Inter-regional Seminar on Flood Hazard Mapping and Its Use for Community Disaster Planning in the Caribbean and Central America Barbados February 16 17, 2004 FINAL Seminar Report Prepared for The Caribbean Disaster Emergency Response Agency Submitted by Dr. Vernese Inniss Consultant April 30, 2004
TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... i 1.0 INTRODUCTION... 1 2.0 OPENING CEREMONY... 2 3.0 OBJECTIVES AND ORGANISATION OF THE SEMINAR... 2 4.0 REPORT OF SESSIONS... 5 4.1 SESSION 1: STATUS OF FLOOD HAZARD MAPPING AND ITS USE IN COMMUNITY DISASTER MANAGEMENT... 5 4.1.1. The Status of Flood Hazard Mapping and Its Use in Community Disaster Planning in the Caribbean... 5 4.1.2. Status of Flood Hazard Mapping and Its Use in Community Disaster Planning in Central America... 5 4.1.3 Status of Flood Hazard Mapping and Use in Community Disaster Planning in Asia... 6 4.1.4 Discussion... 7 4.1.5 Recommendations... 8 4.2 SESSION 2: FLOOD HAZARD MAPPING: METHODOLOGIES AND DATA NEEDS... 11 4.2.1 Flood Hazard Mapping Methods and Data Needs in the Caribbean: Challenges and Issues... 11 4.2.2 Case Study - Flood Hazard Mapping with a View to Building a Community Early Warning System: The Caroni River Basin, Trinidad and Tobago... 11 4.2.3 Case Study: Flood Hazard Simulation in the Lower Caroni River Basin... 12 4.2.4 Case Study: Hazard Mapping and Using Remote Sensing GIS: the Guatemalan Experience... 13 4.2.5 Case Study: The Experience of Making Flood Hazard Maps in Nicaragua... 13 4.2.6 Panel Discussion: Issues in Flood Hazard Mapping Affecting the Caribbean and Central America... 14 4.2.7 Recommendations... 15 4.3 SESSION 3: INCORPORATING FLOOD HAZARD MAPPING IN COMMUNITY DISASTER PLANNING... 16 4.3.1 Hazard Mapping and Community Disaster Planning... 16 4.3.2 Case Study: Incorporating Flood Hazard Maps in Community Disaster Planning: the Rio Cobre Valley, Jamaica... 17 4.3.3 Case Study: The experience of Panama in the Development and Use of Hazard Maps for Community Disaster Management... 18 4.3.4 Case Study: the Experience of Flood Hazard Mapping in Costa Rica... 18 4.3.5 Case Study: Appropriate Level of Flood Hazard Mapping: Experiences in Jacmel, Haiti... 19 4.3.6 Panel Discussion: Issues and Challenges to Incorporating Flood Hazard Mapping into Community Disaster Planning... 20
4.3.7 Recommendations... 21 4.4 WORKING GROUPS... 22 4.4.1 Working Group: Organisation and Terms of Reference... 22 4.4.2 Working Group Report on the Flood Hazard Mapping Manual... 22 4.4.3 Working Group Report on Preparation of the Community Disaster Planning Manual... 23 5.0 CONCLUSION... 24 6.0 APPENDICES... 26 APPENDIX 1A: OUTLINE CONTENTS OF THE FLOOD HAZARD MAPPING MANUAL... 26 APPENDIX 1B: OUTLINE CONTENTS FOR DEVELOPING THE COMMUNITY DISASTER MANAGEMENT MANUAL... 28 APPENDIX 2: LIST OF PRESENTATIONS AND PRESENTERS... 30 APPENDIX 3: PARTICIPANTS LIST... 33
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The CDERA Inter-regional Seminar on Hazard Mapping and Its Use for Community Disaster Planning in the Caribbean and Central America held on February 16 and 17, 2004 was convened as part of the Caribbean Disaster Management Project (CADM) sponsored by the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). The seminar provided the opportunity to share experiences in hazard mapping applications in the Caribbean, Central America and Asia. It also focused on the processes for the development of flood hazard mapping and applications, and identified best practices from the three regions on applications at the community level. The seminar was opened at 9.00 am with a welcome by Chairperson Elizabeth Riley, Programme Manager, Mitigation and Research, CDERA. Remarks were delivered by Mr. Toshimi Kushida, Senior Assistant to the Managing Director, Social Development Cooperation Department, JICA; Dr. Elizabeth Sagastume, Director of International Cooperation, Coordination Centre for the Prevention of Natural Disasters in Central America (CEPREDENAC); and Mr. Jeremy Collymore, Coordinator, CDERA. The vote of Thanks was delivered by Andria Grosvenor, Programme Manager for Projects, CDERA. The objectives of the seminar were: To facilitate sharing of information, experiences and outputs of past initiatives between the Caribbean and Central American regions; To familiarize participants with processes for the development of flood hazard mapping and applications; To identify good practices on applications of flood hazard maps for community disaster management; To elaborate outline content for the Flood Hazard Mapping Manual and Community Disaster Planning Manual to be developed under the Caribbean Disaster Management Project (CADM). The workshop was organized into three plenary sessions, panel discussions and working groups as follows: Session 1 Plenary: Status of flood Hazard Mapping and Use in Community Disaster management Session 2 Plenary: Flood Hazard Mapping Methodologies and Data Needs Session 3 Plenary: Incorporating Flood Hazard Mapping into Community Disaster Planning Session 4: Working Groups i
The Status of flood Hazard Mapping and Its Use in Community Disaster Management The first session consisted of presentations on the status of flood hazard mapping and its use in community disaster planning in the Caribbean, in Central America and in Asia. It was noted that the CDERA participating states need to support the development of flood hazard maps within the CDM framework, their application in hazard mitigation planning, and their use in broad preparedness and response. The Central American experience revealed that several initiatives were already being undertaken including the mapping of problem areas or areas prone to inundation, maps to indicate threats and to initiate work on preparedness against possible events, and maps to inform planning and decision making. Questions to be resolved include defining the purpose of the maps, developing comparable indicators of hazards, vulnerability and risks, and promoting regional cooperation among countries and institutions. There are plans to standardise information and establish a regional database, but these are still at the conceptual stage. From the overview and analysis of initiatives in the Asian region, of note were of the initiatives being undertaken by the Typhoon Committee. They include a flood hazard mapping project to prepare flood hazard maps for pilot river basins in each member country, applying a common manual. The similarity in the approach and timing between this project and the CADM project suggested opportunities for cooperation between the Typhoon Committee and CDERA in the implementation of these two projects. Another initiative is the Sediment Disaster Alarm Project to develop flash flood and debris flow warning systems for pilot areas in each member country, applying a common guideline. This would also be useful for flash flood and debris flow warning for small catchments in the Caribbean. The discussion on the initiatives in the three regions touched on several points. 