Emergency Plan, including procedural guides and legal agreements, and emergency response equipment diagnostics and to assist in design and implementationof simulation exercises under activity (c); training in emergency procedures, including disaster simulations, in equipment maintenance and use under activity (c); and (c) acquisition of emergency response equipment for the National System under (b) and of supplies for emergency simulation exercises under (c) as described below.
29 (a) Development of National Emergency Plans
Under this activity, the direction of the Planning Department will manage consultants to design a National Emergency Response Plan, counting on assistance from international experts and will include publication of 2,500 copies of the plan itself and of instruction guides for application. The plan will be prepared through a consultation process involving key preparedness and response agencies, NGOs, and other concerned stakeholders.
(b) Improving Emergency Response Capacity
In order to improve emergency preparedness and response capacity of the National System, the following tasks will be implemented: Acquisition of needed emergency equipment, following an inventory and diagnostic carried out by consultants for an inter-agency task force. The Department of Administration and Finance in the Executive Secretariat will be responsible for this activity, although the diagnostic would be under the aegis of the Office of Norms and Procedures, and both will report to the Planning Department. The same inventory/diagnosticwould identify emergency response equipment needs for key search, rescue and first aid agencies (Volunteer Fire Brigades, National Fire brigades Police, Civil Defense). Following the completion of the diagnostic, The Department of Administration and Finance in the Executive Secretariat, under the coordination of the Planning Department, would purchase equipment (mainly shelter supplies, search and rescue, and communications equipment, no vehicles) for the use of agencies members of the National System, under the responsibility of the Office of Norms and Procedures. As a condition for disbursement against the purchase of emergepcy equipment, the Secretariat will present a plan for storage, maintenance, distribution and utilization of all emergency response equipment acceptable to the Association and will enter into such legal agreements with agencies and members of the National System as the Association requires to assure appropriate usage of emergency equipment to be purchased. Equipment to be provided under this task can include, but would not necessarily be limited to the following items: - Personal protection equipment such as: life vests, hard hats, boots, smoke masks, gas masks, harnesses, oxygen tanks - Underwater rescue equipment: diving equipment, motor boats - Fire and explosive protection: liquid foams; portable water pumps - Electrical generators and solar energy plants - Sirens - Communicationsequipment - Rescue equipment (brake bars, ropes, pulleys and rappel lines, carabiners, gate openings, gurney and stretchers, portable resuscitation systems, rescue and retrieval systems for combined spaces, Petzl Hanoled Ascenders, rechargeable flashlights, portable rescue saws, hot line cutters, extrication and rescue tools, lifting bags, rescue pulleys, multi-purpose gas detector, water containers, portable winches) Tents and mobile shelters, sleeping bags, foam mattresses, army kitchen, camping trailers, portablejohns and shelters.
(c) National Program of Emergency Simulations
Under this activity, administered by Civil Defense, four emergency simulations will be carried out at the national level as follows: one in year one, two in year two, and one in year three. Tasks include contracting international and national experts to design simulation exercises, development and purchase of special equipment, including computers, software, communication equipment, office equipment, etc., training in the operation of the EOC and
30 the use and maintenance of key equipment, mobilization of National System personnel engaged in the exercises, and evaluations of the exercises.
Project ComponentB - US$1.65 million Development of a National Mitigation Program and Strategy
This component will be the responsibility of the Inter-Institutional Commission of the Executive Secretariat, which will work closely with technical agencies such as INETER, MAGFOR, MARENA and MTI. The objective is to improve the capacity of key technical agencies to gather, analyze and share scientific knowledge and to develop studies leading to the development of mitigation policies and strategy. In addition to a Sector Coordinator of the Executive Secretariat, whose costs are included under this component to manage the component, the following sub-componentswould be fnanced:
Sub-component B. 1: Design of a Mitigation Information System
The objective of this sub-component is to promote information sharing across key technical and scientific agencies of the National System, such as INETER, MAGFOR and MARENA, and facilitate consolidation and dissemination of existing knowledge. It will finance consultants to identify needs and to design an information management system linking key technical agencies of the National System (principally the Secretaria Ejecutiva, MAGFOR, MARENA, MTI, INETER, and Defensa Civil.) Under this sub-component information experts would be contracted to review and identify, inter alia, information needs, existing systems to be made compatible and protocols to be designed to permit necessary sharing of information for disaster management and mitigation planning.
Sub-component B.2: Development of a National Policy for Involuntary Resettlement to Reduce Risk from Natural Disasters
Focusing on the possibility of involuntary resettlement from areas at risk, this activity will generate an involuntary resettlement policy acceptable to the Government of Nicaragua, in accordance with the directives of the IDA, following: (i) A diagnostic study to identify national resettlement experiences; (ii) development of a policy, including strategies, methodologies, procedures, and design of institutional arrangements to carry out resettlement of persons at risk of natural hazards; (iii) Workshopsto obtain the input and support of agencies and sectors of civil society in the formulation of the policy for involuntary resettlement from areas at risk; and (iv) Development of a strategic plan to make the new policy operational. International experts will help the Executive Secretariat and an advisory group comprised of INIFOM, AMUNIC and relevant ministries in the development of this policy.
Sub-component B.3: Strategic Mitigation Studies
The activities of this sub-component are designed to produce information vital to the advancement of mitigation efforts for both practical program identification and policy development. It will be based on consultancies to carry out key studies to define a national mitigation program. Disbursementfor these activities will be conditional on approval of an action plan showing a detailed description and phasing of sub-activities and tasks and indicatingthe agencies' and sub-departments responsible for each. Specific activities follow:
(a) Vulnerability Assessment of Managua
Managua houses 20% of Nicaragua's population. The city has been hit by two serious earthquakes in this century. Three recent studies (two with funding from Norway and
31 Sweden, one nationally financed) have analyzed and quantified risk factors (soil and slope conditions, micro-zoning and flood hazards) but none, as yet, has mapped and/or quantified the precise neighborhoods and buildings at risk. A full vulnerability assessment is therefore proposed which will analyze the resistance factors of existing buildings and designate standards for developing areas. It will take special account of lifeline infrastructure (hospitals, schools, public refuge, water and electricity mains), their construction quality and needs for retrofitting. This activity will develop a methodologyto apply to Managua (and to other municipalities in Nicaragua) to analyze existing and future building patterns and to produce seismic risk maps and retrofitting plans following the information from micro- zoning and other studies.
(b) Watershed Vulnerability - Overall Review and Pilot Assessment
Accumulated natural phenomena combined with deforestation and road construction, among other factors, have made Nicaragua's watersheds increasingly susceptible to flooding and to landslides. Hurricane Mitch both revealed and increased their vulnerability as it changed river beds and destabilized slopes. A comprehensive review of Nicaragua's watersheds has never been carried out, although INETER now has information available to allow a comparison of vulnerability and identification of affected watersheds, prior and post-Mitch. Identification of the watersheds at greatest risk, would be the first phase of the proposed study. As a second phase of this activity, INETER proposes to carry out a detailed assessment of vulnerability in a particular watershed (of the Estero Real River) to develop a replicable methodology for identifying and mapping areas at risk and for providing local governments and communities with information and disaster mitigation planning assistance.
(c) Review and Revision of National Building Codes
Nicaragua's building code dates from 1983, based mainly on analyses carried out following the Managua earthquake of 1972. Since then additional data has been gathered concerning geomorphologic conditions in different parts of the country. Also, subsequent events have changed requirements for construction standards. Using information developed from micro- zoning maps and vulnerability studies by INETER, the MTI proposes to carry out a review and up-date of Nicaragua's building codes. This activity involves development of new minimum standards for construction in concrete, masonry, steel, wood and adobe (earth) as well as the introduction of new regulations for training and preparing not only formal sector construction companies and engineering consultants, but also informal builders. Among other deliverables, this activity would produce: an updated national map showing risk areas anidcode applications for seismic risk, volcanic risk, wind event risks, guidelines for structural calculations for construction in concrete, masonry, steel, wood and adobe (earth) buildings, and a micro-zoning map for seismic risk in Managua.
Sub-component B.4: Preparation of National Mitigation Program and Strategy
Using the results of the foregoing studies, plus short-term local and international consultants, the Department of Planning of the Executive Secretariat will develop a long term plan to promote disaster mitigation in Nicaragua in the third year of project implementation. An action plan to develop such a program will be presented to the Association prior to disbursement for this activity which will include workshops to discuss and promote the objectives of the program and its strategy.
32 Sub-component B.5: Expert Technical Assistance in Vulnerability Analysis
Studies proposed above and vulnerability analyses to be carried out under other components, specifically D.4 will require technical advice from experts in hydrology, geology and related earth sciences. This activity will finance input from experts to assist in reviewing risk assessments, studies, proposals and terms of reference as well as training INETER professionals in disaster risk assessment and mitigation planning.
Project Component C - US$ 0.97 million Building Public Awareness of Disaster Prevention
This component is focused on making disaster prevention a part of daily life and culture and will be managed by the Public Relations Department of the Executive Secretariat. In addition to a Public Relations expert to manage the component, various activities under the following sub-components would be financed:
Sub-component C.1: Updating Formal Education Curricula on Disasters
The Secretariat will work in conjunction with the Ministry of Education (Direcci6n Didactica) to implement this sub-component, which would include the following. To the degree in which instruction is offered indigenous languages, materials and programs will be developed accordingly:
(a) Updating of Methodological Guides for Teachers
The Ministry of Education prepared a Methodological Guide for Teachers on Disasters in 1994, which preceded the enactment of Law 337, and thus is in need of updating. Moreover, based on its previous limited application, several changes have been identified. This activity will include updating of the guide with the help of international experts, as well as the graphic design and publication of the new guides. The preparation of the new guide will be coordinated with the design and production of instructive materials discussed under Activity (c) below.
(b) Training for Teachers
Teachers from primary and secondary schools will be trained in the use of new methodological guides and instructive materials, and in innovative ways to educate kids and young adults on disaster management and its relevance for a country like Nicaragua. The activity involves the design and implementation of a training program through which teachers will be presented with new or revised techniques and methodologies, based on a review of lessons learned from previous experiences in Nicaragua and other countries in the region. Special attention will be given to techniques and methodologies that focus on hands- on and interactive educational tools.
(c) Design and Production of Instructive Materials
This activity includes an assessment of instructive materials that have been used in Nicaragua and other countries in the region; and design, production and dissemination of revised and/or new instructive materials considered adequate for the new methodologies and techniques to be applied by teachers.
33 (d) Impact Evaluation and Exchange of Experiences in the Formal Education System
This activity includes the following tasks: (i) follow up and impact evaluation of the use of the new guideline, instructive materials and educational techniques. This task will be carried out by international experts; (ii) exchange of experiences with other countries; and (iii) implementationof a pilot project in 5 schools to promote involvement of students in community-based disaster management efforts.
Sub-component C.2: Public Awareness Program
The purpose of this sub-component is to bring a basic awareness of disasters and better understanding of mitigation and prevention activities which can be taken from the household to the public at large, through extensive publicity and media campaigns. This program should take into account cultural and language differences to fully and adequately include indigenous peoples. In addition to financing a director for the office of Public Relations, activities under this sub- component include:
(a) Design and Development of a CommunicationsStrategy
Based on a recently completed study financed by the Inter-American Development Bank and CEPREDENAC, and taking into account the various hazards prevalent in the country, a Communications Strategy will be developed to guide the implementationof periodic public awareness programs. The objective of the strategy will be to promote a "Culture of Prevention" in Nicaragua. As such, the strategy's design should: assess risk perception of the public at large, identify the main factors affecting risk perception (positively and negatively); and identify adequate ways to validate local knowledge and introduce scientific knowledge and technical information. The strategy should provide specific measures to reach out clearly identified target audiences, and will identify indicators to measure its impact. Due to its nature, this activity will be carry out by a multidisciplinary team of international and national experts.
(b) Production and Dissemination of Materials
This activity includes the following tasks: (i) preparation of a production plan in close coordination with the Communication Strategy. This plan, to be prepared by a consultant firm, will identify the type and amount of materials required to undertake the first public awareness program. These materials include videos, audio messages, posters, etc. (ii) design and production of materials; and (iii) dissemination through the recommended medium (TV, radio, newspapers, etc.).
Sub-component C.3: Strengthening Disaster Awareness in the CommunicationsMedia
Focused on improving relations with the press and the public, this sub-component will strengthen the communications capacity of the National System, and promote disaster awareness in the communications media through:
(a) Production and Dissemination of Information on Risk Analysis
This activity involves design and production of a set of official materials related to disaster management to be distributed by the Secretariat's Public Relations Department and other key agencies of the National System to journalists, decision makers, private sector representatives, and civil society groups, to ensure that a consistent and informative message
34 will be disseminated. Official materials will include, inter alia, updates on the various activities implemented by the Secretariat and other key agencies, information on natural hazards in Nicaragua, opportunities for risk reduction, and success stories related to prevention and mitigation.
(b) Training for Journalists and Communications Employees
Under this activity, the Project will support the organization of a series of workshops at the national and regional levels for journalists and communications employees. The objective of the activity is to familiarizejournalists and communications specialists with basic concepts related to disaster management, with the role that the media can play in developing a "Culture of Prevention" in the country, and with ways to improve reporting of emergencies and disaster prevention activities.
(c) Review and Reform of Education Curricula for Communications Professionals
With the help of experts, a review of existing curricula in journalism and communication schools in the country and the region will be undertaken, identifying any previous efforts to introduce the disaster management theme. The consultants selected for this activity will also provide recommendations on how to proceed to promote the introduction of the disaster management theme in the curricula of journalism schools, especially those located in public universities.
