Disaster Risks Ignored - Fatalities Continue to Occur

The high number of deaths and material losses caused by various disasters shows the poor prevention and risk reduction aspects of Indonesia's construction engineering. A change of perspective and disaster management, from focusing on responses after the fact to risk reduction, is urgently needed.

The nine deaths caused by hot ash clouds from Mount Sinabung in May and the destruction of 1,955 houses by a small-scale earthquake in West Sumatra on June 2 are just the latest additions to the already long list of deaths and material losses caused by natural disasters. This is despite the fact that deaths and losses can be reduced by focusing disaster management on mitigation efforts.

According to the National Disaster Mitigation Agency (BNPB), from January to June 6 in 2016 natural disasters claimed 154 lives and affected 1.6 million others. Disasters also damaged 14,500 houses and 462 public facilities. Losses caused by these disasters are estimated to be between Rp 50 trillion (US$3.75 billion) and Rp 100 trillion every year.

However, last year the losses induced by forest fires alone reached Rp 221 trillion," BNPN spokesman Sutopo Purwo Nugroho said in Jakarta on Monday (13/6/2016).

Disaster researcher Eko Yulianto from the Indonesian Science Institute's (LIPI) Geotechnology Research Center said that the high number of deaths and material losses caused by disasters occur because risk reduction was not yet mainstreamed in development efforts.

The deputy for geophysics, Masturyono, from the Meteorology, Climatology and Geophysics Agency (BMKG) shared this sentiment. "In budgeting, for example, disaster is not a national priority even though it is in the mid-term development plan (RPJM)," he said.

Earthquake and tsunami researcher Widjo Kongko from the Agency for the Assessment and Application of Technology (BPPT) added that the failure to mainstream disaster planning in development projects is clearly on display in a number of national strategic projects that have no serious foundation of mitigation aspects. He cited the Jakarta-Bandung high-speed railway project and the airport development project in te tsunami-prone area of Kulon Progo, Yogyakarta, as examples.

"Despite Law No. 24/2007 pushing for a paradigm shift in disaster management from reactive to preventive, in reality disaster management is too focused on responding after the fact," Eko said.

There are only a few activities focused on risk reduction and prevention. As a result, the people and government, especially in regions, have a limited capacity to reduce disaster risks.

This failure is due to the relative lack of coordination of disaster management efforts between the BNPB and other state agencies. "We should emulate the Women Empowerment and Child Protection Ministry's strategy of mainstreaming gender issues. Disasters should not only be managed by the BNPB alone, but should be mainstreamed in every ministry and state agency," he said.

Limited funding

Sutopo highlighted limited funding as a major problem in disaster management in Indonesia. The BNPB's budget in 2016 is around Rp 1.1 trillion, consisting of Rp 807.8 billion for disaster mitigation programs and Rp 292.2 billion for infrastructure management support, monitoring and improvement of state officials' accountability.

The reserve funds for disaster management in the Finance Ministry are Rp 4 trillion, consisting of Rp 2.5 trillion for emergency management and Rp 1.5 trillion for rehabilitation and reconstruction. "The budget is too small compared to the needs, especially with increasing threat of disasters," Sutopo said.

Ideally, the BNPB gets an annual budget of between Rp 10 trillion and Rp 15 trillion for disaster management. "This was initiated by the National Development Planning Agency (Bappenas), which proposed a 1 percent allocation in the state budget for disaster management. Compare this to Japan, which allocates 6 percent of its state budget every year for disaster management efforts," he said.

Disaster management budgets in regions are also limited. In Lampung, for instance, the regional budget is only enough to cover operational expenses, victim evacuation and logistics during disasters. As a result, it is difficult for the region's disaster mitigation agency to hold disaster simulations for regional officials.

However, Eko said, the main issue in disaster management in Indonesia is more about a wrongheaded perspective. "Disasters are seen more as a purely technical problem so that the focus of disaster mitigation efforts is on providing physical infrastructure and not on improving the people's preparedness," he said.

Behavioral change

According to Eko, the ultimate goal of development is human development. This perspective must be the foundation in disaster risk reduction. "The managers of disaster risk reduction (especially the BNPB and its regional counterpart, the BPBD) must see human behavior as the main cause of disasters.

In regard to this, disaster risk reduction must be focused on improving people's behavior, which ultimately involves reducing the people's social, physical and economic vulnerabilities. "The office that is most responsible for disaster risk reduction must be the Office of the Coordinating Human and Culture Development Minister," Eko said.

The issue of human capacity was clear in the deaths caused by hot ash clouds from Mt. Sinabung. The government had set a no-entry danger zone, but this was ignored by the people.

A volcano expert who was the former head of the Volcanology and Geological Disaster Mitigation Center (PVMBG), Surono, highlighted the nation's lack of disaster management. "This reflects our poor disaster management. If the PVMBG recommends relocation, the people must be immediately relocated. The government must be present," he said.

A number of Sinabung evacuees complained about the slow relocation process that has resulted in several residents returning to their fields.

source Kompas, Tuesday, June 14, 2016