1 Experiences of community participation in the Caribbean and Central America that can be used as examples of best practice. 2. A mechanism to access funding for implementation of disaster management plans once current exercises have been completed. 3. Mechanisms for the storing and subsequent sharing of information. 4. The role of physical planning in the hazard mapping process. 5. Activities in Asian countries for flood hazard mapping applying a common manual. The following recommendations were made regarding the status of flood hazard mapping and its use in community disaster management in the Caribbean, Central America and Asia: ii
I. Clearly define the purpose, content and scales of flood hazard maps. II. Establish standardized scales. III. Establish parameters for standardization of information presented on maps. IV. Address the social aspects of flood management. Flood Hazard Mapping: Methodologies and Data Needs The second session examined some challenges and issues related to flood hazard mapping methods and data needs in the Caribbean. Case studies from Guatemala and Nicaragua were also presented. Challenges and issues raised for the Caribbean include the availability of the data, legislative support for actions, the need for public awareness and the need for sustained updating and production of maps. In charting the way forward the Caribbean needs to focus on adopting a regional approach to data acquisition and management, and involving end users from the very conceptualization of the project. In addition, the case of the Caroni River Basin revealed that using community organisations was effective in gaining community interest and in sustaining that interest over the long term. The importance of the availability of reliable data for use in simulation models was also stressed. The Central American experiences uncovered several challenges including the following: The products of the flood hazard mapping exercises cannot be compared due to the differences in data collection methods and analyses. Difficulties exist in updating historical information. There is an absence of legislation that authorizes evacuation procedures. Little or no opportunity exists for training residents in the use of flood hazard maps. There is a heavy reliance on low technology solutions. There is a high level of dependence on international cooperation and support. The lack of hydrological data poses a major problem. In the plenary discussion on issues in flood hazard mapping affecting the Caribbean and Central America the following points were noted: 1. The island characteristics of small catchment areas and short concentration times between the rainfall event and downstream discharge hold specific implications for early warning systems in the Caribbean. 2. The issue of incomplete and inadequate data must be recognized and improved upon. iii
3. Ownership of data, embedded in which is the problem of cost of data, often creates problems of access. 4. Lack of standards for information leads to problems of comparability, compatibility and overall utility. 5. The challenge of incorporating the potential impacts of climate change needs to be addressed. 6. The importance of institutional relationships is emphasized. The following recommendations were made: I. Programmes and mechanisms must be established to build awareness in the communities. II. Mechanisms are needed to enable sharing of the technical information. III. Methodologies are needed for standardising map information. IV. Strategies must be devised to address the issue of incomplete and inadequate data. V. Community members should be trained in the technical aspects of monitoring and managing information. VI. Partnerships among institutions within the region can be established in order to foster self-reliant implementation and sustainability in the future. Incorporating Flood Hazard Mapping in Community Disaster Planning In this session case studies in community disaster planning were drawn from Jamaica, Panama, Costa Rica and Haiti. Two key points emerged from the Caribbean experience. First was the importance of recognizing the shortcomings of flood hazard maps in the context of the Caribbean, and taking into account the ability of the communities to understand them and to use them effectively. The second was related to the documentation of cases of best practice, and it was considered that the strategy used in Haiti in developing a community based initiative to build partnerships was a good example of community participation and the use of appropriate technologies. In the case of Central America, the Panama and Costa Rica experiences revealed that (1) the production of the maps can influence the development process and in some cases prevented development in hazard prone areas, (2) that possibilities exist for the use of advanced technologies for hazard mapping, and (3) that communities and stakeholders need to take ownership of the flood hazard mapping systems. iv
Overall the Issues with incorporating flood hazard mapping in community disaster planning centred on the question of sustainability. Specific points are summarized as follows: 1 The hazard map cannot serve all purposes. Explore the feasibility of developing a suite of maps that show various aspects of the flood hazard. 2. It is important for the communities to self-assess their capacities and vulnerabilities and be involved in making their own maps. 3. Preparedness merits greater attention. 4. It is important to find and develop mechanisms for fostering community involvement. 5. A very practical issue in the Caribbean is that of payment for community action. Involve communities in the mitigation of the hazards to them, so that they see the tangible benefits. 6. It is necessary to establish formal mechanisms for linking traditional information with the scientific and technical aspects of hazard mapping. Recommendations I. Establish formal mechanisms for linking the technical to the traditional. II. Establish a community-based system that does not rely on external resources. III. Simplify the hazard maps for educational purposes. IV. Develop a systematic process for incorporating local knowledge. V. Develop training programmes in the management of community-based early warning systems. VI. Promote community involvement in the preparation of their maps. v
