Monday, October 1, 2012

As floods and drought worsen, short-sighted response is costing lives and squandering scarce aid money

Islamic Relief (UK): A new report from Islamic Relief to be published on October 1 says that while climate-related disasters are becoming more frequent and severe, a huge imbalance in disaster spending is costing lives and squandering scarce aid budgets. Feeling the Heat says providing protection against increasing droughts and floods is more effective and much less costly than waiting to act until disaster strikes – yet the world spends 23 times as much on emergency relief for the most disaster-prone countries as it spends on disaster risk reduction.

...Feeling the Heat challenges the UN, governments and aid agencies to completely rethink their priorities and put disaster risk reduction at the heart of all aid programmes. The report is being launched in the UK with fringe events on October 1 and 9 at the Labour and Conservative party conferences respectively, featuring first Shadow International Development Minister Rushanara Ali and then a Coalition Government representative in debate with Islamic Relief’s Shahnawaz Ali and Craig Bennett, Policy and Campaigns Director of Friends of the Earth.

The 44-page report – which was researched in association with nef (the new economics foundation) and includes positive examples from Islamic Relief projects in Bangladesh, Kenya, Pakistan and Mali – says that:
  • The number of climate-related disasters increased by an average of 4% a year from 1980 to 2010
  • In 2011 alone such disasters killed 27,000 people and cost $380 billion in economic losses. Their financial cost is doubling every 12 years
  • The richest countries suffer the highest incidence of natural disasters but only account for 7% of the death toll. Sixty-nine people died in the 1989 San Francisco earthquake, compared to 316,000 in a quake of similar intensity in Haiti in 2010
  • A dollar of spending on disaster risk reduction projects can deliver $15 worth of reduced disaster damage, according to US government research...

No comments: