9

GREEN
GUIDE TO

DISASTER RISK
REDUCTION

GREEN RECOVERY AND RECONSTRUCTION: TRAINING TOOLKIT FOR HUMANITARIAN AID

 The Green Recovery and Reconstruction Toolkit (GRRT)
is dedicated to the resilient spirit of people around the world
who are recovering from disasters. We hope that the GRRT
has successfully drawn upon your experiences in order to
ensure a safe and sustainable future for us all.
 9
GREEN
GUIDE TO

DISASTER RISK
REDUCTION
Charles Kelly, Consultant

NOTE TO USERS: The Green Recovery and Reconstruction Toolkit (GRRT) is a training program designed
to increase awareness and knowledge of environmentally sustainable disaster response approaches. Each
GRRT module package consists of (1) training materials for a workshop, (2) a trainer’s guide, (3) slides, and (4)
a technical content paper that provides background information for the training. This is the technical content
paper that accompanies the one-day training session on integrating environmentally sustainable approaches
into disaster risk reduction.

Cover photo © Mark Edwards/WWF-Canon

© 2010 World Wildlife Fund, Inc. and 2010 American National Red Cross. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit [Link]
org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California,
94105, USA.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Project Manager Jonathan Randall, World Wildlife Fund

Training Specialist Paul Thompson, InterWorks LLC

Creative Director Melissa Carstensen, QueenBee Studio

Advisory Committee Erika Clesceri, U.S. Agency for International Development

Veronica Foubert, Sphere
Christie Getman, American Red Cross
Ilisa Gertner, American Red Cross
Chris Herink, World Vision
Emma Jowett, Consultant
Charles Kelly, Consultant
Robert Laprade, American Red Cross
Anita van Breda, World Wildlife Fund
Expert Reviewers
Joseph Ashmore, Consultant Judy Oglethorpe, World Wildlife Fund
Rick Bauer, Oxfam-UK Robert Ondrusek, International Federation of Red Cross
Gina Castillo, Oxfam-America and Red Crescent Societies
Prem Chand, RedR-UK Adrian Ouvry, Danish Refugee Council
Scott Chaplowe, International Federation of Red Cross Megan Price, RedR-UK
and Red Crescent Societies Catherine Russ, RedR-UK
Marisol Estrella, United Nations Environment Programme Graham Saunders, International Federation of Red
Chiranjibi Gautam, United Nations Environment Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Programme Ron Savage, U.S. Agency for International Development
Toby Gould, RedR-UK Hari Shrestha, Save the Children
Tek Gurung, United Nations Environment Programme Rod Snider, American Red Cross
Yohannes Hagos, American Red Cross Margaret Stansberry, American Red Cross
James Kennedy, Consultant Karen Sudmeier, International Union for Conservation
Earl Kessler, Consultant of Nature
John Matthews, World Wildlife Fund Nigel Timmins, Tearfund
Andrew Morton, United Nations Environment Programme Muralee Thummarukudy, United Nations
Radhika Murti, International Union for Conservation Environment Programme
of Nature Anne-Cécile Vialle, United Nations
Marcos Neto, CARE Environment Programme
Jacobo Ocharan, Oxfam-America

Special Thanks
The development of the GRRT has truly been a collaborative process and could not have been done without an
extraordinary team of international experts from the humanitarian and environmental sectors. Over the course of
a two-year development process, the GRRT was built on the diverse experiences of over 15 technical authors and
training specialists, over 30 expert reviewers, and a dedicated team of graphic designers and copy editors. Special
thanks go to Paul Thompson whose depth of experience in humanitarian training helped to shape this project and
whose commitment made it a reality. Thanks to Anita van Breda, Robert Laprade, and Ilisa Gertner for their insight,
ideas, and time spent reviewing many rounds of drafts. Special acknowledgement goes to the participants of the
GRRT pilot workshops in Sri Lanka and Indonesia for all of their excellent feedback. Special thanks also goes to
Gerald Anderson, Marcia Marsh, Alicia Fairfield, Achala Navaratne, Julia Choi, Bethany Shaffer, Owen Williams,
Brad Dubik, Leah Kintner, Tri Agung Rooswiadji, Tom Corsellis, Eric Porterfield, Brittany Smith, Sri Eko Susilawati,
Jan Hanus and Manishka de Mel. –Jonathan Randall, WWF
MODULE 9: GREEN GUIDE TO DISASTER RISK REDUCTION

Table of Contents
1 Introduction.............................................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Module Objectives.............................................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 The Green Recovery and Reconstruction Toolkit............................................................................................. 1

1.3 Intended Audience............................................................................................................................................. 1

1.4 Module Key Concepts........................................................................................................................................ 1