1.0 Introduction The Caribbean Disaster Emergency Response agency (CDERA) and the Central Emergency Relief Organisation (CERO) co-hosted an Inter-regional Seminar on Hazard Mapping and Its Use for Community Disaster Planning in the Caribbean and Central America on February 16 and 17, 2004 at the Amaryllis Beach Resort, Barbados. This seminar was part of the Caribbean Disaster Management Project (CADM) sponsored by the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), and was held in collaboration with the Centre for Coordination for the Prevention of Natural Disasters in Central America (CEPREDENAC). The CADM Project is a three-year project aimed at assisting CDERA participating countries 1 in mitigating damage from disasters, particularly those arising from flood hazards. The project was conceptualized after a CDERA survey 2 identified floods as the most common event occurring in 90 per cent of CDERA participating states in the five years prior to the survey, while only 25 per cent of these countries had plans to deal with flood hazards. The goal of the CADM project will therefore be achieved by strengthening the region s institutional and technical capacity for flood hazard mapping and community disaster planning. Hazard mapping is a necessary first step for any other disaster reduction measure and is undertaken in many countries. However, it is still in the initial stages and a great number of areas remain in need of such maps. Moreover, in many instances the hazard maps developed remain as technical and scientific materials and are not utilized satisfactorily for disaster management planning. This seminar provided the opportunity to share experiences in hazard mapping applications in the Caribbean, Central America and Asia. The seminar also focused on the processes for the development of flood hazard mapping and applications, and identified best practices from the three regions on applications at the community level. Seminar participants were drawn from national disaster management and response agencies in CDERA and CEPREDENAC participating states. A number of regional and international institutions and donor agencies were also in attendance. 1 Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, British Virgin Islands, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, Montserrat, Saint Kitts/Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago, Turks and Caicos Islands 2 Status of Disaster Preparedness in CDERA Participating States conducted in May 2001 1
2.0 Opening Ceremony The seminar was opened at 9.00 a.m. with a welcome by Chairperson Elizabeth Riley, Programme Manager for Mitigation and Research, CDERA. Remarks were delivered by Mr. Toshimi Kushida, Senior Assistant to the Managing Director, Social Development Cooperation Department, JICA; Dr. Elizabeth Sagastume, Director of International Cooperation, Coordination Centre for the Prevention of Natural Disasters in Central America (CEPREDENAC); and Mr. Jeremy Collymore, Coordinator, CDERA. The vote of Thanks was delivered by Andria Grosvenor, Programme Manager for Projects, CDERA. In his remarks Mr. Toshimi Kushida spoke about the support of JICA to the Caribbean and Central American regions and of the importance of the meeting and the CADM initiative, referring to the policy of JICA to place priority on regional approaches and to promote cooperation among countries and regions. Dr. Sagastume (CEPREDENAC) emphasized the importance of the JICA programme and of early warning systems in particular, in light of the huge impact of Hurricane Mitch (1998) on the Central American Region. She looked to the seminar to provide useful case studies that would bring new experiences and knowledge to the region. In his statement Mr. Collymore drew attention to the seminar s focus on ways of fusing scientific data with local experience and knowledge in the development of community disaster plans that engage those at risk. The CADM project not only provides a mechanism for achieving these goals, but also facilitates both formal and functional cooperation arrangements with other regional institutions like the University of the West Indies (UWI) and the Caribbean Institute of Meteorology and Hydrology (CIMH), as well as with the Caribbean, Central America and Asia. The common vision on the outputs of the seminar that emerged from these statements was for a strengthened capacity and even self-sufficiency in the area of disaster management for the region. The opening session concluded with the presentation by Mr. Hidetomi Oi, JICA Chief Advisor to CDERA on the CADM Project. This presentation set the context of the CADM project on Flood Hazard Mapping and Community Disaster Management Planning. Mr. Oi placed in perspective the need for national, regional and inter-regional partnerships given the limited resources in the region, and the benefits to be gained by sharing experiences and expertise as the CADM project moves from preparation to the implementation phase. 3.0 Objectives and Organisation of the Seminar This inter-regional seminar on flood hazard mapping and its use for community disaster planning in the Caribbean and Central America fell within the framework of the Caribbean Disaster Management (CADM) Project. The broad objective of 2