Project Component D - US$3.69 million Strengthening Local Capacity for Disaster Risk Management
The Territorial Commission of the Executive Secretariat will be responsible for the implementationof this component. Local governments will be the main partners, supported by FISE, Civil Defense and the advisory group from INETER. In addition to financing a Territorial Coordinator (US$ 0.2 million) to manage the component, the sub-components listed below would be financed with the objective of reducing disaster risks at the municipal level:
Sub-component D.1: Consolidation of Committees for Disaster Management
This sub-component supports Nicaraguan legislation requiring the creation and maintenance of committees on prevention, mitigation and response at different territorial levels (municipal, departmental and regional). It also follows traditional practice of local emergency managementheaded by local authorities, hailing from both government and civil society, including adequate representation of different indigenous groups. Developing a local emergency response capacity entails two steps:
(a) Organization of and Equipment for Local Emergency Committees and Brigades
This activity involves purchase and distribution of emergency response equipment,training expenses for organizing, and training emergency committees in up to 15 departmental,2 regional, and 98 municipal committees. Consistent with the responsibilities assigned under the National System, organization, training and equipping of the committees will be done by the Civil Defense, through field trips, and information and organizational meetings to distribute equipment. The project will provide financing to Civil Defense: a) for training purposes which will cover logistical costs of mobilizing the Civil Defense trainers and b) for acquiring teaching materials and needed training equipment. After Mitch, the World Bank supported the organization and equipment of some 45 municipalities at risk from floods and landslides and therefore, the full 151 municipalities do not require organization and training
35 for emergency committees. A total of 107 municipal committees and 124 emergency brigades will require training. Training will take into account the local customs and languages to assure full participation of the indigenous peoples in each community. Each emergency brigade oversees four specialized brigades, as follows: 1) first aid; 2) search and rescue; 3) fire prevention; and 4) communications. This activity also includes the purchase and distribution of equipment to the specialized brigades and training in its use and maintenance.
(b) Monitoring of the Committees
Follow-up on emergency committee training to assure that the committees remain operative will include monitoring of equipment maintenance, development of local "Disaster Response Plans", and preparation and carrying out of simulation exercises. This activity will be under the responsibility of Civil Defense together with the Municipal Committees and will cover logistic costs including the provision of eight vehicles to cover mobilization needs for monitoring the committees.
Sub-component D.2: Promotion of "Preventative Planning"
The objective of this sub-component is to strengthen planning and technical capacity for disaster mitigation and prevention in at least 25 highly vulnerable municipalities, as per an agreed upon list ranking Nicaragua's municipalities in order of vulnerability. The list presented in Annex 13 shows the 110 municipalities identified as most susceptible to disaster risks (superimposing risks from floods, landslides, volcanoes, seismic and wind events). Disbursementagainst this component will be conditional on presentation of a selection criteria for municipalities, based on factors such as historical records of frequency and impact of disasters, population growth, poverty levels, and access to services, to permit objective listing of vulnerable municipalities.
(a) Vulnerability Analysis and Mapping
The objective of this activity is to help the eligible municipalities identify their most prevalent hazards, determine the vulnerability levels of their population, infrastructure and productive activities, and identify the most feasible structural and non structural mitigation measures. The main partners in this activity are the local government, community leaders, NGOs, and local private sector representatives. International and national experts in risk analysis will be selected to work together with local consultants and NGOs experienced in community development and land use planning to apply a methodology that will facilitate validation of scientific knowledge and technical information vis-a-vis local knowledge and risk perception through primary and secondary data gathering, a series of community workshops and field visits. The consultant teams will work closely with local officials from the technical, planning and environmental units of the municipality to ensure transference of knowledge. Hazard and vulnerability analysis and mapping will be used, through this methodology, as an opportunity to train local technical officials and to educate community members. The final outputs by municipality will include a hazard and vulnerability assessment, including identification of the main factors contributing to vulnerability; GIS- based hazard and vulnerability maps at a scale of 1:50,000 (municipal level) and 1:5,000 (urban level); and recommendations on feasible structural and non structural mitigation measures.
36 (b) Long-term Land-Use and Mitigation Planning
Using a process of public consultation, and working together with municipal officials, NGOs and community leaders, the consultant team which carried out Activity (a) will help the same municipalities to prepare a long-term development plan (considering a minimum of twenty years future growth) that identifies areas at risk and indicates appropriate land uses. The goal of this plan will be to promote sustainable social, economic and environmental growth in the municipality by including natural hazard risk in future land use planning. The outputs of this activity by municipality will include a land use and mitigation plan, including maps at 1:50,000 (municipal level) and 1:5,000 (urban level) identifying risk levels as well as "safe" growth areas, and recommendations on feasible measures such as zoning ordinances, alternative uses (for example, parks and sports fields in areas at risk), building standards, "living" maps etc. to ensure that the recommended land use plans are implemented. The long-term mitigation plan will incorporate the recommendations on feasible structural and non structural measures identified under (a).
Project Component E - US$4.16 million Implementation of Local Vulnerability Reduction Measures
FISE will be responsible for carrying out all activities under this component. FISE will, however, report to the Territorial Coordinator of the Executive Secretariat who will in turn present progress reports to the Planning Department which integrate the PMRs for this component. Activities fall into two sub-components, one to screen mitigation measures to qualify for sub-projects and to prepare municipal investment plans, and one to actually implement the sub-projects.
Sub-component E.1: Selection of Sub Projects and Preparation of Municipal Investment Plan
Under this sub-component, FISE will review recommended mitigation measures emerging from the vulnerability analyses and "preventative planning exercises" (see component D.2) as per its normal project evaluation cycle and will select eligible sub-projects, subject to the following criteria: 1) Subprojects must not appear on the "negative list" shown below; 2) The total amount of any single sub-project does not exceed equivalent of US$100,000 and the total number of sub-projects for any one municipality may not exceed an amount to be specified in the Operations Manual, times the number of inhabitants; 3) Municipalities must have presented acceptable land use development plans, which include programs to check development or settlement of land identified as at risk; 4) Subprojects must apply standard FISE designs at pre-established costs and pass standard environmental screening procedures, unless the Guidelines for Selection and Evaluation of Mitigation Measures call for additional procedures. Disbursement for this sub-component will be conditional on FISE's presentation of designs, costs and environmental screening procedures acceptable to the Association for standard sub-projects (listed as type "I" in the attached chart) and of procedures or terms of reference acceptable to the Association for non-standard sub-projects (listed as "2"or "3" in the attached chart).
Priority mitigation measures identified as feasible financially would be integrated into an investment program to be included in the Municipal Investment Plan. To accomplish this objective, FISE would follow its participatory planning methodology, which promotes leadership on the part of the municipal government, and close partnerships between the local government and central agencies and ministries, and civil society.
Financing for Implementation of sub-projects (component E.2) will be conditional on FISE's presenting the following formulae found acceptable by the Association:
37 1. For evaluating project costs: Pre-establishedcosts for standard items as noted in guidelines, Maximum cost per person protected, or formula for costlbenefit analysis based on insurance or reconstruction costs
2. For evaluating environmental impact: Terms of Reference for an independent environmental impact assessment
3. For evaluating technical design: Codes to be applied in cases of construction in areas at risk of flood, landslide, wind and seismic events and Terms of Reference for special review by experts in disaster resistant construction
Negative list
The project will not finance any subproject which will be classified as category A under the Bank's EA policy, or subprojectswhich are implemented in violation of Nicaragua's environmental laws and environmental impact assessment procedures, or Nicaragua's laws on treatment of cultural heritage. Nor will any physical or economic involuntary displacement(as interpreted in accordance with the Association's Operational Directive (OD) 4.30) take place as a consequence of the execution of the Subprojects; specifically, no person shall have - as a consequenceof the execution of the Subprojects - his or her: (i) right, title or interest in any house or any other fixed or movable goods acquired or possessed, temporarily or permanently;or (ii) business, occupation, work or place of residence or habitat adversely affected;
Specifically, subprojects involving the following activities will be excluded from financing:
Dam construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation or strengthening.
Activities affecting natural protected areas recognized by central, departmental, regional or municipal governments (or buffer zones thereof), other than to rehabilitate areas damaged by a previous natural disaster.
Land reclamation (i.e., drainage of wetlands or filling of water bodies to create land).
Land clearance and leveling (when affecting natural habitats and natural land contours, natural habitats for this purpose being those water or land areas where most of the original plant and animal species are still present), except for clearing of debris resulting from an emergency. (For more details on natural habitats, Bank Operational Policy (OP) 4.04 can be consulted at www.worldbank.org).
Hazardous waste managementand disposal as well as manufacture, transport and use of pesticides and other hazardous and/or toxic materials (except small amounts of solvents, degreasing materials, paints, fuels, and the like used during construction).
River training (such as realignment, contraction or deepening of an existing river channel, or excavation of a new river channel).
Activities involving industrial plants (large-scale) and industrial estates.
New road construction or major upgrading or realignment of roads ("major" means changing the road category, such as from seasonal to all-weather or secondary to primary; adding new lanes; or changing road surface).
38 New, large-scale irrigation, drainage or flood control works.
Activities which, when being carried out, will affect, or involve the use of, water of rivers or of other bodies of water (or their tributaries) which flow through or are bordered by countries other than Nicaragua, in such a manner as to in any way adversely change the quality or quantity of water flowing to or bordering said countries; and (b) activities involving the installation or construction of facilities which, when operated after their construction or installation, will affect, or involve the use of, water of rivers or of other bodies of water (or their tributaries) which flow through or are bordered by countries other than Nicaragua, in such a manner as to in any way adversely change the quality or quantity of water flowing to or bordering said countries (unless such bordering countries have formally expressed in writing to the Bank and to the Guarantor their no-objection to the activities referred to in (a) or (b) herein).
Activities relating to forestry production other than reforestation of areas at risk.
Development of new, or expansion of existing, ports and harbors.
Aquaculture and mariculture activities.
River basin development activities.
Development of new, or expansion of existing, thermal power and hydropower facilities.
Activities of any type classifiable as category A for environmental purposes pursuant to Annex B of the Association's December 1998 policy document entitled Good Practices (GP) 4.01.
Conversion or degradation of critical natural habitats (as defined in the Association's September 1995 Operational Policy (OP) 4.04, Annex A, on natural habitats).
Chart 2-1
Guidelines for Selection and Evaluation of Mitigation Measures
Sub-Projects Economic Social and Technical Criteria Environmental Criteria Criteria 1. Pre-established unit 1. Standard FISE 1. Standard costs (to be set prior to E.LA. design disbursement of this Component) 2. Independent 2. Standard E.LA. Design with 2. Cost/personprotected specialized Codes 3. Geotecnic review 3. Cost/Benefitanalysis 3. Review by based on comparative Disaster Resistant insurance costs Construction Specialist 4. Cost/repayment ______affordability
39 Standard Measures Retrofit key public buildings 1 1 1 such as schools and hospitals, including one marked as safe refuge in disaster Identify high risk areas and 1 1 1 post warnings and/or barriers for unsuitable occupation Provide system for identifying 1 1 1 refuges, unsafe areas, and escape routes Provide Parks, sports facilities, I 1 1 tree planing in unpopulated high risk areas (to prevent settlements) Reforestation programs (using 1 1 1 native species) to control landslides, erosion Waste water drainage systems in high density areas subject to 1 1 1 erosion Early warning systems for 1 1 1 floods, landslides Storm water drainage in high density areas subject to erosion 1 1 1 and/or to flooding Non-Standardized Measures Construction of retaining walls 2 2,3 3 and terracing to prevent landslides and flooding______Remove sediment deposits 2 2 3 from resulting from earlier disasters (MITCH) which create flooding risk, to return rivers to original state. Storm water drainage on 3 1 2, roadways subject to flooding Channel control in water ways, 3 2 3 especially to protect roadways and urban areas Construction of protective 3 1 3 works for and retrofitting of key bridges and cross walks Reinforcing vital infrastructure 2 2 3 (roads, water supply systems, energy systems) .
40 Sub-component E.2: Implementationof Sub Projects
Under this sub component, FISE would carry out sub-project evaluations and design and implement civil works according to its standard procedures. The component is broken into two activities:
(a) Sub-Project Evaluation and Design
Where standard design and evaluations cannot be applied, FISE will hire consulting engineers, architects and environmental specialists to review proposals and to prepare bid documents.
(b) Sub-Project Implementation
Following standard procedures, FISE will either contract out civil works or, in the case of projects under US$50,000, will supervise the local government's procurement and construction of works.
Project Component F - US$0.76 million Project Financial Management
Under this component the project shall finance costs related to administration of the Executive Secretariat, UCRESEP and FISE, including goods and services, consultants, operating costs, financial administration, contracts, and monitoring and evaluation of the project.
Sub-component F.1: Financial Administration Support
(a) Support to the Executive Secretariat
This activity will support the costs of annual external auditing requirements and will also provide the Executive Secretariat with hardware, software and training needs to generate and interpret "PMR's" as developed by UCRESEP
(b) Support to UCRESEP
UCRESEP will receive support to carry out its financial administration and acquisitions functions listed in Components 1 to 4. UCRESEP will employ a Procurement Assistant and a Financial Assistant, and obtain LACI software, computer and office equipment.
(c) Support to FISE
To accomplish its goals of financial administration and acquisitions from Component 5, FISE will contract the services of a Procurement Assistant and a Financial Assistant.
