12th Ministerial Session EUR-OPA - Facing increased disasters and promoting prevention and response in a context of climate change

Session on ‘Placing people at the heart of resilience’

Themes ‘the human dimension’ and ‘disaster reduction and human rights’

St Petersburg, Russian Federation, 28 September 2010

Speech by Line Vennesland, member of the Committee on Sustainable Development of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe

“Human rights and the resilience of territories”

Mr President,

Ministers,

Excellencies,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

It is a great honour for me to address this Ministerial Session of the countries participating in the EUR-OPA Major Hazards Agreement. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities, which I represent today, and the EUR-OPA Agreement enjoy a long-standing relationship of close co-operation as we have common concerns for the well-being of our territorial communities, of our cities and regions, and common interest in improving their resilience to disasters.

It is also an honour to speak to you today because we in the Congress are convinced that national governments and local and regional authorities are natural and indispensable partners in assessing disaster risks, taking measures to reduce the vulnerability of communities and territories and to prepare them for possible calamities, finally, in managing disasters and mitigating their consequences.

This Session is taking place in a particular context, in the wake of unprecedented forest fires in this country. This emergency situation brought to the forefront not only the role and responsibility of local and regional authorities in disaster preparedness and management, but also the importance of the national/local partnership in the face of natural catastrophes. It has indeed highlighted the need for greater response capacities of our communities, which are directly linked to institutional capacity-building and the quality of governance at local and regional level.

Whereas it is the national government that must decide on the disaster prevention and reduction policy and demand that measures be taken to increase resilience of communities, it is at the level of cities and regions that such measures are put into practice. At the same time, national authorities must support local and regional communities in implementing these measures. In other words, if your house is on fire, you will not be calling the national capital but the local fire brigade – however, the national capital must make sure that local authorities have the competences and means to organise, train and equip this fire brigade. This is, in our view, the essence of the national/local partnership.

The Congress also places a particular emphasis on the direct involvement of territorial authorities in the elaborating of preventive and preparatory measures, and in the organisation of emergency and rescue services. They are best placed to know the terrain, the capacities and the needs of their communities in terms of equipment and human resources, which is why regular consultations with them are a necessary condition for the efficient coordination of efforts. At the same time, local and regional authorities must also be up-to-date with risk assessment for their municipalities and regions in order to target better their preventive and preparatory measures.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The main theme of this Session is ‘Placing people at the heart of resilience’. More specifically, its objective is to examine the human dimension of disaster reduction, and to look at the link that exists between the implementation of human rights and the resilience of our territories.

In the Congress, we strongly believe that there is a natural link between the two. First, because people, their concerns and their rights must be in the centre of any public action in a democracy. Second, because ensuring the safety of our citizens – which is the ultimate objective of disaster prevention and mitigation – means protecting their fundamental rights to life and physical integrity. Finally, because both the resilience of communities and the human rights implementation are conditioned by the same common denominator, which is good governance at national, regional and local level.

The quality of governance is clearly linked to the level of human rights realisation and, in turn, to the level of community development and disaster response capacity. There is a strong correlation between resilience and development, vulnerability and poverty.  In poor areas the impact of a natural disaster could be catastrophic and the capacity to reduce the risks is minimal. Suffice it to compare the consequences in terms of material damage and the loss of human life of two earthquakes of a similar magnitude: the one that struck Haiti and the one in Chile. In Europe, the vulnerability and resilience of the cities differ among countries and regions, depending not only on the level of economic growth achieved, but also on the natural risks mitigation policies and institutional capabilities.

Regional and local authorities being closest to the citizens are a key element in ensuring the delivery of good governance, and therefore have high institutional and legal responsibilities vis-à-vis our fellow citizens and before the law. Indeed, whereas management of natural disasters is the shared responsibility of different levels of government, citizens turn to local and regional authorities for the initial response, and the gravity of the human and material consequences of disasters depends to a large extent on their preparedness and the prevention measures they have taken. It is for this reason that our proposals for improving governance at local and regional level pay particular attention to building capacity to respond to natural and technological risks. Because in the face and in the wake of disasters, the capacity to respond is expressed in terms of the most precious asset – human life.