CADM is the mitigation of damage from natural hazards in the region. The seminar on flood hazard mapping was one of the activities conceptualized to directly achieve the objectives of the CADM project. The objectives of the seminar were: To facilitate sharing of information, experiences and outputs of past initiatives between the Caribbean and Central American regions; To familiarize participants with processes for the development of flood hazard mapping and applications; To identify good practices on applications of flood hazard maps for community disaster management; To elaborate outline content for the Flood Hazard Mapping Manual and Community Disaster Planning Manual to be developed under the Caribbean Disaster Management Project (CADM). The seminar brought together experts and professionals from research and academic institutions, government agencies and non-governmental organisations in the Caribbean and Central America, in the fields of meteorology, hydrology, engineering, emergency management and geographic information systems, to share the products of their work and experiences in flood hazard mapping and community disaster management (See Appendix 2). For the Caribbean region the results of the collective contributions of the Mona and St. Augustine campuses of the UWI and of the CIMH, all under the CADM project, were shared. From the Central American Region the work of CEPREDENAC and the experiences of several countries in the region were also presented. The experiences of the Asian region, particularly the member countries of the Typhoon Committee, provided useful lessons in regional approaches for the Caribbean and Central America. The workshop was organized into three plenary sessions, panel discussions and working groups as follows: Session 1 Plenary: Status of Flood Hazard Mapping and Its Use in Community Disaster Management Status of Flood Hazard Mapping and Use in Community Disaster Planning in the Caribbean Status of Flood Hazard Mapping and Use in Community Disaster Planning in Central America Status of Flood Hazard Mapping and Use in Community Disaster Planning in Japan Discussion Session 3
Session 2 Plenary: Flood Hazard Mapping Methodologies and Data Needs Flood Hazard Mapping Methodologies and Data Needs Challenges and Issues Case Studies on Flood Hazard Mapping Methodologies and Data Issues: (a) The Caribbean (b) Central America Panel Discussion Further development by the Panel of issues arising from the presentations, in particular, issues affecting both the Caribbean and Central American regions in advancing flood hazard mapping. Session 3 Plenary: Incorporating Flood Hazard Mapping into Community Disaster Planning Hazard Mapping and Community Disaster Planning: Exploring the Role of Hazard Mapping in CDP and Mechanisms for Promoting Use Case Studies on the Use of Flood Hazard Maps in Community Disaster Planning (a) The Caribbean (b) Central America Panel Discussion Session 4 Working Groups Working Group 1: FHM Manual Content Working Group 2: CDP Manual Content Advancing Production and Use of Flood Hazard Maps The seminar concluded with a Rapporteur s Report summarising the common themes, crosscutting issues and general points that emerged from the presentations and discussions. 4
4.0 Report of Sessions 4.1 Session 1: Status of Flood Hazard Mapping and Its Use in Community Disaster Management 4.1.1. The Status of Flood Hazard Mapping and Its Use in Community Disaster Planning in the Caribbean This presentation gave an overview of the status and nature of the flood hazard mapping in the Caribbean. It drew on the results of a survey conducted with the support of JICA and undertaken by the University of the West Indies Centre for Geospatial Studies, St. Augustine Campus. The current status in the production and application of flood hazard maps for community disaster planning was examined, including the specific limitations identified in the survey. Limitations included difficulties in disseminating the maps to those at the community level who need them most, the disconnection between data needs and data availability, and the tendency to focus more on past impacts than on future preparedness and prevention. An important conclusion was that there is very limited application of flood hazard mapping for community disaster planning in the region. Current CDERA initiatives under way, all of which are in support of the Comprehensive Disaster Management (CDM) strategy, were presented. The CDM strategy, among other things, supports the development of hazard mapping products and assessment of vulnerability to hazards, promotes the use of hazard maps in Community Disaster Planning in particular and in development planning as a whole and, most pertinently, seeks to engage communities in the process. The second initiative is the Caribbean Disaster Management Project (CADM) described in section 3 above, and a third is the Caribbean Hazard Mitigation Capacity Building Programme (CHAMP), which focuses on hazard mapping and vulnerability assessments as tools in the disaster mitigation process. In moving forward, the CDERA participating states need to support the development of flood hazard maps within the CDM framework; support the application of hazard maps in hazard mitigation planning; and support the use of hazard maps in broad preparedness and response, including evacuation planning and early warning systems. 4.1.2. Status of Flood Hazard Mapping and Its Use in Community Disaster Planning in Central America This was an overview and analysis of flood hazard mapping in Central America and some of the major initiatives that are under way there. Noting that flooding is the major cause of disasters in the region, several dimensions to the Central American problem were highlighted including the fact that there are large basins shared among several countries. This characteristic highlights the need for 5
regional cooperation in several areas. Among these are the harmonization of data among the countries, sharing of mapping initiatives, and developing comparable indicators of hazards, vulnerability and risks. Initiatives already being undertaken include the mapping of problem areas or areas prone to inundation, maps to indicate threats and to initiate work on preparedness against possible events, and maps to inform planning and decision making. There remain, however, several questions to be resolved with respect to regional maps including defining the purpose of the maps and their target users, the minimum scales for showing information, comparable indicators of hazards, and vulnerability and risk. The regional nature of the problem for Central America clearly highlights the need for regional cooperation, among countries as well as regional institutions. 