1.5 Module Assumptions.......................................................................................................................................... 2

1.6 Key Module Definitions...................................................................................................................................... 3

2 Project Cycle and Disaster Risk Reduction ............................................................................................... 4

3 Linking the Environment with Disaster Risk Reduction............................................................................. 6

4 Integrating the Environment into Disaster Risk Reduction Assessments and Design................................ 9

5 Ecosystem-Based Activities for Reducing Disaster Risk.......................................................................... 13

6 Environmental Implications of Disaster Risk Reduction Activities........................................................... 18

Annex 1. Relevant Agencies and Sources of Information.......................................................................... 21

Glossary..................................................................................................................................................... 23

Acronyms................................................................................................................................................... 30
1

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Module Objectives

This module is intended to increase the knowledge of disaster risk reduction (DRR) specialists with respect
to the integration of environmental considerations in disaster preparedness, mitigation, risk assessment, and
risk reduction.

Specific learning objectives for this module are as follows:

1. Describe the ways in which disaster risk and environmental conditions are linked.
2. Integrate environmental issues into typical disaster risk reduction assessments.
3. Identify a set of ecosystem-based activities that can reduce risk and enhance
disaster risk reduction programs.
4. Describe how disaster risk reduction activities can have negative impacts on the
environment and how these impacts can be mitigated.

1.2 The Green Recovery and Reconstruction Toolkit

This is Module 9 in a series of 10 modules comprising the Green Recovery and Reconstruction Toolkit (GRRT).
Collectively, the GRRT modules provide information and guidelines to improve project outcomes for people
and communities recovering from disaster by minimizing harm to the environment and taking advantage of
opportunities to improve the environment. Module 1 provides a brief introduction to the concept of green
recovery and reconstruction to help make communities stronger and more resilient to future disasters by
integrating environmental issues into the recovery process. GRRT Module 2 provides guidance on how project
design, monitoring, and evaluation can better incorporate and address environmental issues within the typical
project cycle. GRRT Module 3 builds upon Module 2, focusing specifically on assessment tools that can be
used to determine the environmental impact of humanitarian projects regardless of the type of project or
sector. GRRT Modules 4, 5, and 6 pertain specifically to building construction, with Module 4 focusing on site
planning and development, Module 5 on building materials and the supply chain, and Module 6 on building
design and construction management. GRRT Modules 7 through 10 provide sector-specific information to
complement Modules 2 and 3, including livelihoods, disaster risk reduction, water and sanitation, and greening
organizational operations.

1.3 Intended Audience

Module 9 is intended for DRR managers, planners, and field staff; hazard-risk assessment teams; and other
practitioners responsible for planning and implementing post-disaster recovery and reconstruction efforts.

1.4 Module Key Concepts

1. DRR and the environment are linked. In many cases, the root cause of disaster
risk is a degraded environment. The use of environmental management to
reduce disaster impact is often less costly, more effective, and more socially
sustainable than more traditional structural measures. When structural disaster
risk reduction activities are used, however, it is critical that they address
 [ GREEN GUIDE TO DISASTER RISK REDUCTION ] 2

environmental sustainability so that future risk is not increased and neighboring

communities are not adversely affected.
2. Risk assessments should include environmental considerations and
participatory involvement of disaster-threatened communities. There are a
number of procedures and tools used for a participatory assessment of disaster
risk, including capacity and vulnerability assessment and community-based
disaster risk assessment. Root cause analysis is essential to an understanding
of the underlying causes of vulnerability, and to addressing these causes in
the risk reduction process. In order to address root causes of disaster risk, it is
important to consider the extent to which a community’s disaster risk is linked
with environmental management practices (e.g., increased flood risk that is
caused by the conversion of natural landscapes to agricultural areas). The use
of participatory assessment tools is critical for successful risk reduction, as it
is individual communities and members who are directly affected by disaster
risk and who need to take action to reduce this risk. It is unlikely that risk
reduction efforts will be successful without local participation and support
during the assessment stage. In terms of environment-based risk reduction, local
participation is critical to success, as environment-based approaches require
a holistic approach and may require short-term reductions in access to natural
resources. Such efforts will not succeed without local agreement.
3. There is a set of ecosystem-based activities for risk reduction that should be
considered alongside more conventional, infrastructure-based activities. A
few examples include stabilizing hillsides with vegetation, creating open spaces
to absorb floodwaters, and restoring mangrove cover for coastal protection
against storm surge. These approaches can be an integral part of disaster risk
reduction planning that would also include early warning systems, response
capacity, and infrastructure-based approaches.
4. Environment-based DRR should be integrated into development
programming as well as pre- and post-disaster humanitarian action. Much
of disaster management involves actions that reduce the risk from immediate
disaster impacts, such as warning and evacuation systems, capacity building,
and structural measures to limit hazard impacts (e.g., embankments and flood-
prevention walls). DRR needs to be an integral part of humanitarian action and
development programming, where potential risks are identified and addressed
through the action provided. These longer-term risk assessment and reduction
efforts should include the environment as a source both of hazards and the
means to reduce or avoid disaster impacts.