41 Chart 2-2 Program of Activities
Component, Sub-Component, Activity and Task Year I Year 2 Year 3
l 2 3 4 l 2 3 4 1 2 3 4_
i Strengthening of National System Capacity for Disaster
- Management 1.1 Institutional Strengthening of the Executive Secretariat (a) Organizational Development _ _ - - (b) Improvement of l'hysical Plant / Equipment 1.2 Strengthening of the VationalSystem______(a) Development of National Plan for DPMR _ _ _ (b) Improving Emergency Response Capacity (c) National Program of Emergency Simulations _ _ - -
2 Development of National Mitigation Program and Strategy 2.1 Development of Infrmation ,fanagement System =. (a) Desigm of Information-sharing System (b) Establishment ofthe System 2.2 Strengthening of the lechnical Knowledge Base (a) -velopment of Mitigation Policy (b) Identification ot Mitigation Needs Technical Assistance in Vulnerability Analysis - -
3 Building Public Awareness of Disaster Prevention 3.1 I 'pdiating Formal Curricula on Disasters (a) Updating of Methodological Guides (b) Training for Teachers _ = (c Design and Production of Instructive Materials ___ (d) Impact Evaluation and Exchange of Experiences 3.2 Public A4wareness Program (a) Design /Development of Communications Strategy (b) Production/ Disseminationof Materials 3.3 Strengthening Disaster Awareness in the Communications Media (a) Production/Disseminationof Info on Risk Analysis b) Training for Journalists/Communications Employees (c) Review and Reform of Education Curricula
4 Strengthening Local Capacity for Disaster Risk Management 4.1 Consolidation of Committees for Disaster Management (a) Organi_ation of Committees (b) Follow up of Committees 4.2 Promotion of iPreventive Planning" (a) VulnierabilitNAnalasis and Mapping (b) Long-term Land Use and Mitigation Planning
5 Implementation of Local Vulnerability Reduction Measures 5.1 Identification of litigation Investment Plan (a) Selection of Mitigation Measures (b) Incorporation of Mitigation Measures in MIP 5.2 Implementation,'l aluation of Mitigation Measures (a) Sub-project EXaluationand Design (b) Sub-prqject Implementation
42 Annex3: EstimatedProject Costs
NICARAGUA:Natural Disaster Vulnerability Reduction
Local - TW Prect ' et4 Y compoent- US $mifion US $O#fipn US $mnilion Strengthening of National System Capacity for Disaster 3.80 0.80 4.60 Management Development of a National Mitigation Program and Strategy 0.76 0.78 1.54 Building Disaster Prevention Awareness into Society 0.89 0.05 0.94 Strengthening Local Capacity for Disaster Risk Management 2.47 1.03 3.50 Implementation of Local Vulnerability Reduction Measures 3.66 0.41 4.07 Project Financial Management 0.59 0.14 0.73
Total BaselineCost 12.17 3.21 15.38 PhysicalContingencies 0.35 0.17 0.52 PriceContingencies 0.01 0.14 0.15 Total ProjectCosts 12.53 3.52 16.05
Total FinancingRequired 12.53 3.52 16.05
Lckal Fo TIMMi Pro y r 0tos, S.$mili USf$owWtnU$ mU~
Goods 1.90 1.66 3.56 Works 0.79 0.00 0.79 Services 3.51 1.86 5.37 Training 1.49 0.00 1.49 Sub project 3.00 0.00 3.00 Recurrentcosts 1.84 0.00 1.84
Total ProjectCosts 12.53 3.52 16.05
TotalFinancing Required 12.53 3.52 16.05
1 Identifiable taxes and duties are 0 (US$m) and the total project cost, net of taxes, is 16.05 (US$m). Therefore, the project cost sharing ratio is 84. 11% of total project cost net of taxes.
43 Annex4: Cost BenefitAnalysis Summary NICARAGUA:Natural Disaster Vulnerability Reduction
4.1. The Context
Nicaragua's history repeatedly attests to the high cost of natural disasters, and to the fact that losses and impacts are heightened by lack of investments in preparedness and mitigation. In the last five years Nicaragua has been hit by hurricanes Joan and Mitch (classified as catastrophic events), by a volcano eruption, and several major forest fires. Chart 4-1 presents some of the economic effects of these recent natural disasters plus the infamous 1972 Managua earthquake.
Chart 4-1 Short Term Economic Effects Of Disasters In Nicaragua (Impacts in the disaster year, or the following calendar year)
Event Effects on GDP Fiscal Effects Effect on balance of Losses in Infrastructure and Payment Capital
Managua 15 % drop in overall 39% drop in fiscal 20% drop in exports and 20% 700% increase in investmentneeds. Earthquake (1972) GDP and 46% in gains. rise in imports. industry.
Nicaragua 2% drop in GDP and 20% rise in fiscal 10% increase in balance of Total damages equivalent to USS839 Hurricane (1988) 17% in agricultural deficit. payments deficit. million. sector.
Nicaragua (1992, Close to 1% drop in 10% rise in fiscal 2% increase in balance of Total damages equivalent to US$19 Cerro Negro) GDP. deficit. payments deficit. million.
Nicaragua (1992, Close to 1% drop in Close to 5% rise in 24% increase in balance of Total damages equivalent to US$25 tsunami) GDP. fiscal deficit. payments deficit. million.
Nicaragua (1998, Close to 1.5% drop in Fiscal deficit Estimated increase in debt of Total damages equivalent to Mitch) GDP. increases from an US$60 million for 1998 and US$562 million. estimated 6.1% of US$200 million for 1999 Source: Adapted from .______GDP to 6.7 % GDP Caballero y Zapata 1995.
In Central America, a natural disasters prone region, Nicaragua seems to exceed all other countries both in terms of the number people affected by natural disaster and in terms of the limited resources available to cope with them (see Chart 4-2).
Chart 4-2 Central America Average Annual Toll of Natural Disasters (1970-1999)
Country Deceased People Affected Nicaragua 3 340 59 287 Guatemala 978 156 440 Honduras 476 50 952 El Salvador 119 64 661 Panama 13 57 020 Costa Rica 7 10 032
44 Summary of Benefits and Costs: 4.2 The Economic Cost of Disasters
The economic costs of natural disasters' impacts can be classified in a) direct costs, mostly in terms of lives, property and income losses; and b) indirect costs, mostly in terms of reduced economic prospects, increases in poverty, social disruptions, etc. A study commissioned as part of this project helps estimate part of these costs to Nicaragua: Freeman P. et al (2000) "Case Study of Natural Catastrophe Risk in Nicaragua" IIASA, Vienna, (available in the project's file). Among direct costs the study only considered property losses to storms, flood and earthquake. Among indirect costs the study focus on the impact of the same set of natural disasters upon GDP growth and poverty prospects. Its main findings were:
* Direct costs: taking into account the probability of occurrence, Nicaragua annual average loss of capital due to major storms, floods and earthquakes is approximately $20 million or 0.4% of the country's capital stock (in the year 2000). Absent investment in disaster managementthis $20 million figure would grow at the same pace as the capital stock (1% to 3% annually). Again, this figure does not include the economic costs of deaths and casualties that are particularly high in Nicaragua (see above Chart 4-2).
* Indirect costs: to consider dynamic impacts, the likelihood of natural disasters was incorporated into the Bank's Revised Minimum Standard Model (RMSM, the modeling tool used by the Bank to develop its Country Assistance Strategies). Three post-disaster hypothesis were used: a) that Nicaragua has access to external additional financing so that it can immediately reconstruct all its lost and damaged properties; b) that external additional financing only add to 50% of the reconstruction needs; and c) that no additional external financing is available. As could be expected, if external funding for post-disaster reconstruction is plenty and ready available, long term impacts can be contained. Otherwise the disaster impacts could be long lasting. Taking 1998 as the baseline, the Bank's RMSM model for Nicaragua predicts that ten years without annual additions of external funding for disaster reconstruction would: a) cut the GDP growth rate by half, from more than 6% to less than 3%; b) increasethe number of people in poverty by almost 25%, from 1.8 to 2.2 million; c) increase the number of people in extreme poverty by more than 45%, from 0.4 to 0.6 million.
4.3. Investing in Preparedness and Mitigation
The magnitude of the damages associated with natural disasters call for preparedness and mitigation efforts, and while no agreed methodology exists to assess the overall returns of these type of investments, there are many partial evidences to the effect tat the returns exist and are high.
Pollner (2000) "Managing Catastrophic Risks Using Alternative Risk Financing and Insurance Pool Mechanisms" cites estimates from civil engineering experts to the effect that, on average, an increased investment in vulnerability reduction measures of 1% of a structure's costs will reduce the "probable maximum loss" from wind damage by at least one third. Detailed data suggests that retrofitting residential buildings at costs running from 1.8% to 3.4% of total building value, will reduce "probable maximum loss" by 50%. For commercial buildings the same impact is expected from investments of 2.0% - 3.8% in structural retrofitting.
In the U.S., FEMA has done extensive work to demonstrate the benefits of the use of building codes and has developed a computer program (Hazards U.S. or "HAZUS") which is used as a decision-support tool to calculate returns on investments in building construction to lower probable maximum loss from earthquakes.
In a study commissioned as part of this project preparation, Professor Harold Cochran of the University of Colorado at Boulder considered Hurricane Mitch's impact in terms of property damage, lives lost and casualties, and examined scenarios with and without mitigation measures (timely warnings, channel improvements and land use restrictions.) The study focused on flood damages and identified ranges of high
45 medium and low damage for different areas of the country based in environmental vulnerability, population at risk, and the feasibility of mitigation measures. Cochran's conclusions identified hazard mapping and land use restrictions as the initiatives that render the highest benefits in terms of disaster mitigation.
Main Assumptions: 4.4. Costs Avoided Versus Investing in Preparedness and Mitigation. Rates of Return and Net Present Values
With respect to the question: How much should Nicaragua invest in disaster management, the above discussion leads to the following conclusion. Given the figure for property losses due to natural disasters: $20 million per year (from section 4.2 above), only one of several measures of the costs of natural disasters, and setting a relatively conservative target for investments in disaster management - to cut these losses by half - the following figures show required investments for the ten years horizon.
Chart 4-3 Investing in Disaster Management to Avoid 10 Million Dollars of Annual Property Losses
8% 9.4 4.0 10% 9.1 5.5 15% 8.7 6.5 20% 8.3 7.1 25% 8.0 7.2
This is simply an illustrative exercise based on two major assumptions: a) a very modest project target, reducing property losses due to major natural disasters by half. (In fact, international experience suggests that reducing death and casualties is both more important and more easily achievable); b) a very ambitious effectiveness goal, that the investment in disaster management actually attain the proposed target Actually the last assumption is part of any project proposal, but risks of not achieving the expected effectiveness grow with the complexity of the project.
Comparatively, the present project is a) much smaller in its investment; but, b) has wider aims, encompassing investments in emergency preparedness, and mitigation measures (structural and non- structural) to reduce loss of property and life immediately after natural disaster events strike. Therefore it is safe to say that it its expected rate of returns in the higher range of chart 4-3, considering that:
* Because this is one of the country's first initiatives in disaster management it would address the protection measures that have the larger payoff. For instance following the findings of Cochran's study, the project investments are focused on preventative planning and avoiding growth in areas at risk, including flood prone areas, areas susceptible to landslide, and to volcanic, seismic and wind events. This measures can render an IRR of 25% or more.
* Furthermore, where amenable, the project will perform cost benefit analysis of sub-components, like in the case of protective investments for specific buildings and other investment proposals in mitigation measures (with the exception of the pre-established investments under Component E
* Finally considering the disaster related indirect costs (see above section 4.2) this project has the potential to reduce by 1/4Nicaragua's annual need of external financing for post-disaster reconstruction, and to cut by half the risk of setbacks in GDP growth and poverty alleviation that natural disasters entail.
46 Annex5: FinancialSummary NICARAGUA:Natural Disaster Vulnerability Reduction Years Ending
| Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Total Financing Required Project Costs InvestmentCosts 0.8 6.2 5.4 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 RecurrentCosts 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Project Costs 1.1 6.8 6.0 2.2 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Financing 1.1 6.8 6.0 2.2 0.0 0.0 0.0
Financing IBRDIIDA 0.8 5.8 5.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 Government 0.3 1.0 1.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 Central 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Provincial 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Co-financiers 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 UserFeeslBeneficiaries 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Others 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total Project 1.1 6.8 6.0 2.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 Financing
47 Annex6: Procurementand DisbursementArrangements
NICARAGUA:Natural Disaster Vulnerability Reduction
Procurement
Procurement for the proposed project would be carried out in accordance with World Bank "Guidelines: Procurement UnderIBRD Loans and IDA Credits", published in January 1995 (revised January/August 1996, September 1997 and January 1999); and "Guidelines: Selection and Employment of Consultants by World Bank Borrowers" published in January 1997 (revised in September 1999 and January 1999), and the provisions stipulated in the Credit Agreement.
Assessment of the agency's capacity to implement Procurement
Procurement for the Project would be carried out by the Executive Secretariat for Disaster Prevention, Mitigation and Response (the Secretariat) which is lodged within the Office of the Vice-Presidency. The Secretariat will be responsible for the project including procurement and financial management, with the assistance of two agencies: For activities in Components I through 4, UCRESEP - which presently performs these same activities for other ongoing Bank operations and for Component 5, the Emergency Social Investment Fund (Fondo de Inversion Social para Emergencia, FISE) for all activities relating to implementation of local mitigation measures under the project and which will directly implement Component 5, i.e., procure goods, works and services. UCRESEP would be in charge of consolidating the information on the part of FISE in order to ensure that project information for purposes of evaluation financial, procurement and disbursement in the project, and for auditing activities.
