Draft Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DRAFT REPORT BELIZE: MACRO SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT OF THE DAMAGE AND LOSSES CAUSED BY TROPICAL DEPRESSION 16 Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean Subregional Headquarters for the Caribbean Distr. LIMITED LC/CAR/L.211 1 September 2009 ORIGINAL: ENGLISH BELIZE MACRO SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT OF THE DAMAGE AND LOSSES CAUSED BY TROPICAL DEPRESSION 16 __________________ This document has been reproduced without formal editing. i PREFACE Tropical Depression 16 (TD16) crept up on disparate populations in Belize over a period 8-16 October 2008. TD16 struck less than five months after the first named tropical storm of the 2008 Atlantic season, Arthur. The storm had been forecasted to dump up to 10 inches of rain over Belize and up to 15 inches in isolated areas. Arthur had devastating effects on Belize, particularly the southern regions where bridges collapsed and lives were lost. It was in the aftermath of such devastation that Belize faced TD16. The consequence of TD16 is what falls under the purview of this assessment. Although the humanitarian crisis posed by TD16 might not appear as grave as that posed by Hurricane Dean in 2007, or Hurricane Keith in 2000, the consequences nevertheless present the need, beyond the humanitarian response, for a rapid assessment of the damage (impact on assets) and losses (effects on economic and social flows) to determine its macroeconomic, social and environmental consequences and its implications for the country. At the request of the Government of Belize, and with the support of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), such an assessment was undertaken by an Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)-led mission in accordance with its well-established and accepted disaster evaluation methodology (ECLAC, 2004, www.eclac.cl/mexico, and ECLAC, 2007, www.eclacpos.org )1. This assessment will complement and expand on the emergency and humanitarian needs identified previously by the government and particularly by the National Emergency Management Organization (NEMO), the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment and with the support of civil society organizations such as the Red Cross. A sector-by-sector analysis was conducted which led to an overall estimation. The result of such an assessment provides a quantitative approximation to the overall damage and reconstruction costs of the event and looks into the effect on the country’s macroeconomic performance as compared to the pre-hurricane targets. The final section of the report outlines some strategic considerations and priorities for projects and actions. These may require additional resources. Baseline data for the conduct of the Macro Socio-Economic Assessment are drawn from official government data sets including: the Population and Housing Census 2000, the 2002 Poverty Assessment Report, Abstract of Statistics 2006, and other relevant data sets from the Statistics Institute of Belize and the Central Bank of Belize. 1 This methodology has been applied since the mid-1990s in the Caribbean to assess the impact of earthquakes, hurricanes and tropical storms in Cayman Islands, Belize, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, Saint Lucia, St Kitts and Nevis, Suriname and the Turks and Caicos Islands. The ECLAC DALA methodology has been used for over 30 years to assess such large-scale disasters as Hurricane Mitch in Central America, major earthquakes in Central America and Mexico, and the El Nino effect in the Andean region. More recently it has also come into use in Asia following the Tsunami of 2004. ii Mission components ECLAC prepared, with a team of experts and consultants, a multi-sector, integrated damage and loss report. This report was made possible by the cooperation, coordination and support provided by the relevant government authorities and the UNDP. In the process, appropriate dialogue and coordination was made with the relevant national institutions. These are, namely, The Ministry of Agriculture, the local government authorities; the NEMO, the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment and civil society organizations such as the Red Cross and Red Crescent Society. The mission was undertaken from the 4-12 March 2009 and comprised the following ECLAC staff and consultants: • Asha Kambon, Coordinator and Social Sector Specialist – the affected population and the social subsectors of housing, health and education. • Michael Hendrickson, Macroeconomist, undertook the economic impact and the consequences on public finance. • Beverly Lugay, Micro economist – supporting the work of the senior Microeconomist. • Lancelot Busby, Microeconomist, undertook the economic impact and the consequences on commerce and the tourism sectors. • Dr. David Smith, Coastal Engineer and Infrastructure Sector Specialist, examined the impact on roads, telecommunications, and public utilities; and • Dr. Vincent little – Agro Economist, with specific attention to the Agricultural Sector. The national counterpart team was coordinated by Mr. Craig Moore of the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Environment. The mission team expresses its gratitude and recognizes that the assessment would not have been possible without the support from this group. Special mention must be made of the support provided by the CEOs, Deputy CEOs, and civil society organizations, and the private sector organizations who gave of their time to meet with members of the team in order to verify and clarify data and provide new information. iii Table of contents Preface ........................................................................................................................................................i Executive summary ..................................................................................................................................................vii I. Background................................................................................................................................................... 1 A. Description of the event.................................................................................................................................. 1 1. Evolution and decay of Tropical Depression 16...................................................................................... 1 2. Rainfall associated with TD16......................................................................................................... 3 3. Flood levels associated with TD16 .................................................................................................. 4 4. Emergency actions ........................................................................................................................... 4 II. Affected population...................................................................................................................................... 6 A. Key social dimensions of disasters ................................................................................................................. 8 1. Vulnerability of women and children............................................................................................... 8 III. Description of damage and losses by sector ............................................................................................. 11 A. Productive sector .......................................................................................................................................... 12 1. Agriculture .................................................................................................................................... 12 2. Climate .....................................................................................................................................16 3. Description, analysis and estimation of damage ............................................................................17 4. The crop subsector ................................................................................................................................ 19 5. Grain industry ................................................................................................................................ 23 6. The sugar industry ..........................................................................................................................25 7. Other crops .....................................................................................................................................28 8. The livestock subsector ..................................................................................................................28 9. Tourism .....................................................................................................................................29 10. Commerce .....................................................................................................................................31 11. Petroleum sector .............................................................................................................................31 B. Infrastructure sector ...................................................................................................................................... 32 1. Water (storage, treatment and supply) and sanitation ............................................................................ 33 2. Transportation - Bridges ........................................................................................................................ 36 3.