4.1.3 Status of Flood Hazard Mapping and Use in Community Disaster Planning in Asia The final presentation of Session 1 provided an overview and analysis of initiatives in the work of the Typhoon Committee in Asia. The Typhoon Committee 3 was established by the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) and the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) to promote activities to mitigate impacts of typhoons under the cooperation of countries in the region. Of particular relevance to the seminar were (a) the Flood Hazard Mapping Project and (b) the Sediment Disaster Alarm System Project. The Flood Hazard Mapping Project aims at preparing flood hazard maps for the pilot river basins in member countries. The pilot basins have been selected by member countries in initial works under way applying a Flood Hazard Manual prepared by Japanese experts. In view of the similarity of the objective, approach and time schedule for implementation, it was recommended that CDERA and the Typhoon Committee cooperate in implementing flood hazard mapping projects currently being undertaken by both organisations. The Disaster Alarm System Project adopts the same approach, aiming at establishing an alarm system for flash floods and sediment-related disasters in member countries. The pilot areas have been selected and initial works are under way, following Guidelines for Development of Warning and Evacuation System against Sediment-related Disasters. It was noted that flash floods and sediment-related disasters are also common to countries in the Caribbean and Central America, and a similar approach might be considered in these two regions in the future. 3 Member countries of the Typhoon Committee are Cambodia, China, Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, Japan, Lao Peoples Democratic Republic, Malaysia, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Thailand, and Vietnam. Besides the member countries, Myanmar and Pakistan (Cyclone Panel members) also participate in this exercise. 6
A number of points were noted with respect to the overall flood hazard mapping project. First, the land areas, catchment areas and populations of the pilot sites in each participating country vary substantially. Second, countries are at different stages in the process with some having no maps, others only 1:50,000 maps and the more advanced countries having 1:10,000 maps. Third, countries are at different stages in the types of maps that are being produced. Lastly, lack of basic data, especially hydrological data, is a problem common to many countries. Japan already has flood hazard maps for over 200 communities but this falls far short of the 1,200 needed. 4.1.4 Discussion The discussion following the presentations touched on several points that were raised during the course of the presentations, including the following: 1 Experiences of community participation in the Caribbean and Central America that can be used as examples of best practice in terms of empowerment and involvement should be documented and shared, as communities will be the key in making hazard mapping useful. For the Caribbean region the CADM initiative will be the main source of such cases, since the development of the flood hazard maps is focused on specific communities. Examples under that initiative can be drawn from activities in St. Vincent where the communities were involved in the data gathering phase and in the project implementation phase. Under the DEPECO-funded programme for the development of an early warning system in the Caparo river basin in Trinidad and Tobago, the community was involved in ground truthing of the flood hazard mapping data, and was trained in the use of the maps as well as in disaster preparedness. In Dominica cases also exist with respect to community involvement in the verification of map data. Some examples also exist in the Central American region, where communities were involved in the actual production of information for the hazard maps. The Red Cross and Red Crescent societies also have experiences in hazard mapping in the Caribbean and Central America that can be used as cases of best practice for communities where detailed and accurate information is not necessarily required in view of the size, socio-economic and other characteristics of the community. Examples of these experiences are summarised in Table 1 (page 10). 2. An important consideration was whether there was a mechanism within the various projects to access funding for implementation of disaster management plans once the planning and mapping exercises have been completed. This is a matter that CDERA will be looking at with JICA and other donor partners, particularly with respect to the use and application of the products of the CADM programme. From the JICA perspective, consideration will be given to activities deriving from the CADM that can 7
be implemented by communities at the community level. Hazard maps offer a variety of activities which are effective for disaster mitigation without resorting to financial support from outside. 3. Mechanisms for storing and subsequently sharing information are another area of concern. For the Caribbean some examples are beginning to emerge. The CADM has an information warehouse component which creates a site for dissemination of all the information generated, and a programme is also in place to train personnel in the development of such sites to disseminate information gathered under this and other projects. With respect to information generated from the survey on hazard mapping, vulnerability assessments and digital map information, individual country reports have been prepared for all 20 countries and will be made available on the CDERA website. In the case of Central America there are plans, in collaboration with JICA, to establish a data base, but this is still at the conceptual stage. 4. The role of physical planning is critical given (a) the tendency in the region for unplanned development, often in flood prone areas and (b) community knowledge that could be useful to the hazard mapping process. Town and Country Planning Departments have a lead role to play in that the physical planning permitting process provides the legal and regulatory bases for the application of hazard mapping tools. 5. The approach by the Typhoon Committee in Asia is unique in that member countries prepare flood hazard maps for the pilot river basin selected in each member country with their own resources, under the technical guidance of an expert group of the Committee. They learn lessons from each other and apply a common manual with necessary modification according to the conditions of the respective country. This regional approach will be useful in promoting hazard mapping in the Typhoon Committee member countries. 4.1.5 Recommendations I. There is a need to clearly define the purpose, content and scales of flood hazard maps, bearing in mind the utility of these products to the stakeholders in disaster management planning. The flood hazard map must be seen as a tool whose effectiveness is dependent on its use in building public awareness and education, and in developing the community disaster plan design process itself. II. The marked differences in size both within and between the Caribbean and Central America affect the nature and manifestation of the flood hazard as well as its impacts. However, if communities are targeted, information and experiences can be shared despite these differences. 8