1.5 Module Assumptions

This module is intended to increase the knowledge of DRR specialists with respect to the integration of
environmental considerations in risk assessment and risk reduction. The workshop participants are expected
to have a strong grounding in DRR, including knowledge of community-based disaster risk assessment and
reduction tools and procedures. The authors of this module acknowledge that there is a variety of terminology
describing the elements of disaster risk management. This module focuses on the environmental issues
associated with the risk assessment process and risk reduction activities (i.e., mitigation).
3

1.6 Key Module Definitions

The following are key terms used in this module. A full list of terms is contained in the Glossary.

Climate change: The climate of a place or region is considered to have changed if over an extended period
(typically decades or longer) there is a statistically significant change in measurements of either the mean state
or the variability of the climate for that place or region. Changes in climate may be due to natural processes or
to persistent anthropogenic changes in atmosphere or in land use.

Disaster preparedness: Activities designed to minimize loss of life and damage; organize the temporary
removal of people and property from a threatened location; and facilitate timely and effective rescue, relief,
and rehabilitation.

Disaster risk: Potential disaster losses in lives, health status, livelihoods, assets, and services that could occur
to a particular community or a society over some specified future time period. Risk can be expressed as a
simple mathematical formula: Risk = Hazard X Vulnerability. This formula illustrates the concept that the greater
the potential occurrence of a hazard and the more vulnerable a population, the greater the risk.

Disaster risk reduction: The practice of reducing disaster risks through systematic efforts to analyze and
manage the causal factors of disasters, including reduced exposure to hazards, lessened vulnerability of people
and property, wise management of land and the environment, and improved preparedness for adverse events.

Ecosystem: Dynamic complexes of plants, animals, and other living communities and the nonliving
environment interacting as functional units. Humans are an integral part of ecosystems.

Hazard: A potentially damaging physical event, phenomenon, or human activity that may cause the loss of
life or injury, property damage, social and economic disruption, or environmental degradation. Hazards can
include latent conditions that may represent future threats and can have different origins: natural (geological,
hydrometeorological, and biological) or induced by human processes (environmental degradation and
technological hazards).

Resilience: The capacity of a system, community, or society potentially exposed to hazards to adapt, by
resisting or changing, in order to reach and maintain an acceptable level of functioning and structure.
This is determined by the degree to which the social system is capable of organizing itself to increase
its capacity for learning from past disasters for better future protection and to improve risk reduction
measures.

Vulnerability: Human vulnerability is the relative lack of capacity of a person or community to anticipate, cope
with, resist, and recover from the impact of a hazard. Structural or physical vulnerability is the extent to which
a structure or service is likely to be damaged or disrupted by a hazard event. Community vulnerability exists
when the elements at risk are in the path or area of the hazard and are susceptible to damage by it. The losses
caused by a hazard, such as a storm or earthquake, will be proportionally much greater for more vulnerable
populations, e.g., those living in poverty, with weak structures, and without adequate coping strategies.
 [ GREEN GUIDE TO DISASTER RISK REDUCTION ] 4

2 PROJECT CYCLE AND DISASTER RISK REDUCTION

In planning and carrying out their disaster response activities, many humanitarian agencies follow a standard
project management cycle, as shown in Figure 1.

FIGURE 1: STANDARD PROJECT MANAGEMENT CYCLE

1
INITIAL
ASSESSMENT
2
PROBLEM/
6
STAKEHOLDER
EVALUATION /
ANALYSIS
LESSONS LEARNED

5
3
MONITORING
PROJECT
4
DESIGN
IMPLEMENTATION

The focus is often on DRR in disaster preparedness (e.g., early warning, evacuation planning) and in
post-disaster response (integrating DRR into recovery). DRR should be integrated into all stages of
disaster response and development activities.

In developing DRR projects, there are opportunities throughout the project cycle for introducing and
reinforcing the principles of environmental sustainability as shown in Figure 2.

At the Initial Assessment phase, it is important to understand the root causes of the disaster risks facing a
community and to determine if there are environmental links. For example, if a community identifies flooding
as a hazard, examine if there are environmental factors, such as deforestation, that are contributing to the
risk. Similarly, if there are environmental factors that are strengthening resilience, such as the availability of
natural resources (e.g., fish) for livelihoods, these should be noted as well. A more detailed discussion about
integrating the environment into Disaster Risk Reduction Assessments is contained in Section 3.