A procurement assessment of UCRESEP was done under the Competitiveness LIL Project and filed as required in LCOPR. The results of this assessment indicated an average to high risk in the Competitiveness project because UCRESEP has expanded its support activities to several Bank projects but its installed capacity is at its limits. The action plan for this project will include provisions to hire additional procurement and accounting staff in UCRESEP. Notwithstanding, the action plan, closely coordinated with all parties involved in the use of the services of UCRESEP on the part of the Bank, should include a condition to update of the assessment of UCRESEP vis a vis its support commitments with all Bank projects to ensure that its installed capacity is sufficient to serve the needs of all projects in time and quality, as required in their implementationplans. The update to the assessment should be conducted no later than 3 months into project effectiveness. On the basis of this background, and while the update is completed, the risk assessment for this project should be registered in the high mark. Also, it is noted that arrangements for procurement supervision on the part of the Bank should be strategically planned to designate, if at all possible, only one PAS to provide procurement support to all projects in UCRESEP's portfolio. Indeed, this should provide grounds for a uniform and consistent approach to procurement notices and to monitor the work plan of UCRESEP in the different projects.
UCRESEP was originally established as an entity of the GON under the direction of the Vice President's Office. Its terms of reference encompassed the technical supervision of the GON's projects within the scope of the public sector reform, with some activities in financial and procurement, basically at the level of coordination. In recent years, UCRESEP has moved more into a role of administrative, financial and procurement support to new projects in the sphere of public sector and policy reform. As of November 2000, UCRESEP administers approximately US$60 million of financing proceeds from IDA and other financiers. In addition, the recent agreement to involve it in the Competitiveness LIL, its administration responsibilities were increased to US$65 million. UCRESEP has a core team composed of Project Coordinator, two procurement officers, and financial-administrativeofficer, are all knowledgeable of IDA operations and financial and procurement policies and procedures. UCRESEP assumes directly the responsibility of all procurement activities and direct management of funds under the recently approved
48 Competitiveness LIL and the Economic Management Technical Assistance Project, including management of Special Accounts.
In view of UCRESEP's participation in project administration of this project, it is proposed that, except for the technical inputs required in the request and evaluation of proposals, the Executive Secretariat will not be engaged in any procurement activity. Notwithstanding, its technical staff will be responsible for the quality of technical documents and products delivered by consultants, or physical inputs financed under the project, as a result of any contracting done by UCRESEP on its behalf.
A procurement manual or a chapter of the Project Operational Manual focusing on procurement should be prepared and adopted prior to effectiveness. The manual should describe, as a minimum:
Staffing of the procurement unit. Organization of the procurement function including a detailed description of individual responsibilities and appropriate internal control procedures. Thresholds for different types of procurement of goods and works and for selection of consultants Thresholds for prior review. Procedural details of the various procurement methods which are going to be used for the Project. Procedures for planning and monitoring/supervisingprocurement actions. Reporting requirements (internally and to IDA). The Project's filing system and procedures to ensure its control, security and confidentiality.
In addition, the agencies would prepare standard formats for shopping.
A consultant is preparing a system for filing, monitoring and reporting procurement actions. However it will not be ready on time for negotiations. Consequently the UCRESEP, as Financial Management Unit for the Executive Secretariat is INELIGIBLE for PM-based disbursements on procurement reporting grounds. Such situation will be re-assessed when the consultant work is completed.
Procurement Plan. At appraisal, the Borrower developed a procurement plan for project implementation which provided the basis for the aggregate amounts for the procurement methods (per Table A). This plan was approved by the RPA and is in the project files. At the beginning of each calendar year, the Borrower will update the Procurement Plan with a detailed procurement schedule for the coming year.
Frequency of Procurement Supervision. Procurement supervision missions should be carried out every year by a Procurement Specialist (PS) or Procurement Accredited Staff (PAS) and include a review of: (i) the PCU capacity; (ii) the procurement plan for the project, including a timetable for procurement actions anticipated during the next 12 months; (iii) the PCU monitoring system for the purposes of the Project; and (iv) complete records for one in every five contracts (for goods, works, and consulting services, respectively). The PS or PAS should perform selected physical inspections of the goods received and meet with selected suppliers/contractors, whenever possible.
49 Table A: Project Costs by Procurement Arrangements (US$ millionequivalent)
I. Works 0.00 0.78 0.01 0.00 0.79 (0.00) (0.66) (0.01) (°-°°) (0.67) 2. Goods 2.90 0.27 0.39 0.00 3.56 (2.47) (0.23) (0.33) (0.00) (3.03) 3. Services 0.00 0.00 5.37 0.00 5.37 (0.00) (0.00) (5.24) (0.00) (5.24) 4. Training 0.00 0.00 1.49 0.00 1.49 (0.00) (0.00) (1.49) (0.00) (1.49)
5. Recurrent Costs 0.00 0.00 1.84 0.00 1.84 (0.00) (0.00) (0.52) (0.00) (0.52) 6. Sub Projects 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.00 3.00 (0.00) (0.00) (2.55) (0.00) (2.55) Total 2.90 1.05 12.10 0.00 16.05 (2.47) (0.89) (10.14) (0.00) (13.50)
1/ Figures in parenthesis are the amounts to be financed by the IDA Credit. All costs include contingencies 2/ Includes civil works and goods to be procured through national shopping, consulting services, services of contracted staff of the project management office, training, technical assistance services, and incremental operating costs related to (i) managing the project, and (ii) transferring project funds to local government units.
50 Table Al: Consultant Selection Arrangements (optional) (US$ million equivalent)
,.-S ;BS SF8 LCS i; other m TS
A. Firms 2.02 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.00 2.22 (1.93) (0.00) (0.00) (0.08) (0.08) (0.00) (0.00) (2.09) B. Individuals 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.15 0.00 3.15 (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (3.15) (0.00) (3.15) Total 2.02 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 3.15 0.00 5.37 (1.93) (0.00) (0.00) (0.08) (0.08) (3.15) (0.00) (5.24)
1\ Including contingencies
Note: QCBS = Quality- and Cost-Based Selection QBS = Quality-based Selection SFB = Selection under a Fixed Budget LCS = Least-Cost Selection CQ = Selection Based on Consultants' Qualifications Other = Selection of individual consultants (per Section V of Consultants Guidelines), Commercial Practices, etc.
N.B.F. = Not Bank-financed Figures in parenthesis are the amounts to be financed by the Bank Credit.
51 Table B: Thresholds for ProcurementMethods and Prior Review 1
1. Works 150-1,000 NCB First 2 contracts <150 3 Quotations First 2 contracts 2. Goods >150 ICB All 25-150 NCB First 2 contracts <25 Shopping First 2 contracts 3. Services Consulting Firms >100 Least cost or consultant All qualification Individual <100 Least cost or consultant TOR only Consultants qualification >50 Chapter V All <50 Chapter V TOR only
Overall Procurement Risk Assessment
Average
Frequency of procurement supervision missions proposed: One every 12 months (includes special procurement supervision for post-review/audits)
1 Thresholds generally differ by country and project. Consult OD 11.04 "Review of Procurement Documentation" and contact the Regional Procurement Adviser for guidance.
52 Disbursement Table C: Allocationof CreditProceeds
Expenditure Category Amount in US$miillio Financing Percentage Works 0.65 85 Goods 2.90 85 Services 4.94 100 Training 1.49 100 Sub Projects 2.55 85 Recurrent Costs for Component 1 0.51 60,40,25 Unallocated 0.46 0 Total Project Costs 13.50 Total 13.50
Financial Management Responsibility
UCRESEP will be responsible for the implementation and maintenance of a financial management system, in order to efficiently manage the Project's funds and timely prepare the Project Management Reports (PMR). The financial management system will include policies, norms and procedures for Planning, Budget, Procurement, Accounting, Reporting, and Auditing, to ensure the provision of accurate and timely information to the Executive Secretariat and to the Word Bank, regarding Project funds resources and expenditures, as required by OP/10.02. The system will provide information on physical performance, according to Project's out-put and indicators included in Annex 1.
FISE will execute Component 5 and will be responsible for implementingand maintaining the financial management system designed by UCRESEP in order to provide uniform, accurate and timely information to UCRESEP regarding Project finds resources and expenditure, procurement and monitoring.
The Project financial management system must be in place within six month period, after Project effectiveness. A Bank Financial Management Specialist will carry out a financial managementreview, in order to assess the system accuracy.
Financial Management Action Plan
Estimated completion dates Dec. Jan Feb. March April Actions 2000 2001 2001 2001 2001 I Definition of Activities and Tasks for all the Components and Subcomponents for PIP 4 2 Definition of Costs by Components, Subcomponents Activities and Tasks 5 3 Draft documents for Inter institutional financial arrangements with UCRESEP and FISE. 5 4 Draft TORs for Financial Management Implementation. 5 5 Contract Financial Management Consultant 25 6 Preparation of Operational Manual, including administrative. financial and monitoring policies and procedures 28 7 Contract External Auditors 15 8 Software installation and training 15 9 First PMR submitted to the Bank 30 10 Minimum Project accounting and budgeting system in place, for 30 disbursements based on SOEs (if necessary)
53 Disbursement Procedures
Until a PMR compliant financial management system is in place UCRESEP will follow traditional disbursement procedures for withdrawal of funds under the credit agreement in accordance with the guidelines set in the Disbursement Procedures Handbook. SOEs documentation will be maintained by UCRESEP for post-review and audit purposes. Reimbursement requests should be sent to the IDA on a monthly basis. Once the accounting and financial management system is deemed compliant with LACI requirements, and is certified as such by the Association, a migration to a LACI type of disbursements may be implemented as described hereafter.
To facilitate project implementation, credit proceeds would be deposited in a Special Account to be opened in US Dollars at a commercial bank acceptable to IDA.
Each application for disbursement shall be supported by a PMR or SOE. Upon receipt of each application, IDA would deposit into the Special Account an amount equal to the lesser of: (a) the amount so requested; and (b) the amount which IDA has determined, based on the PMR, is required to be deposited in order to finance eligible expenditures during the six-months period following the date of the PMR; provided, however, that the amount so deposited, when added to the amount indicated by said PMR to be remaining in the Special Account, shall not exceed an amount equal to US$3.5 million.
The Special Account is only to be used for eligible expenditures under the credit (under no circumstances may funds in the Special Account be used to cover the share of expenditures corresponding to the counterpart and/or other financiers). Transfers from the Special Account to other bank accounts will only be performed to meet eligible expenditures for a limited period of less than 30 days Use of statementsof expenditures(SOEs):
The IDA and the Borrower have agreed that if by Project effectiveness, UCRESEP has not fully implemented a financial management system to produce the PMR required by IDA, the traditional disbursements procedures will apply for the first two quarters of Project implementation. IDA funds will be disbursed to a Special Account at the Central Bank, according to the categories and percentages shown in the attached charts.
The Association may require withdrawals from the Credit Account to be made on the basis of statements cf expenditure for: (a) goods and works costing less than $150,000 equivalent per contract; (b) consulting services provided by firms costing less than $100,000 equivalent per contract; (c) consulting services provided by individuals costing less than $50,000 equivalent per contract; (d) Subproject expenses; (e) training expenditures; and (f) expenditures for incremental operating costs under such terms and conditions as the Association shall specify by notice to the Borrower.
Project funds can be used to reimburse expenses made after November 30, 2000 and prior to signing, for consultancies, training and goods under the project up to a total of $500,000 (SDR 390,000).
Use of Project Management Reports (PMRs)
The PMRs will serve as disbursement requests. Transition to PMRs will be subject to the satisfactory results of new financial management and procurement assessments. Once UCRESEP becomes PMR compliant, disbursements would be in accordance with guidelines set in the Loan Administration Change Initiative (LACI) Implementation Handbook. Each application for withdrawal should separately identify the funds requested from the credit account, and would be supported by a PMR or such other documents
54 and evidence as the Association may request. PMRs should be submitted within 45 days from the preceding quarter. Upon receipt of each application for withdrawal, the Association, on behalf of the Borrower, shall withdraw from the credit account and deposit into the Special Account an amount equal to the lesser: (a) the amount requested; and (b) the amount the Association has determined,based on the PMR accompanying the application, is required to be deposited in order to finance eligible expenditures during the six month period following the date of the report, but in no case should exceed 20% of the total loan funds, without prior authorization from the Loan Department.
Special Account: The attached chart shows the flow of funds from the Special Account, which will be managed by UCRESEP:
Chart 6-1 Flow of Funds
Executive Secretariat IDA Government of Nicaragua
UCRESEP FISE Central Bank
SpecialAccount in ecial Account Dollars pca con I Dollas_ in C6rdobas
Counterpart Payable Bank Sub- Account in account in C6rdobas
Quartrerly Replenishment Reports Requestfor Special .4 Account
55 Auditing Arrangements
An external auditor, acceptable to IDA, will be contracted by the Executive Secretariat to carry out the annual review of the Project financial reports, as required by OP/BP 10.02. The auditor will be selected according with the Bank's Guidelines for the Selection and Employment of consultants by the World Bank Borrowers dated January 1997, revised in September 1997, so that the audit can be performed throughout each year of Project implementation.
The Project financial statements, Special Account Statement, SOEs (if applicable) and the PMRs will be review and audit report will be submitted to IDA within 120 days of the close of the year ending in December 31. The Guidelines and Terms of Reference for Audits of Projects with Financing by the World Bank in Latin American and the Caribbean Region should be followed when preparing the terms of reference (TORs) for the audit and these guidelines should be provided to the selected auditors.