III. Parameters for standardising the information presented on maps need to be established. This has implications for comparability and effective use of the product. IV. The social elements of flood management seem to be emerging as a gap in the process that needs to be addressed. Specifically, there appears to be a need to assess the social factors that affect choices at the community level, and to find ways of integrating these considerations into the overall flood management process. In conclusion, for the benefit of the community, the connection has to be made between problem identification and solutions in a tangible way. In this regard, demonstrated mitigation interventions that change what is revealed by the flood mapping exercises will be the true test of the extent to which communities embrace and take ownership of disaster management in general and the flood mapping exercises in particular. The CADM and other initiatives in Central America that provide for the development of demonstration projects of best practice cases are therefore encouraging in advancing the application of modern technologies in finding solutions to mundane problems. 9
Table 1. Good Practices in Flood Hazard Mapping and Its Use for Community Disaster Planning in the Caribbean and Central America Region Project (Organization,Country) Good Practices (experiences, lessons, materials, equipment) Asia Flood Hazard Mapping Project Flood Hazard Map Manual for flood hazard mapping (Typhoon Committee) Sediment Disaster Alert System Project (Typhoon Committee) Guidelines for Development of Warning and Evacuation System against Sediment Disasters for early warning for flash floods and debris flows to be applicable for Central America Caribbean Central America and Caribbean (CEPREDENAC) Community Operated Early Warning System (Guatemala, Nicaragua and others) Community Based Disaster Preparedness (IFRCRCS) (Panama) CADM (CDERA) Community Flood Warning (Rio Cobre/Jamaica, Caparo-Caroni River/ Trinidad and Tobago, Roseau River/Dominica) Community disaster management for Jacmel in Haiti and Aguan in Honduras (PADF) small catchments in the Caribbean and others Standardization of information and establishment of database at the regional level (still conceptual stage) Simple equipment for measurement of rainfall and water level. (Implications of usefulness for early warning for flash floods in small catchments in the Caribbean) Manual for Community Based Disaster Management for community planning including hazard mapping Incorporation of hazard maps into country activities resulted in preventing development in hazardous areas. Use of internet to link inundated areas to monitor flood situation Partnership among regional institutions for flood hazard mapping and community planning Use of flood hazard map for community based flood warning Community based disaster management which includes a component for flood hazard mapping using appropriate technologies and directly involving community members in drawing their own maps for the community 10
4.2 Session 2: Flood Hazard Mapping: Methodologies and Data Needs 4.2.1 Flood Hazard Mapping Methods and Data Needs in the Caribbean: Challenges and Issues This presentation drew on the methodologies for flood hazard mapping applied in the development of flood hazard maps under the CADM project being implemented by the Centre for Geospatial Studies at the St. Augustine campus of the UWI. Details were presented on the types and range of information contained on a flood hazard map, including evacuation, inundation, educational and other information, as well as the various administrative uses to which the maps are put. For example, in planning evacuation routes, developing the emergency activity systems, establishing communications channels for emergency information and others. Very important is the dissemination of the maps, particularly to local residents in the inundation areas. There are several challenges and issues associated with the development of flood hazard maps in the Caribbean. Chief among these is the availability of the data required. This data is wide ranging and detailed, covering all types of geophysical, infrastructural (for example, utilities and transportation), socioeconomic (for example, population and essential services), atmospheric/climatic, and evacuation planning. Others include gaining legislative support for actions such as constraining and controlling the use of land in flood prone areas, and for facilitating the work of evacuation teams; the need for public awareness on the use of the maps; sustained updating and production along with building the capacity to do this; and up to date registration of residents of the area. Against this background, the Caribbean needs to focus on a number of areas in charting the way forward. First is the need for a regional approach to data acquisition and management, which will not only reduce the cost of the data, but also enhance the capacity to interpret and use it. Second, is the need to involve end users from the very conceptualization of the project. Finally there is a need to focus on research in areas such as space standards and criteria for the issuance of evacuation orders, among others. 4.2.2 Case Study - Flood Hazard Mapping with a View to Building a Community Early Warning System: The Caroni River Basin, Trinidad and Tobago The objective of the project in the Caroni River Basin was to promote community disaster preparedness and build a disaster sensitive community. The Caroni River Basin was selected because of its high incidence of floods and the 11