During the Problem/Stakeholder Analysis phase, it is important to engage a wide range of relevant stakeholders,
the community in particular, to better understand the environmental context and the major actors in the project
area. This will also help with buy-in for the long-term success of the project. Communities should be asked,
specifically, what environmental issues are most important to them. In addition, environmental expertise should
be accessed from NGOs, as well as from government environmental and natural resource ministries to better
understand local context and increase participation in DRR.

During the Project Design and Implementation phases, the project designers should be sure to consider all of
the alternatives for reducing disaster risks, including structural and nonstructural solutions. Ecosystem-based
solutions such as mangrove rehabilitation should be considered as part of this process. The environmental
impacts of implementing a DRR project (such as building a flood wall or raising houses) should be considered
and minimized in order to reduce future risk and vulnerability.
5

FIGURE 2: PROJECT CYCLE WITH OPPORTUNITIES FOR INTRODUCING ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

PRINCIPLES INTO DISASTER RISK REDUCTION PROJECTS

• Identify root causes of disaster risk

• Modify project as necessary to
improve performance • Identify key environmental resources that support resiliency
(e.g. forests stabilizing slopes, wetlands reducing coastal
• Transfer lessons learned to flooding)
other projects
• Identify linkages between community’s well being and
their environment

1
• Ensure project adheres
INITIAL
to the original design
ASSESSMENT
• Monitor DRR 2 • Consult community regarding
PROBLEM/ risks and root causes of
intervention to see 6
STAKEHOLDER disaster
that no new EVALUATION /
ANALYSIS
environmental LESSONS LEARNED
• Consult community about
problems are created environmental issues they
and existing problems have identified
are reduced. 5
3 • Ensure hazard mapping
• Ensure construction MONITORING
PROJECT explicitly includes
staff follow better 4
DESIGN environmental hazards
management policies IMPLEMENTATION
and opportunities

• Ensure construction staff for structural DRR

projects follow better management practices
including 1) site planning and layout; 2) materials • Consider all alternatives for reducing disaster risk,
handling; 3) equipment handling; 4) waste including ecosystem-based techniques such as
handling; 5) pollution prevention; 6) workforce wetland restoration
training and equipment • Design project to minimize environmental impacts
• Add environmental specifications to terms (e.g., does the design of flood walls take into account
of reference downstream impacts?)

• Train construction staff on better

management practices
• Include consideration of environmental issues
in training and capacity-building programs

During the Monitoring phase, the project should be reviewed to ensure that it meets the original specifications
of the design and the project performance objectives. The results of the Monitoring phase can be used by
project managers to adapt the project as needed during implementation. For example, if a sea wall project
is helping one community but increasing flooding in a neighboring community, then the project should
be adapted as necessary. The Monitoring phase also informs the Evaluation phase (e.g., midterm and final
evaluations) to track the project’s progress in meeting objectives. Specific indicators in the project logframe
and/or Monitoring and Evaluation plan related to environmental sustainability will help to ensure that the
project achieves its sustainability objectives. The integration of DRR into projects is a more cost-effective and
efficient way to reduce the impacts of disasters and improve the environmental sustainability of the recovery
and reconstruction process.
 [ GREEN GUIDE TO DISASTER RISK REDUCTION ] 6

3 LINKING THE ENVIRONMENT WITH DISASTER RISK REDUCTION

The environment has a significant role to play in reducing the risk of disasters and reducing the impact of
disasters once they occur. Well-managed ecosystems can reduce the risk of hazards, such as landslides,
flooding, avalanches, and storm surges.1 Many disasters are either caused or exacerbated by environmental
degradation. For example, the creation of drought conditions and the relative severity and length of time the
drought lasts are mainly natural phenomena. But drought conditions may be exacerbated by environmental
degradation resulting from poor cropping patterns, overgrazing, the stripping of topsoil, poor conservation
techniques, depletion of both surface and subsurface water supplies, and unchecked urbanization.2 Similarly,
the root causes of many human conflicts are conflicts over natural resources, such as timber in Liberia, water in
Bolivia, and diamonds in Sierra Leone.3

Protecting and restoring ecosystems is a project activity that disaster risk reduction managers can use
alongside of other DRR techniques like the construction of drainage infrastructure, early warning systems, and
training and capacity building. For instance, wetlands can be used as flood-retention areas – a use similar to
their natural function – or vegetation can be used to stabilize erosion-prone slopes. Environment-based risk
reduction interventions can have a lower cost and lower maintenance requirements than do traditional
engineered interventions, such as concrete floodwalls. According to the World Bank, investments in
preventive measures, including maintenance of healthy ecosystems, are seven-fold less costly than the
cost incurred by disasters.4