56 Annex7: ProjectProcessing Schedule
NICARAGUA:Natural Disaster Vulnerability Reduction
Time taken to prepare the project (months) 7 7 First Bank mission (identification) 07/11/2000 07/11/2000 Appraisal mission departure 01/15/2001 01/08/2001 Negotiations 01/15/2001 02/12/2001 Planned Date of Effectiveness 09/30/2001
Preparedby: Nicaragua Disaster Mitigation Task Team
Preparationassistance: Consultants included: Deborah Landau (Team Assistant, Environmental Risk); Booz-Allen & Hamilton (Institutional Assessment); Gisela Durand (Cost Specialist); German Escobar (Financial Manager Advisor); UNDP Nicaragua Office; Osmar Velasco (Paritcipatory Microplanning Specialist), Walter Soundy (Civil Engineer), Omar Dario Cardona (Disaster Management Expert); Christobal Sequeira (Institutional Development); Maria Augusta Fernandez (Disaster Preparedness); PYCSA (Vulnerability Analysis). Bankstaff who workedon the projectincluded:
Tova M. Solo Task Manager Amaud M. Guinard Lead Urban Specialist Enrique Pantoja Urban Planner, Disaster Mitigation Specialist Irani G. Escolano Procurement Specialist Alexandra Ortiz Urban economist Mariangeles Sabella Counsel Livio Pino Sr. Financial Management Specialist Teresa M. Roncal Procurement Analyst Rosa Valencia Estrada Procurement Analyst
57 Annex8: Documentsin the ProjectFile*
NICARAGUA:Natural Disaster Vulnerability Reduction
A. ProjectImplementation Plan February 23, 2001
B. Bank Staff Assessments Augusto, Suzana C. and John Stein, "Memorandum and Recommendation of the President of the International Development Association to the Executive Directors on a Proposed Credit of SDR 36.1 million to the Republic of Nicaragua for a Hurricane Emergency Project," December 14, 1998.
Gilbert, Roy and Alcira Kremer, "Learning from the World Bank's Experience of Natural Disaster Related Assistance," May 1999
Pollner, John, "Managing Catastrophic Risks Using Alternative Risk Financing and Insurance Pooling Mechanisms", unpublished manuscript, Caribbean Group for Cooperation in Economic Development in conjunction with FPSI, Caribbean Country Management Unit, The World Bank, June, 2000 C. Other FEMA, "Design Recommendations for the Nicaragua Emergency Operations Center," November 2000.
"Report on Costs and Benefits of Natural Hazard Mitigation- Evaluating Costs and Benefits", December 2000
Cochrane, Harold, "Cost and Benefits of Land Use Restrictions in Disaster Reduction" - April 20, 2000
Fernandez, Maria A. et al., "Nicaragua: Proyecto de Reduccion de la Vulnerabilidad frente a Desastres Naturales," May 31 - July 10, 1999
Freeman, Matin, et al., International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, " IntegratingNatural Catastrophe Exposure into Development Planning: Case Study of Natural Catastrophe Risk in Nicaragua," Laxenburg, Austria, September 20, 2000
Government of Nicaragua and UNDP, "Progama Nacional de Reduccion de Riesgos," May 2000
INETER, "Las Lluvias del Siglo en Nicaragua: El Huracan Mitch, las Liuvias y otros Eventos Ciclonicos y su Recurrencia en Nicaragua 1892-1998," Managua, 1998
INETER, "Catalogo General de Estaciones Hidrometricas," Managua, 1999
INETER, "Catalogo de Estaciones Meteorologicas de Nicaragua," Managua, 1998
INIFOMIPROTIERRA, "Estudio para la Ejecucion de un Plan de Medidas Inmediatas de Prevencion y Mitigacion para la Zona del Volcan Casitas," April, 1999
58 International Resources Group, Ltd., OFDA/LAC Program, "Central America Disaster Mitigation Initiative - Phase One Assessment, Washington, December, l999International Resources Group, Ltd., OFDA/LAC Program, "Central America Disaster Mitigation Initiative - Phase One Assessment, Washington, December, 1999
Martinez, Arnoldo J., "Reflexionesa partir del Huracan Mitch," Managua, Diciembre 1998
Nicaraguan Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure, "Listado de Proyecto Identificados y Cuantificados para Emprender Acciones Concretas para Mitigar Effectos del Huracan Mitch," June, 1999 Nicaragua Civil Defense, "Fortalecimientode las Capacidades para la Prevencion y Mitigacion del Riesgo en el Presente Invierno 1999," June, 1999
Presidency of the Republic of Nicaragua, Law #337: "Ley Creadora del Sistema Nacional para la Prevencion, Mitigacion y Atencion de Desastres," April 7, 2000
"Public Investment Program for the National Reconstruction - Towards a New Milennium" September 15, 1999
PAHO, Emergency Preparedness and Disaster Relief Coordination Program-1998 Annual Report, Washington
PADCO, "Rebuilding Shelter after Natural Disasters: Three Decades of USAID Experience in Latin America and the Caribbean, Washington, April 1999
Proyecto Y Control S. A., "Proyecto de Mitigacion de Desastres Naturtales," Madrid, November 2000.
Roman, Jaime W. et al., "Desastres Narutales de Nicaragua: Guia para conocerlos y prevenirlos," Managua, 2000
Seligson, Mitchell A., "Los Nicaraguenses Hablan Sobre la Corrupcion: Un Estudio de Seguimiento de la Opinion Publica," March, 1999
USGS, Hurricane Mitch, Disaster in Central America, Washington D.C. December 1998
Vazquez, Jose Luis M., "Reduccion de Vulnerabilidad Ante Desastres en Nicaragua: Analisis de los Deslizamientos y Avenidas de Lodo (Inundaciones)," July 5, 1999
Vermeiren, Jan and Stichter, Steven, "Costs and Benefits of azard Mitigation for Building and Infrastructure Development: A Case Study in Small Island Developing States", unpublished manuscript, OAS website (www.oas.org/EN/CDMP/document/papers/tiems.htm)
World Meterological Organization (WMO) Apoyo a la Prevencion de Desastres Naturales y Gestion de los Recursos Hidricos - Propuesta de Provectos Para Honduras, Nicarapua, Guatemala y El Salvador, Geneva, June, 1999 *Including electronic files
59 Annex 9: Statement of Loans and Credits
NICARAGUA: Natural Disaster Vulnerability Reduction 15-Oct-2000 Difference between expected
Original Amount in US$ Millions and actual disbursemEntsa Project ID Purpose IBRD IDA SF GEF Cancel. Undisb. Orig FrmnRevd FY
P064915 2000 AG TECHN & RURAL EDU 0.00 23.63 0.00 23.27 097 0.00
P040197 1999 FISE III 0.00 45.00 0.00 18.14 -204 0.00
P052080 1999 FORESTRY 0.00 9.00 0.00 700 2.27 0.00
P035080 1995 INSTITUTIONALDEVCR 0.00 23.00 0.00 0.20 0.57 0.00
P049296 2000 NIECONOMICMANAGEMENTTAC 0.00 20.90 000 19.07 -0.80 0.00
P007783 1995 NV?BasicEducalion Project 0.00 47.20 0.00 1.95 -8.76 5.26
P035753 1998 NVHEALTHSECT II 0.00 24.00 0.00 16.96 4.22 0.00
P050613 2000 NVSECONDBASIC EDUCATION PROJECT 0.00 52.50 0.00 41.42 -10.00 0 00
P056087 2000 Pension and Finandal Market Reform TA 0.00 8.00 0.00 7.48 0 00 0.00
P007788 1996 ROADS REHAB & MAINT 0.00 25.00 0.00 0.03 1.60 0.00
P007790 1997 RURAL MUNICIPALITIES 0.00 30.00 0.00 2.01 4.00 0.00
P055853 2000 TELECOMMUNIC.REFORM 0.00 15.90 0.00 9.41 2.73 0.00
P053705 1998 TRANSPORT II 0.00 47.40 0.00 24.64 -4.39 0.00
Total: 0.00 371.53 0.00 171.58 -17.63 5.26
NICARAGUA STATEMENT OF IFC's Held and Disbursed Portfolio 15-Oct-2000 In Millions US Dollars
Committed Disbursed IFC IFC FY Approval Company Loan Equity Quasi Partic Loan Equity Quasi Partic 2000 Finarca 2.00 0.60 0.00 0.00 1.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 1998 Frutan 2.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.64 0.00 0.00 1998 La Colonia 4.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 1999 SEF Dicegsa 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total Portfolio: 9.00 1.60 0.50 0.00 5.67 0.64 0.50 0.00 )Kppr-ova1sPending -Co-m-mit-m-en FY Approval Company Loan Equity Quasi Partic
Total Pending Commitment: 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
60 Annex 10: Country at a Glance NICARAGUA:Natural DisasterVulnerability Reduction
61 Latin POVERTYand SOCIAL America Low- Nwareuaus Carib. income Developmentdiamond* 1999 Pooulation.mid-year (mnl/ons) 4.9 509 2.417 Lifeexpectancy GNPDercaoia (Atlas method.US$) 430 3.840 410 GNP(Atlas method. USS biWlonts) 2.1 1955 988 Averaaeannual orowth. 1993-9 Pooulation(%1 2.7 1.6 1.9 Laborforce 4.0 2,5 2,3 GNP Gross per primary Most recentsetimate (latest vear avaiable. 1993491 capita enrollment Povertvt% ofooulation belownational Dovertfline) 48 UrbanDoculation (% of totaloooulationJ 56 75 31 UfeexoecWacv at birthAears) 66 70 60 Infantmortalitv(oer 1.000 live btidhsl 40 31 77 Childmalnrutition (% of childrenunder 5) 20 8 43 Accessto safewater Accessto imorovedwater source (% of ovulationl 67 75 64 IlliteracY( ofooulatbionaem 15.) 20 12 39 Grossorimnv enrollment;(% ofschool-aaeoooaatbo 101 113 96 Nicaragua Male 100 . 102 Low-incomegroup Female 102 86 KEYECONOMIC RATIOS and LONG-TERM TRENDS 1979 1989 1998 199S Economicratlos* GOP(USS b/iNns) 1.6 1.0 21 2.3 GroSSdomestic investmentfGDP -5.7 27.5 33.4 42.4 Trd Exoortsof ooods and services/GDP 42.0 32.5 35.8 33.6 rae Grossdomestic savinos/GDP 8.2 -5.2 -8.6 -12.6 - 2 Grossnational savinos/GDP -0.9 -26.1 -5.7 -7.2 Currentaccount balance/GOP 2.5 -53.2 -29.4 -3619 Do/si InterestoavmenWGDP 2.3 0.2 4.0 S.2 Domestc Investment TotaldebtGDPP 97.8 952.5 280.7 2810 Savings Total debtserviceexoonts 8.9 33 23.2 27.6 Presentvalue of debt/GDP 24684 Presentvalue of debVexworts 484 1 Indebtedness 197949 198949 1998 1999 1999-03 (averaeoannual orowth) GOP -1.0 2.8 4.1 7.0 6.2 Nicaragua GNP e caoita -4A4 2.2 6.4 4.6 3.7 Low-income group Exoortsof ooodsand services -7.4 7.9 0.2 6.7 4.2
STRUCTUREof the ECONOMY 1979 1989 1998 1999 Growth of Investmentand GDP( (% of GDP) 40 Acriculture 28.3 32.0 33.0 31.6 Industrv 28.6 22.3 21.6 22.8 20 - Manufacturino 24.6 17.6 151 14.4 Services 43.1 45.7 45.4 45.7 I 94 95 9s 97 98 99 Private consumoton 74.0 78.5 92.4 94.4 -20 Generaloovemment consumotion 17.9 26.7 16.3 18.2 -GDI - -GDP Imoortsof aoods andservices 28.1 65.2 77.9 88.7
1979-89 1989-99 1998 1999 Growth of exports and Imports (%) (averaoeannual orowthl Aoriculture -2.6 4.7 3.5 4.8 20 - Industrv -0.7 3.4 5.1 12.6 10- Manufacturino -1.4 1.4 2.1 3.3 Services -04 1.3 3.7 4.5 0 94 95 98 97 98 go Privateconsumotion -3.5 4.5 10.4 5.6 -10 Generaloovemment consumotion 7.3 -3.0 0.1 9.6 Grossdomestic investment -3.0 10.0 13.5 39.8 | 20 lmoorts of aoods and services -0.6 9.0 12.9 19.8 Exports 'mports Grossnational oroduct -1.6 5.1 9.3 7.3
Note:1999 data are preliminaryestimates. The diamondsshow four kevindicators in thecountrv (in bold)comoared with its income-orouDaveraoe. If dataare missina.the diamond will be incomolete.