This is why the Congress has been emphasising the need for a new governance of risks involving all tiers of government – international, national, local and regional – which puts an emphasis on improving adaptive capacities of local and regional communities in response to the growing vulnerability of their cities and territories resilient.

In 2005, the Congress proposed 40 practical measures to prepare for and manage disasters and their consequences at local level, stressing the importance of a shared approach at all levels of governance. This shared approach is based on the premise that local and regional authorities obviously cannot face up to natural risks alone. The speed and effectiveness of their response is closely linked to co-ordination of the efforts of all levels of governance, which presupposes the rapid exchange of all relevant information and participation of the local and regional authorities in consultations and decision-making at all stages of disaster preparation and management.

We advocated direct involvement of the local and regional authorities in all aspects of planning and preparing a co-ordinated response to natural risks, consultation with them on spatial management issues in cases where the decision rests with the national level, and sharing with them of all information concerning the possible risks and their prevention. We called at the time for the development of a “risk culture” to help citizens to cope better with disasters. The Congress also called on national governments to set up programmes to promote greater public awareness, thus contributing to the development of this “risk culture”, and training programmes for local and regional elected representatives in management of emergency situations. Lastly, we stressed the need for a multidisciplinary approach to co-ordination of all the services called upon at different stages of disaster management.

In 2008, the Congress proposed a number of measures aimed at improving adaptive capacities of territorial communities in the face of disasters. Just yesterday, our Committee on Sustainable Development, meeting in Antalya, Turkey, approved texts that deal with the increasing threats to our communities from the sea. Our report addresses in particular the question of how climate change - through rising sea levels and extreme weather events - can directly or indirectly effect fundamental rights. It also outlines the ethical and moral aspects to protecting individuals against foreseeable threats.

All along, the Congress and the EUR-OPA Major Hazards Agreement have been enjoying a very close and fruitful co-operation in developing a new governance of natural risks, which was reflected in particular in the 2006 resolution on the role of local and regional authorities, adopted at the previous Ministerial Session in Marrakesh.

The Congress has also been following very closely the initiative of drafting a European and Mediterranean Ethical Charter on Resilience to Disasters. We believe that such a Charter can play an important role in affirming the link between disasters and human rights. As we all know, times of crises and emergency often open the door for corrupt practices, misuse of power and infringements on human rights, and the Charter will help to draw attention to these abuses and deal with them.

For its part, the Congress has been increasingly placing emphasis on ethical governance as a crucial element of good governance. Inasmuch as the quality of governance is a major contributing factor to greater resilience of our territories, through better management and stronger institutional and adaptive capacities, and inasmuch as a better human rights situation – ensured through good governance – means a more developed and therefore less vulnerable community, ethics and ethical principles are an underlying bedrock of the quality of governance itself. This is why they are directly relevant to disaster prevention and management, and must be applied in risk reduction policies.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I would like to conclude my intervention by pointing out that the issues we are discussing today take on a particular importance in the context of the major challenge that has shifted in our perception in the course of the past two decades from a distant threat to an everyday reality. I am speaking about climate change. Due to the consequences of global warming, the risks of natural or technological disasters today are considerably higher, and their intensity and frequency are growing. Climate change is already putting urban life at risk through rising sea levels, floods and increasing extreme weather events.

It is recognised that climate change has negative impacts on human rights but these are often determined by non-climatic factors, such as discrimination and unequal power relationships. Hence, it is essential that local and regional government policies – and in this case their risk management policies – should be coherent with overall human rights objectives. And it is therefore essential to integrate the human rights dimension into any action on climate and disaster prevention, bearing in mind that ensuring that must the right to a healthy environment for our citizens – which is an integral part of their fundamental rights – is the only way for a lasting and sustainable response to global warming.

These are the key components of our approach to the new governance of risks, a governance which will not be effective without the concerted efforts of all players – international, national, and territorial – and without the strong involvement of civil society and the economic sector to improve the well-being and quality of our citizens’ lives.

Ensuring the safety of citizens is a key element for the sustainable development of our societies, and hence of our mandate as local and regional elected representatives. It is precisely this safety which is jeopardised by natural and industrial disasters, and that is why risk governance remains central to our concerns. Because, at the end of the day, our prevention and response capacity saves lives.

Thank you.