The extent to which an ecosystem will buffer against natural hazards and contribute to reducing risk depends
on the ecosystem’s health and the intensity of the event. Degraded ecosystems can sometimes still play a
buffering role, although to a much lesser extent than fully functioning ecosystems.5

1 Sudmeier-Rieux, K. and N. Ash. 2009. Environmental Guidance Note for Disaster Risk Reduction: Healthy Ecosystems for
Human Security. Revised Ed. Gland: IUCN.
2 International Institute of Rural Reconstruction and Save the Children USA. 2007. Leaving Disasters Behind: A guide to
disaster risk reduction in Ethiopia. Nairobi and Addis Ababa.
3 Homer-Dixon, Thomas. 1999. Environment, scarcity, and violence. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
4 World Bank. 2004. Natural Disasters: Counting the Cost. Press release, March 2, 2004.
5 Sudmeier-Rieux, K. and N. Ash. 2009. Environmental Guidance Note for Disaster Risk Reduction: Healthy Ecosystems for
Human Security. Revised Ed. Gland: IUCN.
7

PAKISTAN: EARTHQUAKE AND LANDSLIDES

“In this once-remote region, loss of green cover from commercial logging, local cutting, and overgrazing has made
the land less compact and less able to retain water, which now rushes easily down mountainsides to set off slides that
some call ‘ecological land mines.’” Nithin Sethi, of the Delhi-based Centre for Science and Technology
“If there had been more trees, we would not have lost as much. The impact would not have been as great. It is our
mistake.” Qayoon Shah, teacher at the Jabla village school
Pakistan’s geographical position makes it subject to a number of natural hazards, of which flooding, earthquakes,
cyclones, and drought/heat waves are the most significant. The earthquake hazard in the Himalaya Mountains is
particularly high, due to tectonic movement. Scientists had been predicting a major earthquake in the region for
several years, a prediction that came tragically true on October 8, 2005, when Pakistan experienced one of the
greatest natural disasters in the region in recorded history. The epicenter of the earthquake, which measured 7.6 on
the Richter scale, was in the district of Muzaffarabad, in Azad Jammu Kashmir (AJK), but its effects were felt over an
area of approximately 30,000 km2 in AJK and the North Western Frontier Province (NWFP).
The October earthquake, being natural in origin, was unavoidable. However, the extent of damage that was caused
to human life and property could be attributed to socio-ecological causes, having its roots in policies and actions
related to human use of the mountains and their natural resources. Despite the known likelihood of major earthquakes
hitting the region, there has been little thought given to mitigation of impacts, and the vulnerability of Pakistan to
disaster has been exacerbated by unchecked urban development and extensive deforestation. Large parts of the area
affected by the earthquake, for example, have lost considerable forest cover over the last few decades as a result of
encroachment, illegal logging, and agriculture – increasing the likelihood of landslides. Today, forests cover about 11
percent of AJK compared with nearly 30 percent in 1947; in NWFP, a study in the Hazara Division found a 52 percent
decline in forest resources between 1967 and 1992. AJK is particularly known for its high-quality cedar wood, which
had been generating income from timber for decades until a government decision to ban felling in 1997. However,
the extraction of “dead, decayed, or diseased” trees allowed deforestation to continue, and with fines for illegal
felling at less than US$10 a tree, many villagers continue to use wood for building and fuel.
The commitment of the government of Pakistan to increase the country’s area of natural forests has been stated in
several policy documents such as the National Environmental Policy 2005 and the Pakistan Poverty Reduction Strategy
Paper (PRSP-2003); however, activities on the ground do not always seem to be in line with this policy (e.g.. a proposed
development project within the only remaining intact area of the Blue Pine ecosystem in one of the best remaining
Himalayan temperate forest areas in Punjab).
The effect of human interference on the environment, and in particular depletion of the forest cover, was studied in
relation to landslides around Dehra Dun and Mussoorie in Uttar Pradesh in the Indian part of the Himalaya. Land use
and land cover data for a period of 60 years were analyzed. The study found that forested areas accounted for only
9 percent of landslide occurrence, whilst about 60 per cent of the landslides were in nonforested areas that were
forested in 1930. That forest clearing accelerates erosion, and thus causes landslides in mountainous terrain, has been
discussed for more than a century.
The restoration of vegetation cover will take a long time to decrease landslide risk. A study of the environmental
changes in three severely degraded watersheds in the Chamoli district (Central Himalaya) has concluded that even
after 20 years of restoration, there is only a marginal reduction in landslide activity. In this case, the stabilization
process of the active landslide zones seems to have been quite slow due to the presence of sheared carbonate rocks.
Any restoration of forest areas in these highly vulnerable areas will thus have to consider the best way to achieve
stabilization as quickly as possible. Experts have suggested that although natural regeneration should be used as
much as possible, the plantation and direct sowing of trees, shrubs, and pasture herbs and grasses will enhance
the revegetation process of the bare soil. Land-use planning is therefore a key issue in the creation of any kind of
environmental stability in the area. Although restoration of forest resources is important, one of the most important
land use decisions that needs to be made is the effective protection of the forest cover that remains.
Source: Stolton, S., N. Dudley, and J. Randall. 2008. Natural Security: Protected areas and hazard mitigation.
 [ GREEN GUIDE TO DISASTER RISK REDUCTION ] 8