significant losses incurred. The main outputs were 2-year, 10-year and 50-year flood maps. Activities included a review and collection of background data, and examination of existing GIS coverage. To build capacity in disaster preparedness and community response, training in reading the instruments was undertaken in the community and a communications system was installed. With respect to implementation of the early warning system, flood watchers within the communities monitored the flood levels and relayed information to communities lower down the basin, and those at the lower levels communicated the information to the rest of the community through previously established channels. Based on the hydrological information being relayed, an assessment would be made as to whether the flood management team (comprising various government agencies) is activated and the response mechanisms would come into operation. Apart from the scientific structure of the process, some community issues emerged. (1) How are the first points of contact within the community identified? In this case the Ministry of Community Development was used to identify community groups who in turn identified the community leaders, and these were later able to influence the behaviour of the communities. (2) It was found that using community organisations was effective in gaining community interests and in sustaining that interest over the long term. 4.2.3 Case Study: Flood Hazard Simulation in the Lower Caroni River Basin This case was based on the results of a study conducted on behalf of the National Emergency Management Agency of Trinidad and Tobago. It focused on the flooding hazard in the Caroni River Basin, the flood mapping exercise, and the early flood warning system. The Caroni is the largest river basin in Trinidad (18 tributaries feed into the main stream). It presents the greatest problems because 50% of the floods occur in this basin, and more than 40% of the country s economic and social activity occurs along this east-west corridor. Therefore a high level of damage usually results from each flood event. Some details of the simulation models and flood hazard analyses applied in the study were presented, and the linkages made between the technical aspects of the study and the practical application both to the flood hazard mapping process and to the early warning system. For example the analyses enabled identification of 17 warning stations which were also linked with population centres and centres of economic and social activity. These contributed to the assessment and mapping of flooding risks and will contribute to the development of flood control infrastructure on the ground. 12
Lessons learned from this study were the importance of the availability of reliable data and enough data for the use of simulation models, and the value of GIS technology in the mapping process. 4.2.4 Case Study: Hazard Mapping and Using Remote Sensing GIS: the Guatemalan Experience This presentation provided an overview of the progression of flood hazard mapping in Guatemala, focusing on variations in the methodologies applied. These included the use of satellite imagery, historical data about flood hazards, and probability analyses using statistical programmes, interpretation of aerial photographs, and field validation work. Examples of the mapping exercises undertaken include an initiative by the National Geographic Institution (IGN) and the meteorological entity in Guatemala (INSIVUMEH) with the assistance of JICA, and one by CONRED. The civil protection agency in Guatemala also has a flood hazard map, this one of the Madre Vieja Basin. The problem is that these products cannot be compared due to the differences in data collection methods and analyses. Several other issues emerged from the mapping exercise. The first relates to how maps utilizing historical data can be updated and how the information can be used to prevent flood events. In Guatemala this type of map is used to help implement early warning systems. Second, there is no legislation that authorizes CONRED or any other entity to initiate evacuation procedures and neither is there a budget for this. Thirdly, there is no opportunity for training residents in the use of early warning systems. Finally, there is often no budget for advanced technological applications, so low technology solutions have to be applied to meet community needs. 4.2.5 Case Study: The Experience of Making Flood Hazard Maps in Nicaragua Two points are made concerning hazard mapping in Nicaragua. First, hurricane Mitch was the driving force in the movement to develop flood hazard maps, and such mapping has been implemented in areas most affected by that hurricane. Second, flood hazard mapping to date has depended on international cooperation and support. The maps produced, however, are not technically flood hazard maps, but simply geographical maps that also incorporate vulnerability studies. Flood hazard mapping in the post-mitch period has been conducted in close collaboration with local authorities and residents of the affected areas. The maps are at a 1:50,000 scale, which is useful for a large land mass like Nicaragua. More recently urban maps have been developed with assistance from the European Union, at a scale of 1:1000 for the urban centres and 1: 50,000 for the 13
municipalities. A major problem was the lack of hydrological data, and so the term risk analysis was used in producing the hazard maps. Two criteria flood intensity and return periods were used to classify the mapped areas as low hazard, medium hazard and high hazard. 4.2.6 Panel Discussion: Issues in Flood Hazard Mapping Affecting the Caribbean and Central America Several important points emerged in this discussion, and these are summarized as follows: 1. The peculiarities of small territories in the Caribbean, such as small catchment areas and short concentration times between the rainfall event and downstream discharge, hold specific implications for early warning systems. For example, the short time frame between monitoring the rainfall and in issuing the warning to downstream residents afterwards. The lessons from Central America concerning community based early warning systems that are already in operation show the importance of having the rainfall intensity monitored at the community level. This, when linked by a clear system for communicating the information to downstream areas (for example a sound alarm that changes as intensity approaches critical levels), would prove useful for island communities. It would also be useful as an early warning system for landslides, slope failures and debris flows. This is critical in cases of very short periods of intense rainfall, and experiences in this area should be very useful. 