62 Nicaragua
PRICES and GOVERNMENTFINANCE 1979 1989 1998 1999 Inflation(%) Domesticprices (% change) 30 Consumer prices 48.1 4,709.3 13.0 11.2 20 Implicit GDP deflator 31.7 4,709.3 13.0 11.2 10+ Govemment finance (% of GDP, includes current grants) o Current revenue .. .. 26.2 25.1 94 95 .96 97 98 99 Currentbudget balance .. . 5.0 5.4 - GDPdeflator CP1 Overall surplus/deficit .. .. -4.8 -11.7
TRADE
(US$ millions) 1979 1989 1998 1999 Exportand Importlevels (US$ mill.) Total exports (fob) 567 311 573 544 G,O Coffee 159 90 173 135 Shnmp and lobster 22 11 79 86 1,500 Manufactures 118 48 125 109 Total imports (cifl 360 615 1,492 1,846 1,0* Food 78 90 357 441 s ** Fuel and energy 76 94 144 161 Capital goods 46 200 452 597 o 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 Exoort Doceindex (1995=100) 65 78 90 83 Imoort orice index (1995=100) 56 81 112 109 *Exports *lmports Terms of trade (1995=100) 116 97 81 76
BALANCE of PAYMENTS tUSS millionsl 1979 1989 1998 19 Current account balance to GDP (%) Exports of goods and services 623 333 830 839 o Imports of goodsand services 511 667 1,517 1,800 Resource balance 112 -334 -687 -961
Net income -73 -205 -170 -176 Net current transfers 0 0 232 300 Current account balance 39 -539 -626 -837 -40 Financing items (net) -42 471 620 955 Changes in net reserves 3 68 6 -118 -60 M,emo: Reserves includina aold (USS millions) 156 164 357 510 Conversion rate (DEC. localUSSJ 1.85E-9 3.02E-3 10.6 11.8
EXTERNAL DEBT and RESOURCE FLOWS 1979 1989 1998 1999 (USSmillions) Composidonof 1999 debt (US$ mill.) Total debt outstandingand disbursed 1,533 9,651 5,968 6,372 IBRD 85 221 15 9 G:750 A:9 8:599 IDA 23 60 487 598 Total debt service 56 11 251 321F:409 IBRD 8 0 11 7 IDA 0 0 4 5 Composition of net resourceflows D: 1,567 Official grants 45 173 345 310 Official creditors 99 570 187 135 Private creditors -5 11 -13 18 Foreign direct investment 3 0 184 143 Portfolio equity 0 0 0 0 E: 2,990 World Bank program Commitments 0 0 238 91 A - IBRD E - Bilateral Disbursements 8 0 105 120 B- IDA D- Othermutilateral F - Private Prncipal repayments 4 0 10 7 n - IMF G.- Rhnrl-trm Net flows 5 0 95 114 Interest payments 5 0 5 5 Net transfers 0 0 90 108
Development Economics 9/12/00 63 Additional Annex I1
Summarv History of Natural Disasters in Nicaragua
Devastating natural disasters have repeatedly highlighted Nicaragua's need for effective disaster management. Although over the past 25 years the national government has increasingly assumed operational and organizational responsibilities in this respect, the main focus has been disaster response and relief. Moreover, there has been little coordination and sustainability of programs due to the lack of a comprehensive disaster management system. A historical breakthrough has recently taken place, however, with the creation of a National System for Disaster Prevention, Mitigation and Response, through Law No. 337 (officially published on April 7, 2000). The law's ratification has, for the first time, placed coordination of disaster management with a civilian organization, the Executive Secretariat, while also giving a major emphasis to prevention and mitigation.
A Chronology of Natural Disasters in Nicaragua
Geographic location combines with weather, temperature, pressure and geological conditions to make Nicaragua one of the world's most disaster-prone countries. According to the Office of the Vice Presidency, major catastrophic events since 1970 have accounted for 10,529 deaths, 200,858 disappearances, and more than US$4 billion in losses. (Dictamen de creacion del Sistema Nacionalpara la Prevenci6n, Mitigaci6n y Atencion a Desastres, pp. 4, Oct. 11, 1999)
A series of natural disasters in the twentieth century, at the rate of one major disaster every two years, severely affected Nicaragua. In 1926 Nicaragua suffered a strong earthquake, destroying 80 percent of the buildings in Le6n, and damaging 50 percent of housing stock in Managua. Likewise, in 1931, an earthquake measuring 5.9 on the Richter scale left at least 1,000 people dead and 2,000 injured. On December 23, 1972 three more majo- earthquakes occurred in the Managua metropolitan area, all measuring above 5.0 on the Richter scale. The earthquakes resulted in 10,000 deaths and 20,000 injuries. Managua required extensive rebuilding and replacement of critical infrastructure.
In May 1982, Hurricane Alleta destroyed 60 percent of the country's corn crop, and disabled 90 percent of cotton production resulting in US$480 million of economic losses. In 1988, Hurricane Joan destroyed Bluefields Island, Rama Island, and Corn Island. The economic loss amounted to US$840 million.
In 1992, the Cerro Negro volcano erupted, throwing thousands of cubic meters of volcanic sand and ash over several thousand farming fields. The ash devastated more than 500 houses and caused more than US$19 million in damages.
An earthquake reaching 7.2 on the Richter scale at the bottom of the Pacific Ocean in the same year caused waves of 8 to 15 meters. The Tsunamis affected approximately 250 Km of coastal inland along the pacific coast resulting in an economic loss of US$25 million.
September 1993 brought Tropical Storm Bret, which caused major infrastructuredamage. The storm affected more than 65,000 people and incurred more than US$5 million in damages.
In 1995, intense rainfall beginning on September 24 and ending on October 11 affected 1,300 people. Floods and mudslides caused US$17 million in damages, of which US$11 million corresponded to the agriculture sector.
Hurricane Cesar's heavy rainfall in 1996 effected more that 6,000 people damaging the Inter-American highway, local roads, and Leon neighborhoods. The following year a prolonged drought resulted in substantial agricultural losses in Leon, Chinandega and Madriz. Estimated economic loss totaled US$93 million.
64 Hurricane Mitch struck on October 1998 as the country began to emerge from a lingering economic depression extending back to the civil war. Hurricane Mitch caused almost 3,000 deaths and significantly affected more than 368,000 people. The hurricane also destroyed a significant portion of the national transportation infrastructure including 1,363 Km of non-paved roads and 1,125 Km of paved roads.
Infrastructure losses, future revenue loss, and physical damage impacted all sectors of the economy. The agricultural market, particularly the coffee sector, lost 80 percent of production. The hurricane destroyed 325 education centers and 23 bridges. Electric systems and telecommunications incurred serious damages; however, authorities rapidly restored basic services. The economic loss amounted to US$3.8 billion. The extent of damage and the difficulty in responding more rapidly to the devastation of Hurricane Mitch influenced the government's decision in establishing the National System.
Summary of Major Disasters
Date Event Dead Affected Most Affected Sectors Affected Economic Impact Pop. Areas ($US million) 1926 Earthquake Leon, Managua Housing and ~~~~~~~~~~ Infrastructure 1931 Earthquake 1,000 2,000 Managua __r_ 1972 Earthquake 10,000 400,000 Managua Infrastructure $ 772 1982 Hurricane 69 Pacific Coast $ 480 Alleta 1988 Hurricane 148 300,000 Bluefields, Rama, Infrastructure $ 840 Joan Le6n Chinandega 1992 Volcanic 2 120,000 Leon, Madriz, Housing, Ports $ 19 Eruption Chinandega (Cerro Negro) 1992 Tsunami 116 40,500 Pacific Coast $ 25 1993 Tropical 31 65,000 Managua, Leon Housing, Water $ 5 Storm Bret Chinandega Infrastructure,
_ _ _ Hospitals 1995 Flood 32 Chinandega Agriculture $ 17 Leon, Managua 1995 Volcanic 6,000 Esteli, Leon, Local roads, $ 2.6 Eruption Madriz, Inter-American (Cerro Chinandega Highway Negro) _ __ 1996 Flurricane 9 110,000 RAAN, RAAS Infrastructure Cesar 1997 Drought 200,000 Leon, Agriculture, $ 93 Chinandega, Health Madriz 1998 Hurricane 2,863 368,000 All Agriculture, $ 3,794 Mitch Infrastructure, ______Communication Sources: CEPREDENAC, Inventario de Desastres en Centro America 1960-1999. Organizaci6n Panamericana de la Salud, Cronologia de los Desastres Naturales ocurridos en Nicaragua (1609- 1995). Inter Press Service News Agency.
65 Additional Annex 12
Institutional History of Disaster Management in Nicaragua
The institutional history of disaster management in Nicaragua dates back to the enactment of the 1976 Civil Defense Law, passed in the aftermath of the 1972 Managua earthquake.According to the Law, the High Command of National Civil Defense would be the permanent institution for disaster response, through National Committees for Emergencies (usually established during an emergency). Ever since, the Civil Defense has carried out disaster response activities with cooperation from the Army, Police Forces, community members, and the Red Cross. Government rehabilitation and assistance have usually followed the immediate response actions, coordinated individually by the administering agencies. Moreover,the Civil Defense has directed significant efforts at creating municipal and local committees for disaster response.
During the 1980s,the National Emergency Committees continued to serve as the principal coordination agency in disaster response. The government, however, redefined the Committee to include representatives of all government agencies and encouraged the participation of state and local entities. The efforts led by Civil Defense during these years increasingly demonstrated the value of organizing communities to improve local disaster response.
In the 1990s, under the auspices of the United Nations International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR), the government formed a National Committee integrated by representatives of the public and the private sector to promote prevention and mitigation activities. The Committee, led by Civil Defense, was the country's first permanent body with an expanded role beyond immediate disaster response. The principal government agencies included INETER, the Ministry of Foreign Relations, MARENA, the Ministry of Health, and MAGFOR. In accordance with IDNDR objectives, the Committee was charged with assessing prevalent hazards and naticnal vulnerability levels, identifying prevention and mitigation actions, establishing a legal framework for disaster management, and promoting disaster awareness. Several studies were carried out, and some pilot initiatives implemented, but the impact of these efforts was not as widespread as expected. However, recent efforts to create the National System have built on the lessons learned under IDNDR.
In 1995 the Government of Nicaraguajoined CEPREDENAC, which was created as a coordinating center for disaster prevention in Central America. As a result, a National Commission of CEPREDENAC was established to define and coordinate a national strategy for disaster management, including prevention and mitigation.
Despite previous government efforts, the extent of Hurricane Mitch damage in October of 1998 revealed the lack of both local response capacity and of coordination to manage a more integrated national response. In the aftermath of Hurricane Mitch, the Vice Presidency, through the National Emergency Committee, established a civilian task force to coordinate the response of government agencies. The task force's experience along with the government's previous experience provided important lessons. The Committee, in particular, indicated the urgent needs for vulnerability reduction programs, and for strengthening the infrastructure for large-scale response. The Mitch experience also revealed to the Committee that inter- agency coordination was inadequate, making it difficult to allocate resources or to promote relief and rehabilitation programs and activities at a national scale. The Vice President's Report of November 24, 1998 indicated many of the same lessons, recommending the establishment of a National Disaster Management System and a renewed emphasis on prevention and mitigation.
In June 1999, the government organized a campaign named "Building a Culture of Prevention" in Managua. During this campaign, representatives of civil society confirmed their agreement on the need to establish a national disaster management system, and on the need for all sectors of society to start taking effective actions to reduce vulnerability. The campaign resulted in a series of recommendations including the
66 promotion of public/private sector participation in disaster management, risk and vulnerability assessment, regional cooperation, and of disaster awareness.
The National System for Disaster Prevention,Mitigation and Response
The momentum created by Mitch facilitated the legislative process that culminated in the passage of Law No. 337, which created the National System, and defined the role for its coordinating entity, the Executive Secretariat. A proposal to create a National Prevention System had been introduced in 1995 into the National Assembly, but it was not evaluated by the latter's Commission of Defense and Government until December 1998. Almost a year later, on October 1999, and after several revisions, the proposal was looked over jointly by the same Commission and the Committee on Central American Integration. A consultation process was simultaneously carried out, which included seminars in Honduras (February 1999) and Dominican Republic (May 1999). Moreover, in June 1999, and with support from UNDP, formulation of a National Risk Reduction Program was initiated. The National Assembly approved Law 337 on 8 March 2000, which went into effect on April 7, when it was published in La Gaceta, Diario Oficial.
Since the passage of Law 337, Nicaragua's legislature has continued to develop the related legislative mandates (laws and decrees) to clearly articulate the government's support for disaster management, and the roles and responsibilities of the different members of the National System. This Project has been seen as an opportune means of highlighting the importance the National System, as confirmed by a letter from the Nicaraguan Minister of Finance, Estaban Duque Estrada, to the World Bank (see letter at end of annex). The following table summarizes the current status of the laws and regulations that guide the System and Executive Secretariat.
ENABLING LEGISLATION LAW/DECREE OBJECTIVE STATUS Law 337: National for Disaster Prevention, Mitigation, and Response System. Establish the necessary norms, dispositions, and general instruments to create, and allow the functioning of, an inter-institutionalsystem focused on reducing the impact of natural or induced disasters through prevention, mitigation, and response activities. Became effective on 7 April 2000 Decree 53/2000: Establish the regulatory framework needed to apply and execute Law 337. Became effective on 28 June 2000 Decree 98/2000: Assigns responsibilities to participating entities of the National System. Became effective on 5 October 2000 To be determined: Creation and Implementation of the National Disaster Fund FND). Being prepared by Executive Secretariat
The National System does not include new agencies (excepting the Executive Secretariat). As designed, the System actually integrates (i) government agencies and ministries horizontally to facilitate intersectoral coordination and consolidation of disaster management efforts at the national level, and (ii) regional and local government and civil society groups vertically to facilitate territorial coordination and promotion of "4coordinateddecentralization" based on improved local capacities and private sector participation. The Executive Secretariat, as the coordination body, is thus supposed to lie in the intersection of the horizontal and vertical integration promoted by the System. As such, Article 4 of the Law establishes the "National System" as "an organic and linked group ofstructures, operational relations, methods and procedures amongst different Ministries and Public Sector Institutions, and between the different social and private sectors, and departmental, regional and municipal authorities."
Specifically, the system is comprised by the following: (a) The National Committee, which is a political body headed by the President of the Republic, and integrated by representatives of several ministries and agencies; (b) the Executive Secretariat, which is the System's coordinating entity; (c) Relevant government, semi-autonomous agencies, ministries, private sector firms, and NGOs, some of which participate also 67 through work commissions on key issues (i.e., education, natural hazards, infrastructure, etc.) or as link entities; and (d) regional and municipal committees, which ensure territorial coordination at their respective levels. The central core to make the System operational in the near future is integrated by the National Committee, the Executive Secretariat, Civil Defense and INETER. Other key System's members include, inter alia, MAGFOR, MARENA, INIFOM, Ministry of Education and the municipal governments.