While the use of the environment has considerable scope in risk reduction, two significant challenges exist.
First, environment-based risk reduction needs to be grounded in the best possible understanding of the
natural environment and the local context. Structural DRR methods such as floodwalls and storm channels
require engineering expertise. Similarly, environment-based risk reduction requires consultation with
environmental specialists. For instance, use of wetlands to manage flooding needs to incorporate a clear
understanding of the frequency, duration, magnitude, and return period of the floods to be managed. If these
factors are not accurately included in the design of a risk mitigation activity, then the activity may not, in fact,
fully mitigate the expected floods. The result is a false sense of safety and the likelihood of needless loss of life
and livelihoods when flooding does occur.

Second, risks change as society and the environment change. For instance, increased urbanization can
increase the likelihood of flash flooding even in areas where river flooding may have been managed in an
environmentally sustainable manner. As a result, risk reduction interventions need to be designed for change
and periodically reviewed to ensure that they remain effective against targeted, newly emergent risks, including
changes in socioeconomic and political systems.

If efforts to reduce disaster risks do not take into account the impact on the environment, root causes
of risk that link to the environment, and the sustainability of risk reduction activities, risk reduction
efforts will likely fail. Risk reduction efforts themselves need to be screened for environmental consequences,
because poorly planned risk reduction activities can have negative impacts on the environment and will
adversely impact people by increasing risk and vulnerability.

When conducting a disaster risk reduction assessment, it is important to consider the environmental factors that
contribute to vulnerability. As shown in this picture from Pakistan after the 2005 earthquake, temporary shelter has
been located in a hazard-prone area within a riverbed. Environmental factors that could contribute to vulnerability in
this picture include modification of the river upstream that can increase flooding downstream, removal of vegetation
along the riverbanks that can increase river flow and velocity, and steep slopes that increase the risk of landslides.
© Karl Schuler/IUCN-Pakistan
9

4 INTEGRATING THE ENVIRONMENT INTO DISASTER RISK REDUCTION ASSESSMENTS AND DESIGN
As defined by the UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction, a disaster risk reduction assessment is
a method for determining the nature and extent of risk. A DRR assessment analyzes potential hazards and
evaluates existing conditions of vulnerability that could pose a potential threat or harm to people, property,
and livelihoods, as well as the environment on which these things depend.6 The assessment typically consists of
three components: 1) a hazard assessment to determine the characteristics, frequency, forewarning, duration,
causes, and effects of hazards facing a community (e.g., drought, flood, wildfire); 2) a vulnerability assessment
to determine who and what is vulnerable, their level of vulnerability (e.g., high, moderate, low), and the
underlying reasons for the vulnerability (e.g., 15 families are highly vulnerable to flood damages because they
live alongside a stream channel); and 3) a capacity assessment to determine a community’s existing capacities
to cope with a hazard and any gaps in the capacities. In addition to these three standard components, most
disaster risk reduction assessments include an action plan specifying what types of activities need to be
undertaken to increase a community’s capacity to respond to threats and reduce its vulnerability. The disaster
risk facing a community is typically defined as the potential disaster losses, in lives, health status, livelihoods,
assets, and services, that could occur to a particular community or a society over some specified future time
period. Risk can be expressed as a simple formula: Risk = Hazard X Vulnerability.

At each stage in the typical disaster risk reduction assessment process, there are opportunities to integrate
environmental concerns in order to ensure the long-term sustainability of the DRR intervention. These are
described in the following table.

TABLE 1: ENVIRONMENTAL INTERVENTION POINTS IN THE DRR PROCESS

DRR COMPONENT ENVIRONMENTAL INTERVENTION POINTS

HAZARD Hazards are potentially dangerous or damaging events that negatively affect lives, property,
ASSESSMENT and/or activities. Hazards can be divided into natural hazards (e.g., earthquakes, floods,
wildfires, epidemic diseases) and human-made hazards (e.g., conflict, industrial pollution
from nuclear or chemical wastes, and environmental degradation). A hazard assessment
should examine root causes of these hazards to see if they are related to environmental
management. For example, if communities identify that flooding is a concern, the hazard
assessment team should determine if environmental factors such as deforestation, road
construction, urbanization, or topsoil removal are contributing to the root cause of the
disaster. This type of analysis will reveal opportunities for addressing root causes by
implementing ecosystem-based DRR activities as further described in Section 5.