2. The issue of incomplete and inadequate data must be recognized and improved upon. The most critical is the inadequacy of hydrological data. For most countries in the Caribbean and Central America it is difficult to establish and maintain the hydrological observation network due to lack of resources. Programmes of data collection need to be established as a normal process. The problem of age of existing maps could also militate against the successful implementation of flood hazard mapping projects. In the Caribbean more recent aerial photos and other recent data (1998, 2002 etc.) have been used to update land use maps. A current initiative is being developed to produce 2003 data to update land use, vegetation etc. in all CADM pilot sites. Topography is more difficult but access to satellite digital elevation models might become available. The real challenge, again, is not one of technology but of availability of financial resources. 3. Ownership of data, embedded in which is the problem of cost of data, often creates problems of access. What kind of reciprocal arrangements can be made to ensure that the private owners of data that was costly to generate, also benefit from the relinquishing of this data to projects conceived in the public interest? In the discussion around this point the view was expressed that the value of data is a matter of economics or a 14
function of supply and demand, bearing in mind that rapidly evolving technology can have the effect of rendering data obsolete in a relatively short period of time. Reciprocal arrangements may therefore not be the appropriate solution. 4. The standardization of information emerged as a central theme particularly for the Central American region but also with relevance to the Caribbean. Many different standards are currently in use with respect to methodologies for data collection and map development, terminology, representation of the information on the maps and others. This leads to problems of comparability, compatibility and overall utility. There is a need to find a solution to the problem of standardization in order to enhance the usefulness of all the technical data that is available through hazard mapping. 5. The extent to which the potential impacts of climate change are incorporated into the hazard mapping process also emerged as an issue. The hazard map is actually a static document. GIS Initiatives that provide real time data on climatic events that enable production of dynamic maps, as is now being done in Japan, would be more useful here. 6. The importance of institutional relationships, particularly of examining the roles and mandates of existing institutions as well as their capacities with respect to communication was discussed. Persons in the field with roles in the operation of early warning systems must be trained in the technical work in order to understand the information on water levels and other parameters that they are monitoring. 4.2.7 Recommendations I. Programmes and mechanisms must be established to build awareness in the communities and involve them in preparing and using the maps. This awareness should extend to prevention efforts and evacuation systems in the event of a flood. It is important for communities to be aware that maps coming from the communities for their own benefit. II. Mechanisms are needed to enable the sharing of the technical information and for building awareness among the experts about the use of the technical information to identify the needs for, and the use of, the flood hazard maps. III. Methodologies are needed for standardising map information and making it usable and useful at the community level. 15
IV. Devise strategies to address the issue of incomplete and inadequate data by establishing programmes of data collection as a normal process. V. Train community members, especially those with functions in the early warning systems, in the technical aspects of monitoring and managing information so that the reliability of these systems can be enhanced. VI. In order to sustain projects after the external assistance comes to an end, it is important to prepare a sustainability plan before the end of the project. This is being done by CDERA for CADM. Establishment of partnerships among institutions (e.g. CDERA, UWI, CIMH) will be effective not only for self-reliant implementation, but for sustainability in the future. The provision of equipment for the post-project period and training of technicians in its use is also critical, along with some mechanisms for ongoing financing of the work. In conclusion, the problems found in the three Caribbean pilot sites are similar to those faced in the four countries in Central America, particularly problems related to accuracy of the data and the use of satellite imagery to update data. Also, the experiences of other countries confirm the finding by end users that the existing hazard maps do not meet their needs at the local level. The methodologies used by Central America will be examined to find ways of enhancing the Caribbean methodologies and vice versa. In the long term feedback from all participants will contribute to finding ways of improving the methodologies. 4.3 Session 3: Incorporating Flood Hazard Mapping in Community Disaster Planning 4.3.1 Hazard Mapping and Community Disaster Planning This presentation placed community disaster management planning within the macro framework of overall disaster management, as well as its micro framework of community level disaster management planning. A conceptualization of CDM in the micro context is based on the understanding that communities are the victims of disasters as well as first responders in emergency situations. It deviates from traditional top-down approaches which tend to minimize community participation and, instead, promotes bottom-up approaches placing communities at the centre of input to management while also incorporating the contributions of science. The role of hazard mapping in community disaster management planning was reviewed. This includes enhancing awareness of vulnerability among local residents and providing information on inundation and evacuation strategies to be employed during flooding. The maps provide evacuation use information as 16