The Executive Secretariat
Law No. 337 places the Secretariat within the office of the Vice Presidency as an independent agency. The Secretariat's general role includes intersectoral coordination (horizontally across government ministries and agencies) and territorial coordination (vertically through the Departmental, Regional and Municipal Committees). In this respect, the Secretariat is expected to integrate and promote disaster management policies, programs and activities, and facilitate the improvement of disaster management capacity at all levels. Moreover, the Secretariat should serve in an advisory capacity to the National Committee, developing, implementing, and updating in the future the National Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Plan and the Emergency Preparedness and Response Plan. Finally, once established, the Secretariatwill manage, in coordination with the National Committee, the National Disaster Fund required under Law 337.
The full scope and responsibility of the Executive Secretariat are described in Article 10. The article outlines the Secretariat's 11 specific functions and defines its organizational structure (See Attachment at the end of this Annex for specific details).
Several disasters, including the floods of September 1999 and the eruption of volcano San Cristobal of April 2000, occurred during the legislative development of Law No. 337. The Civil Defense continued to coordinate the disaster response with limited cross-governmental support. Shortly after the enactment of the law and the establishment of the Secretariat, the earthquake at Messiah (July 6, 2000) and Hurricane Keith (September 2000) struck Nicaragua without warning. Both events initiated the Executive Secretariat's role as the central coordinating body of the National System, initiating also functional working relationships with the territorial participants.
During the period of legislative review, the Executive Secretariat commenced internal work on staffing for key positions. The Secretariathas also taken a lead in developing and promoting the establishment of an Emergency Operations Center (EOC) to serve as the centralized location and command post for integrating and coordinating the activities of the System's members during national emergencies. The Secretariat has been cooperating closely with the US Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) for technical support and assistance in developing the EOC infrastructure and operational capabilities.
The Executive Secretariat is currently in the process of attracting external financing for institutional development. The Secretariat currently operates with support from the Office of the Vice Presidency, UNDP, and staff on administrative loan from cooperating agencies (e.g., Ministry of Economy). The present staffing includes the Executive Secretary, ten professionals, six support staff focused on territorial issues, technical advisors, legal advisors, administrative management, and financial management. The institutional development plan for the Executive Secretariat anticipates an expansion of its functional capabilities to include public and external Relations. A fully functional planning capability including management of the National Disaster Fund is also expected. Overall, the Secretariat requires a final organizational configuration integrated by the Executive Secretary, 16 professionals, and six support staff.
Recurrent operating costs to support the Secretariat's institutionaland operational role over a three year period are estimated at USD$1,677,000. The estimate includes salaries of core personnel and expected operating expenses such as services, materials and additional training. The following table shows a breakdown of categories and recurrent costs.
68 Summary of Estimated Recurrent C'osts(US$'000)
YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 TOTAL Salaries Executive Secretary Technical Advisor Director of Fin and Admin $240 $240 $240 $720 Exec. secretary/2 secretaries Receptionist Messenger / Driver Office Assistant Services Communications Rent and Utilities $243 $271 $215 $729 Insurance Infrastructure maintenance Materials Office supplies $15 $15 $15 $45 Training Publications $61 $61 $61 $183 Domestic and External travel __ _ Total Recurrent Cost $559 $587 $531 $1,677 Source: Booz Allen & Hamilton analysis
Attachment Responsibilities Established in Decree No. 53/2000 Article 10 Functions of the Executive Secretariat Element Codified Requirement Organizational Impacts - Staff Responsible Execution necessary for compliance with the principles, goals and objectives of the System, the 1. functions and compliance with the functions determined by Law No. 33 7 and the present Regulation. Establish a clear leadership role and lines of responsibility through delegated (formal or informal) lines of authority for achieving the objectives of the law Executive Secretary Legal Advisor Serve as the liaison between the Executive Branch and the different sectoral and territorial levels 2. of the System. Establishes a clear coordination focus at the territorial level (Regional, Departmental and Municipal levels) and the sectoral level (Ministries, Government agencies and cooperating NGO organizations) Sectoral Coordinator Territorial Coordinator Convene and coordinate the Sectoral Working Committees Within the context of Sectoral liaison 3. activities and functions, establish leadership for Disaster related activities on behalf of the System Sectoral Coordinator / Liaison Act as the technical advisor to the National Committee (CNPMAD), serving as the secretary 4. during its meetings and issuing the corresponding certificates, and executing the decisions assigned to it by the President of the Republic, the Vice President or the National Committee Establish a coordinated technical capability to gather and synthesize diverse information on prevention, mitigation and response, and information generated throughout the System. Facilitate generation of technically accurate analyses to respond to the needs of the Executive Branch and CNPMAD as required for disaster management at the national level. Planning Department Executive Secretary LegalAdvisor __
69 On behalf of the President of the Republic or the Vice President call for meetings the CNPMAD; 5. prepare proposed agendas and necessary documentation required for decision making and prepare the proposed executive decrees for consideration and decision by the CNPMADAs with 3 and 4, requires an organizational capability to synthesize technical and management data. Additionally, establishes the need for legal and technical oversight to ensure that resulting decisions and projects are effectively implemented and achieve the expected results of the Executive decision making authorities and legal intent. Executive Secretary Legal Advisor
ResponsibilitiesEstablished in Decree No. 53/2000 (continued) Article 10 Functions of the Secretaria Ejecutiva del Sistema Nacional (SE) Element Codified Requirement Organizational Impacts Institutional Response Prepare, in agreement with the Ministry of Finance, the proposed annual budget for the SE and 6. National Disaster Fund (FND) for incorporation into the General Budget of the Republic (Presupuesto General de la Rep6blica) Limited organizational implications, generally an administrative function. However, Secretariat must retain and maintain information on cost of response activities spent by System's members and forecast shortfall within the FND to be funded at the national level. Planning Department Financial Administrations and Procurement Department Contract the staff and technical services necessary to undertake the functions and responsibilities 7. of the Secretariat. Include project and staff procurement, administration and evaluation capabilities within SE. Establish both the technical and administrative functions to structure issues and manage technical assistance procurements. Planning Department Financial Administrations and Procurement Department Provide technical support for the management, negotiation and subscription by the Ministry of 8. Foreign Affairs (MINREX), of international cooperation agreements related to disaster prevention, mitigation, and response. Maintain technical and legal expertise to support the MINREX. Serve as the review and advisory body to MINREX on issues related to external funding by international organizations. Planning Department Legal Advisor Management of External funds Sectoral Coordinator Develop and maintain an up-to-date georeferenced database with the existing statistical 9. information and with that related to the execution of programs, projects and actions within the scope of disaster prevention, mitigation, and response, in coordination with the institutions and public entities within the National System, in particular INETER, which must present the existing information according to the standards and frequency established. Establishes a clear knowledge management role in collecting, coordinating and dissemination of scientific knowledge and technical information related to natural hazards, disasters, and mitigation. Organizational focus on information collection and consolidation from existing sources. Planning Department Knowledge Manager Sectoral Coordinator Territorial Coordinator
70 Crosswalk of ResponsibilitiesEstablished in Decree No. 53/2000 (continued)
Article 10 Functionsof the Secretaria Ejecutiva del Sistema Nacional (SE) Element CodifiedRequirement Organizational Impacts InstitutionalResponse Coordinatethe production of reports related to Law 337 and the presentRegulation that the 10. President must present to the National Assembly. Supports need to technicalanalysis and drafting capabilities. Organizational focus on data analyses, situationalanalyses of technical issues and financialimplications of disaster and disaster-related functions. Implies a capabilityto communicatepublicly on essential information, plans and recommendations related to disastermanagement policy and progams. PlanningDepartment Public Relationsand Communications Department SectoralCoordinator TerritorialCoordinator Coordinatethe preparation of and present to the CNPMAD for its approvalThe National 11. Plan for DisasterPrevention, Mitigation and Response System,as well as the National Emergencvand Contingency Plans for prevalent hazards. In addition, will present to the CNMPAD.for its approval, proposals related to: Policies for the NSPMAD Measuresand instruments required to operationalize the objectivesof the N-SPMAD Proceduresand instruments for the control and distribution of internationalassistance Normativeand regulatory proposals for the territorial zoning related to disaster prevention, mitigation. and response. Developproposals for themes and content for educational programswith respect to disaster preventionmitigation and response. In combination.these requirements supports the need for coordinationat sectoral and territoriallevels for information related to policy, technical inputs and managementof disaster related activities. Additionallv, the final element adds the institutionalcomponent for evaluatingand proposing opportunities for educational process and training directed to the public.
As with 10, the educational component suggests an institutionalcapability to conceptualize and generatepublicly oriented (external communication) informationon disaster management.
SectoralCoordinator TerritorialCoordinator Public Relationsand Communications Department Legal Advisor SOURCE:Booz Allen & Hamilton analysis
71 Ministerio de Hacienda y Cr6ditoPblico Despacho del Minstro Managua 14 de diciembredel 2000 DMHCP-E-465-12-00
Seniora Donna Dowsett-Coirolo Directora Departamento de AmericaCentral Regi6n de America Central Banco Mundial WaslPington,D.C
Estimada Sra. Dowsett-Coirolo:
Dentro de los esfuerzos de reducci6n de la vulnerabilidad en nuestro pais, es preocupaci6n, comoromiso y voluntadpolitica del gobiernode Nicaragua, el fortalecimientodel SistemaNacional para la Prevenci6n,Mitigaci6n y Atenci6n de Desastres y su Secretaria Ejecutiva,creado mediante la Ley 337.
En ese orden, con suma importanciahemos acogido el respaldo del Banco Mundialde financiarde manera concesionalun proyectode "Reducci6nde Vulnerabilidad frente a los desastreNaturales en Nicaragua", proyectoque ya ha pasado por la mision de preevaluaci6n, con el taller efectuadoen la sede del Banco Mundiala mediadosdel reci6npasado mes de Noviembre.
Con responsabilidad, el Gobierno de la Republica reitera su compromiso de ir gradualmente incrementando el financiamientode las actividades del Sistema Nacional para la Prevenci6n, Mitigaci6n y Atenci6n de Desastres y su Secreraria Ejecutiva, que a partir del ejercicio presupuestario del anio2001, contara con su partida presupuestaria correspondiente,asimismo con los fondo de contrapartidalocal para el credito que nos otorgard el Banco para el proyecto en rmenci6nde "Reducci6nde la Vulnerabilidadfrente a los DesastresNaturales en Nicaragua"
Aprovecho la ocasi6n,pam reiterarleUsted, las muestras de mi consideraci6ny aprecio.
Atentamente,
Esteban rada Mi istro de Hacienda Y Credito Publico Gobemadorde Nicaragua ante el Banco Mundial
CC: Ing. Arturo Harding, SecretariaEjecutivo SNPMAD Archivo-cronologico. r N
A Tm$51 a°
,Caimpia_"st- O Additional Annex 13
Comparative Vulnerability Among Nicaraguan Municipalities
The following chart lists the I 10 most vulnerable municipalities in Nicaragua, as determined by a study conducted by the Spanish consultancy firm PYCSA. The study took into consideration landslide vulnerability, volcanoes, earthquakes, floods and access to lifeline infrastructure, as well as population growth and poverty. A series of overlays were then developed to determine which municipalities were most vulnerable to environmental disasters. Five of these maps, ranking municipalities by flood risk, landslide risk, volcanic risk, seismic risk and accessibility to hospitals, are presented in the map section at the end of this document.