6 U.N. International Strategy for Disaster Reduction. Terminology of disaster risk reduction. [Link]/eng/library/lib-
terminology-eng%[Link] (Accessed on April 1, 2010)
 [ GREEN GUIDE TO DISASTER RISK REDUCTION ] 10

DRR COMPONENT ENVIRONMENTAL INTERVENTION POINTS

VULNERABILITY Vulnerability is the degree to which individuals, households, communities, or geographical

ASSESSMENT areas are likely to be affected by disaster when hazardous events occur. Communities living in
hazard-prone areas may be made susceptible because of physical factors (e.g., location and
disaster-resistance of buildings), weak social organization, limited economic opportunities,
political processes, and other factors, including the integrity of natural resources.7 When
conducting the vulnerability assessment, project planners should be sure to consider the
environmental factors of vulnerability. These include:
Extent of natural resource depletion in the area. If livelihoods are based on natural
resources such as fish, and fish stocks have been depleted, then it will be harder for
fishermen to recover their livelihoods after the disaster, and they and their families will be
more vulnerable. Similarly, if building materials such as timber and sand are already locally
depleted, it will be costly and time consuming to reconstruct infrastructure after a disaster.
Local communities will be dependent on outside suppliers for critical needs.
Loss of resilience of the ecological systems. Coastal vegetation and wetland buffers
can play important roles in the protection of coastal communities from storm surge during
cyclones and other storm events. If these systems are degraded, then communities will be
more vulnerable to disaster impacts.
Exposure to toxic and hazardous pollutants. Populations that have been under exposure
to toxic or hazardous pollutants prior to the disaster will have added difficulty recovering
because their health may already be compromised. Disaster events may also further
distribute these pollutants within the community and environment, resulting in contamination
of soil and water resources.

CAPACITY Capacities are a combination of all the strengths and resources available within a community,
ASSESSMENT society, or organization that can reduce the level of risk, or the effects of a disaster. They
can include the physical, institutional, social, or economic means as well as skilled personal
or collective attributes such as leadership and management.8 The capacity assessment
represents an opportunity for DRR project managers to identify the root causes of hazards
and to see if there are linkages with environmental management. If it is determined that
environmental degradation is contributing to hazard risk, then the capacity assessment
can help determine what physical, institutional, social, or economic means can be used or
enhanced, through DRR interventions, to address this problem.

ACTION Most assessments are undertaken with the idea that they will lead to action. With respect to
PLANNING integrating the environment into DRR action plans, there are two main points to consider:
1. In all DRR activities, project planners should make sure that the intervention does not
negatively impact the environment, in keeping with the principles of “Do No Harm.” This is
particularly the case for infrastructure-based DRR activities, such as road construction, dam
building, drainage systems, floodwalls, seawalls, and building relocations.
2. DRR project planners should consider ecosystem-based activities for reducing disaster risk.
These include such things as implementing restoration programs (e.g., mangrove planting),
setting aside conservation areas (e.g., establishing coastal and river buffer zones), and raising
awareness about the importance of good environmental management.

78

7 International Institute of Rural Reconstruction and Save the Children USA. 2007. Leaving Disasters Behind: A guide to
disaster risk reduction in Ethiopia. Nairobi and Addis Ababa.
8 UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction. Terminology of disaster risk reduction. [Link]/eng/library/lib-
terminology-eng%[Link] (Accessed on April 25, 2010)
11

A full discussion of capacity and vulnerability analysis can be found on the ProVention Consortium Web
site, together with a community risk tool kit and specific information on community-based disaster risk
management.9 Specific community-level risk mapping and risk management tools have been developed by
the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) (Capacity/Vulnerability Analysis10),
Oxfam,11 and the Asian Disaster Preparedness Center,12 among others.

In addition to the capacity and vulnerability analyses developed by DRR practitioners mentioned above, there
have also been several tools developed by climate adaptation practitioners that address both climate change
adaptation and disaster risk reduction in the context of better environmental management. A discussion of
how to integrate climate change adaptation into disaster risk reduction can be found in the box on the
following page.

The Community-Based Risk Screening Tool – adaptation and livelihoods (CRiSTAL)13 is a tool designed to
help project planners and managers integrate climate change adaptation and risk reduction into community-
level projects.

