Dara - HRI

Hurricanes Sweep Unchecked Through Poor Communities. “Being Prepared” Is Simply Not Enough

Interview with Sandra Zuñiga

On the 10th anniversary of Hurricane Mitch, Nicaragua’s Atlantic coast was pelted once again by a new hurricane. For Sandra Zúñiga, DARA delegate in Central America, the devastating effects of Hurricane Felix were a consequence of the structural and historical socio-economic exclusion that the area’s communities have suffered. According to Zuñiga, the populations’ vulnerability worsens the consequences of natural catastrophes, and these in turn, put the people at greater risk. Current challenges involve coordinating efforts that will enable these problems to be overcome.

Ten years after Hurricane Mitch swept through and destroyed much of Nicaragua, a new hurricane hits the same area. What is it that makes this region so vulnerable?

It’s important to point out that the media highlighted Hurricane Felix’s negative impact on the North Atlantic Autonomous Region (RAAN). However, in September and October of 2007, Nicaragua was also hit by a series of storms that had a severe impact on the northern, central and western regions. The magnitude of the damage cannot be analysed without taking into account our country’s vulnerability over many decades in the face of disasters, and particularly so in the Atlantic coast area. Hurricanes sweep through highly vulnerable towns and territories that historically have suffered problems such as extreme poverty, social exclusion, land misuse, deteriorated infrastructure and shoddy buildings. This is what has happened in RAAN, where the poverty and neglect that these people (mainly indigenous) have always suffered, were aggravated.

What lessons were learnt from Hurricane Mitch?

Hurricane Mitch taught us that it is the communities and municipalities who act first and mobilise immediately in order to save their families and neighbours and to protect their possessions. For example, during the hurricane, the mayor of Posoltega appealed for help from the government to rescue the people who’d been trapped and buried in the landslide on the Casitas Volcano. The President of the Republic, Arnoldo Alemán, accused the mayor of being “alarmist”. Subsequently, reports revealed that over 2,000 people had died. The consequences of Mitch provoked debate among the country’s social, political and economic sectors, including government organisations, NGOs and international organisations, on the situation relating to disaster risk management in Nicaragua. As a result of this increased interest, Law 337 was passed in March 2002, which led to the creation of the National System for Prevention, Mitigation and Attention to Disasters (SINAPRED). This resulted in a significant improvement in risk management in Nicaragua since it opened up the political arena to the idea of developing an overarching vision on risks in the country. Also, emphasis was placed on the prevention and mitigation of disasters and on the need to get all national and local institutions involved in SINAPRED.

Are there any initiatives that enable people to prepare themselves against this type of disaster?

Yes, initiatives on local risk management are being promoted by international institutions, national NGOs and by the communities themselves. Owing to the continual disasters that have affected the population, there is greater awareness of the need to make progress in terms of local and municipal organisation and strengthening. For example in recent years, through Civil Defence, SINAPRED has organised and capacitated the Municipal and Local Committees for Prevention, Mitigation and Attention to Disaster. However, these actions are still not enough. On the one hand, this is due to the fact that many are isolated activities, linked to projects that tend to be downsized once the money runs out. And on the other hand, because “being prepared” simply isn’t enough. We have to work towards forming policies, strategies and actions that will lead to risk reduction. In order to achieve this, national and municipal bodies as well as local communities, need to be able to identify, analyse and understand the risks we are facing and, in this way, launch initiatives that could reduce the likelihood of disasters happening. Unfortunately, in the region affected by the hurricane, initiatives are scarce for many reasons. First, increased costs due to the fact that these communities are remote and spread out; second, the high cost of petrol and transport. In addition, there is a lack of trained personnel in the area of risk management. The indigenous communities demand training materials translated into their language as well as translators on hand to take part in the training process. Nevertheless, despite these limitations, we can say that the experience we’ve accumulated has enabled us to learn and improve our work in the communities.

How effective was coordination among the humanitarian actors who worked in the area in the aftermath of Hurricane Felix?

In spite of the complexity of the region, every effort was made to coordinate the actions of the national and local authorities and international cooperation. You could say that cooperation responded in a timely and orderly manner with the funds available and this enabled it to work rapidly and assist the population in the days after the disaster. The regional government made efforts to coordinate information relating to the amount and the destination of the aid that arrived. With financial and technical assistance from the Pan American Health Organization, it used a system to control and organise the humanitarian aid that it received transparently and efficiently. However, political conflicts and mistrust, existing before Hurricane Felix among regional organisations and NGOs working in the area, hindered the coordination of aid distribution. This meant that NGOs concentrated their efforts solely on the communities where they were already present.

Many sectors have claimed that the humanitarian response was insufficient and that assistance did not reach remote areas. What were the main problems in this respect ?

The most far-flung rural communities received aid later because of their remoteness and poor access. And the sheer number of fallen trees on the roads was one of the main problems when it came to offering a prompt humanitarian response. In addition, the roads that connect the Pacific and Atlantic coasts were severely damaged. Humanitarian assistance had to be transported by air, but there was a shortage of air vehicles. One of the greatest difficulties was caused by the National Disaster Fund’s limited budget, and SINAPRED depends on these funds. The resources readily available for use are scarce and this makes our country dependent on the resources of international organisations and NGOs.

Do you think an adequate needs analysis was made?

SINAPRED immediately activated Sectorial Working Commissions, which in turn coordinated with the UN Agencies. The purpose of this joint effort was to analyse the territory’s needs in terms of humanitarian supplies, such as food, water and drainage, dwellings, temporary shelters and infrastructure. Despite these efforts, some institutional and organisational weaknesses in the regional government became apparent. A few days after the event, local communities demanded better coordination from the organisations and institutions responsible for compiling the information on damages and needs. This happened because the nearest communities had received repeated inquiries into their needs, while the more remote ones were excluded from this evaluation. This was the case of the town Krukira where, as Leticia Thomas of the Women’s Movement, Nidia White told us, a census was taken of the people affected and organised by age group and gender, highlighting the female household heads who needed prioritising. However, when it came time to distributing the aid, this information was not taken into account…

Six months on, what is the situation like in the area?

Despite the efforts of the central and regional governments, international organisations and civil society, RAAN communities continue to face food security problems. Homes damaged in rural areas are being rehabilitated although the reconstruction process is slower than in urban areas. Another looming problem is an upsurge in rodents, which increases the persistent attacks on the maize and bean crops. Also, over the last few days there have been forest fires caused by the large number of trees downed by the hurricane. In my opinion, one of the greatest challenges facing the government and organisations working in the affected areas is to take advantage of this situation to find solutions. There is an urgent need to debate the structural problems caused by the economic vulnerability and social exclusion that the region’s communities have suffered throughout recent history. This is an opportunity to coordinate efforts and make strategic decisions that will afford these communities the hope of a safer and brighter future.