Chart 13-1 110 Most Vulnerable Municipalities in Nicaragua
I Rivas San Juan del Sur Inundaci6n y sismos 2 Chinandega Chinandega Sismos y volcanes 3 Esteli Esteli Deslave 4 Rivas Tola Inundaci6n 5 Esteli Condega Inundaci6n 6 Rivas Altagracia Volcanes 7 Leon Nagarote Sismos 8 Esteli Pueblo Nuevo Deslave 9 Carazo Diriamba Sismos 10 Chinandega Posoltega Volcanes I I Carazo Jinotepe Sismos 12 Rio San Juan San Carlos Inundaci6n 13 Jinotega Jinotega Deslave 14 Chinandega El Realejo Inundaci6n 15 Matagalpa Ciudad Dario Inundaci6n 16 Nueva Segovia Dipilto Inundaci6n y deslave 17 Chinandega El Viejo Sismos 18 Managua Tipitapa Inundaci6n 19 Leon Telica Volcanes 20 Esteli San Juan de Limay Inundacion 21 Granada Granada Sismos y volcanes 22 Chinandega Chichigalpa Sismos 23 Leon Leon Sismos 24 Esteli La Trinidad Deslave 25 Leon La Paz Centro Sismos y volcanes 26 Managua Managua Sismos
73 27 Granada Nandaime Volcanes 28 Managua San Rafael del Sur Inundaciones sismos 29 Madriz Somoto Deslave 30 Rivas Rivas Sismos 31 Rivas Moyogalpa Volcanes 32 Chinandega Corinto Inundaci6n 33 Jinotega Santa Maria de Pantasma Inundaci6n 34 Leon Larreynaga Sismos y volcanes 35 Managua Mateare Sismos 36 Masaya Masaya Sismos 37 Rivas Buenos Aires Inundaciones y volcanes 38 Leon Quezalguague Volcanes 39 Matagalpa Rio Blanco Inundaci6n 40 Nueva Segovia Jalapa Deslave 41 Masaya Nindiri Sismos y volcanes 42 Chontales Santo Domingo Deslave 43 Matagalpa Terrabona Deslave 44 Matagalpa San Isidro Deslave 45 Matagalpa San Dionisio Deslave 46 Atlantico Sur El Rama Inundaci6n 47 Managua Villa Carlos Fonseca Sismos 48 Rivas Potosi Inundaci6n 49 Jinotega San Rafael del Norte Deslave 50 Granada Diriomo Volcanes 51 Rivas Belen Sismos 52 Atlantico Sur Nueva Guinea Inundaci6n 53 Boaco San Lorenzo Inundaciones 54 Boaco Camoapa Deslave 55 Chinandega Somotillo Sismos 56 Matagalpa Matagalpa Deslave 57 Madriz Las Sabanas Deslave 58 Chinandega Villanueva Sismos 59 Managua San Francisco Libre Inundaciones 60 Masaya Tisma Inundaciones 61 Matagalpa La Dalia Deslave
74 62 Carazo La Paz de Carazo Volcanes 63 Leon El Sauce Deslaves y sismos 64 Nueva Segovia Ocotal Inundaciones 65 Matagalpa Sebaco Inundaciones 66 Masaya Catarina Volcanes 67 Matagalpa Muy Muy Inundaciones 68 Masaya San Juan de Oriente Volcanes 69 Matagalpa Esquipulas Inundaciones 70 Matagalpa Rancho Grande Deslave 71 Masaya La Concepcion Sismos y volcanes 72 Leon El Jicaral Sismos y volcanes 73 Madriz Telpaneca Inundaciones 74 Chontales La Libertad Deslave 75 Rivas Cardenas Sismos e inundaciones 76 Jinotega Cua-Bocay Deslave 77 Matagalpa Matiguas Deslave 78 Jinotega Wiwilide Jinotega Inundaciones 79 Atlantico Sur Bluefields Inundaciones 80 Masaya Niquinohomo Volcanes 81 Chinandega Puerto Morazan Sismos 82 Nueva Segovia Macuelizo Deslave 83 Matagalpa San Ramon Deslave 84 Atlantico Norte Waspam Inundaciones 85 Carazo Santa Teresa Volcanes 86 Carazo San Marcos Sismos 87 Rivas San Jorge Inundaciones 88 Chontales Juigalpa Deslaves 89 Carazo Dolores Sismos y volcanes 90 Managua Ticuantepe Volcanes 91 Rio San Juan San Juan del Norte Inundaciones 92 Leon Achuapa Deslaves 93 Madriz San Jose de Cusmapa Deslave 94 Boaco Boaco Deslaves 95 Chontales Santo Tomas Deslave 96 Jinotega La Concordia Deslave
75 97 Masaya Masatepe Volcanes 98 Jinotega San Sebastian de Yali Deslaves 99 Chontales San Pedro de Lovago Deslave 100 Carazo El Rosario Sismos y volcanes 101 Granada Diria Volcanes 102 Chinandega San Pedro del Norte Deslaves 103 Atlantico Norte Prinzapolka Inundaciones 104 Boaco Teustepe Deslaves 105 Carazo La Conquista Sismos y volcanes 106 Masaya Nandasmo Volcanes 107 Atlantico Norte Puerto Cabezas Inundaciones 108 Atlantico Norte Rosita Inundaciones 109 Chinandega San Francisco del Norte Deslaves 110 Atlantico Sur Laguna de Perlas Inundaciones
76 Additional Annex 14
Donor Activities
The following table lists donor activities in Nicaragua:
Donor Activity Amount Agency (US$mil) ASDI Managua early warning system project 0.5 COSUJDE Rehabilitation and reconstruction 4 FEMA Assess and build emergency management capability; pilot "buy-out" program +1 (risk-reducing reallocation/elevationprogram); identification of pilot communities for Project Impact initiatives GTZ Local-level early warning systems and emergency preparation (Corinto and 0.26 .______Chinandega) IDB Institutional and technical support for CEDEPRENAC 0.3 OAS Pilot community-managedearly warning system 3.25 OFDA A two-year local hire position to serve as a Disaster Mitigation Advisor; through Zamorano University: strengthen municipal capacity for disaster response though training and detailed maps of key municipal centers based on aerial photography and vulnerability analysis for GIS systems provided by USGS' Mitch (IAA) program NOAA Hurricane reconstruction; hazard mapping; strengthen flood alert capability for the Estero Real/Gulf of Fonseca though a national river forecast system Norway Managua earthquake preparedness 0.5 NWS Installation of: one surface automated meteorological observation platform, one automated precipitation station, and one ALERT system, with two automated precipitation gages in Malacatoya; establishment of NWS River Forecast System and Center in Managua; flood forecast training PAHO Define and enforce standards for rehabilitation of water/sanitation (w/s) 0.2 systems; strengthen w/s institutions to carry out emergency response and prevention plans; train local communities in mitigation measures for w/s systems Red Cross Housing relocation and reconstruction UNDP Legal framework 0.6 USGS Hazard mapping (2 years, 1:1 0,000); training in reading of hazard maps; + 2 national flood alert system, including four stream gages
The following organizations are participating in programs designed to assist Nicaraguan municipalities draw up municipal development indicator plans:
GTZ, USAID, DANIDA, and CEPREDENAC.
77 Additional Annex 15
Gender and Disaster
A recent World Bank study indicated that including gender in disaster projects holds the promise of substantial benefits at minimum cost. The study, entitled Gender and Post-Disaster Reconstruction: The Case of Hurricane Mitch in Honduras and Nicaragua, showed that gendered perspective in disaster mitigation is significant because (i) men and women have different vulnerabilities to disasters, (ii) men and women tend to have different risk perceptions and (iii) men and women tend to cope differently in the aftermath of a natural disaster.
Vulnerabilities to disaster Biological factors, such as pregnancy and lactation, can increase women's vulnerability to the negative impacts of disaster. Additionally, different social roles for men and women result in different vulnerabilities between the sexes. Men face an increased risk of morbidity and mortality due to their social role as protector and defender of the household. They are more likely to participate in search and rescue operations than women are, and are less likely to evacuate to shelters in the short term. For women, their social vulnerabilities to disaster can relate to their inferior position in the social structure, including lack of access to transportation and communication. Such vulnerabilities can prevent women from learning about evacuation warnings and utilizing shelter options. Single headed households can be more vulnerable to the negative impacts of disaster since the single parent tends to be less mobile, given their role as caregiver. Besides, the single parent has to combine caregiving and meeting the economic needs of the household. The Hurricane Mitch experience showed that the amount of female headed households tends to increased considerably immediately after a disaster.
Risk perceptions Men and women have a differential perception of risk. Women seem to have a lower threshold of risk tolerance than men do. Consequently, women are quicker to heed disaster warnings and evacuation alerts than their male counterparts. They are also more likely to perceive the probability of disaster resurgence.
Coping strategies with disasters Men and women tend to cope differently during and after a disaster. Women tend to cope by mobilizing formal and informal social networks in order to meet the needs of family, children and the larger community. Women are more likely to evacuate to shelters in the short term than men. Men, on the other hand, often seem to rely upon strategies that take them away from their families and communities. These include: seeking external employment, temporary or permanent migration, and, sometimes, abandoning the family.
A gendered perspective in disaster mitigation would include: (i) ensuring that training needs for disaster preparedness for both men and women are met, (ii) ensuring communication strategy includes mechanisms to reach both women and men and, (iii) ensuring participation of both men and women in the development of disaster awareness curricula and campaigns, risk mapping and analysis, emergency response preparation and local disaster mitigation plans. Participation of both men and women in the participatory assessments would stimulate effective cooperation of men and women in the disaster emergency phase and would assure the inclusion of different needs and priorities of men and women, resulting in a more efficient coping strategy for disaster prevention and mitigation. Under the Programa de Apoyo de Administracion Rural (PAAR) project, for example, community-based disaster prevention in forests in Honduras utilized a participatory assessment with the whole household and specifically integrated men, women and children. The communities that had these mechanisms in place prior to Mitch have responded more quickly and more cohesively to the post-disaster challenges.
Delaney, Patricia L., Shrader, Elizabeth, Gender and Post-Disaster Reconstruction: The Case of Hurricane Mitch in Honduras and Nicaragua, Decision Review Draft, January 2000
78 8t6 85s 84- t 8 NICARAGUA ACCESSIBILITYTO HOSPITALSAND RED CROSSAS A FUNCTIONOF TRAVELTIME
E >2 HOURS [ 2 HOURS _lHOUR HONDURAS *t/s E8 .5HOUR
9 NATIONAL CAPITAL MUNICIPALBOUNDARIES 14- - DEPARTMENT BOUNDARIES ) INTERNATIONALBOUNDARIES ;
Caribbean Sea , a-
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~PACIFIC a ~3CSYAjCAt KILC)MEM *: ' IMEXICO
Thismotp was producedby the \GUTEAA ONUSCrben Mop DesignUrit of TheWorld Bank. Bay 4CASea 1'-' Theboundories, colors,denominationsSLADR RIA and anyotherinformCation howon tis mapdo not imply, on the port of TheWorld BantkGroup, any judgment " ACICCOARA >on the legstus of atnyterritory, or I anyendorsement or acceptance o COSTA RICA such boundaries. $B$6e', 85' 84' 83' 8' 82 C9 I" 4 ______, ______, _ _ _ _ _ ', ______I_ , \ __ _* I i I 0l
I6' 8' 84 \ 833' NICARAGUA RISK MUNICIPALITIESIN ORDER OF FLOOD
RANKING BY FLOODRISK , * - C5 - 1-10 11 -25 t 711126-60 HONDURAS 61 - 150
* NATIONALCAPITAL MUNICIPAL BOUNDARIES - DEPARTMENTBOUNDARIES -. 14' --- INTERNATIONALBOUNDARIES
I,~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i
,,. _._. Caribbean<-l
12" OCEAN t
,JZr aeo00 08 204 '7s- '1
\GUATEMALA.."HONDURAS :' Caribbean )A'- Gar~ ",_Iod ,- J ' Sea -, Thismap waspro[uced by the S tA ... ,CR(U Thebounclaries, colars,denominalfions _-_ andany other information shown on XX9t4( II' * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~SAiVADOR- l W thismop do notirnply, on thepart of ., 3: TheWorld Bank Group,any judgment PACIFIC OCEAN , > on thelegaistotus of anyterritory,or COSTA RI CA ny endorsementor acceptanceof suchboundlaries. 1 98' 816 82 D88I '4 0 8'8"8'8IA
86' 85' 84 83' NICARAGUA MUNICIPALITIESIN ORDER OF LANDSLIDERISK
RANKING BYLANDSUDE RISK
26- lo0
NATCIONALC APITAL-\ t ' 4 0 < 0 t k ~~~~~~~~~~Caribbean
..6.1 -1 HONDUR GAS
&-- 7 R \ < \ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I 314'Sd
Thi, map was produced by the .)}\ro_1! ' 8 - Map DesignUnit oF The World Bank. . Bl Li - NICARAq Theboundories. colors denomRinations , _-5VADOR SAL*44 rIAAU andonyalber infmaion sdowinan ~49 s\- _\t S. ,. 11' I I bismRodonROtiipl>y,oaRbepart oF - 10'/g\8>X 3The World BankIGroup,A ay juNDgIE an llegalstRsonyAterrIoNAr LCO TA RICA.ONDARIES any endorsentor acceptance of ' . w* .i- , ; . , . , I -;ab such boundries. 85° O38 54'
86- ~~~~~~85' 4 3 NICARAGUA MUNICIPALITIESIN ORDER OF SEISMICRISK
RANKING BYSEISMIC RISK * r_< n 1- 10 11-25 AG irdlo 26 - 60 HONDURAS 61 - 150
® NATIONALCAPITAL MUNICIPALBOUNDARIES _O--- DEPARTMENTBOUNDARIES -- INTERNATIONALBOUNDARIES _ ; 0_ I A't
.'4, , 4'V
_ QCaribbean t{S / h ?~ ( 9 13' Sea 13.-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~3
12' OCEAN
0 20 0 ~60 E0 1 Lkr s°< w*
Kt0LO~tlW I. . M ' MEXIC6\H | jBE1 Nic|rrago/ -" Caribbean
3 TheWolrld Dciii, Crwp, onyjudgment ll\ aPAI/coST w'J ' KCA w thioh tshmapchlsowriot.lematws imly ofat on t6ory,srR par of o' OCEAN -dS > ('I onyendorsementormocaptoneofon.' \w X
______ch______b______r______sI ~ ' anyolnclrsos or ' pkm 1 85' 84' \4o CofMBI '
86° 85' 84' 85A NICARAGUA
MUNICIPALITIESIN ORDER OF / "'- RISKOF VOLCANIC ERUPTION .- eV RANKINGBY RISK OF VOLCANIC ERUPTION
- 11-25 m 26 - 60 HONDURAS EIZ61 - j.5
6NATIONALCAPITAL/ I -- MUNICIPALBOUNDARIES ,4, DEPARTMENTBOUNDARIES - - - INTERNATIONALBOUNDARIES -
(~~~~
Ca ribbeamn
12-
KROsMopp>ftEM ' Nicaraguai l k G AEf ortbbean MopDesin Unit of TheWorMl Bank. R - NC * Se/ Theb ondortes,colos,enorrnnatirsns El,- Ze /_\ ^VONICARA(qUASe and anyoher information shownon SA-VA.-- this map do not imply,on te part of * _ *Aw% 0 TheWorld BanikGroup, any iudgment 0° PACIFIC ,, :> on the Iegalstatusof any territory,or OCEAN - n arny endorsementor acceptance oF CO T R CA - I such boundaries. --
84 90' 8826 CO.OMBIAN -rs 870 8;' 185'