9 [Link]
10 [Link]
11 [Link]/themes/default/pdfs/CRA/[Link]
12 [Link]/v2007/Programs/CBDRM/[Link]
13 [Link]

Wildfire is one type of hazard that is typically considered in a disaster risk reduction assessment. The vulnerability
and capacity components of the assessment should include an analysis of the natural resources upon which people’s
livelihoods depend that can help make communities more resilient in times of disaster. In this photograph, a Kobu
tribesman in Sumatra, Indonesia, watches a burning jungle which has been used by generations for hunting and
medicinal plants. © Mark Edwards/WWF-Canon
 [ GREEN GUIDE TO DISASTER RISK REDUCTION ] 12

GUIDANCE FOR INTEGRATING CLIMATE ADAPTATION INTO DISASTER RISK REDUCTION ASSESSMENTS AND
PROJECT DESIGN

The recovery and reconstruction period after disasters is an important opportunity for project planners to incorporate
climate adaptation into their recovery activities to make projects more resilient to a changing climate and reduce
future disaster risk. There are two main categories of climate adaptation: facilitating transitions to new conditions,
and building resilience and buying time to adapt to extreme weather events. Facilitating transitions to new
conditions is needed when what people once knew as “normal” is no longer the norm, such as occurs with changes
in freshwater systems due to melting of snow packs and sea level rise. Building resilience to extreme weather events
helps people and nature withstand shocks after extreme events such as severe storms, drought, or flood. In practice,
one or both of these approaches may be needed in a particular part of the world; building resilience can be a short-
term measure while in the longer term a transition is needed to a new state – buying time in order to facilitate change.
Many of the DRR measures proposed in this module can be applied to help build resilience to climate variability and
climate change, once it has been ascertained how people and ecosystems are vulnerable to climate. Because of
the difficulty in discerning day-to-day impacts of long-term changes at the local level, it is often more practical and
efficient to prioritize immediate and short-term impacts. If communities build capacity to manage and reduce risks in
the short term, they should be more empowered to take similar actions in the future. When developing adaptation
strategies, it is important to find out what indigenous strategies already exist to withstand shocks, as well as to bring
in new technologies that may help communities to cope with conditions they have never seen before (for example,
new strains of crops or breeds of livestock that can withstand larger climate fluctuations; environmentally sound water
conservation technologies for extreme droughts; or alternative livelihoods or energy technologies to take pressure off
forests, enabling them to recover so that there is less risk of future landslides caused by more intense rainfall). In areas
that have recently suffered flood damage, and that are expected to become more prone to flooding due to climate
change, there is a good opportunity to develop zoning plans that accommodate larger floods in the future.
Microcredit and insurance are important ways to reduce risk in the context of climate change, and help tide
people over future shocks so that they are less likely to fall back on the environment and use it in unsustainable
ways. Equitable access to land and resources helps build resilience to climate change and enable poor
households to withstand and recover from shocks. It is very important to promote good governance and
strengthen community institutions – and to create early warning systems that are appropriate for local conditions.
Loss of natural resource species of local importance (for livelihoods, economic development, source of food security,
or medicines) is a risk under climate change, as species ranges will shift with new conditions. We know that some
areas act as refugia, enabling species to survive in a region when they disappear from surrounding areas: for example,
a deep valley that is cooler than the surrounding areas, an area of higher ground, a section of coral reef with cooler
currents, or an inland mangrove zone. Depending on local conditions, there may be needs and opportunities to set
aside land or marine areas as refugia in which species can continue to survive, and where limited and sustainable
harvesting may still be possible. If an integrated ecosystems-livelihoods vulnerability assessment has been done, it
may indicate likely areas of refugia. Strong efforts should be made to conserve these refugia and their wild species.
Consider this climate adaption checklist when designing disaster risk reduction assessments and projects:
❑❑ Project planners have contacted local government officials or experts to determine the predicted impacts of climate
change within the project area.
❑❑ The project includes specific measures to address predicted changes in climate extremes in the next 5-10 years
(e.g., worsening drought, greater frequency of flooding, more intense cyclones).
❑❑ The project design considers the consequences of longer-term, regional climate change effects (e.g., heat stress
from rising temperatures, reduced stream flow due to loss of snow pack, sea level rise from melting ice caps).
❑❑ Alternative activities have been considered in terms of their ability to account for future climate risks.
13

5 ECOSYSTEM-BASED ACTIVITIES FOR REDUCING DISASTER RISK

There is increasing interest in using ecosystem-based activities for the purpose of hazard impact management
(e.g., wetland protection, establishment of coastal buffer zones, planting of vegetation) based on the concept
that “ecosystem-based approaches can be equally or more beneficial than infrastructure or technology-based
solutions.”14

Healthy ecosystems can provide a suite of benefits to people and communities. These benefits or ecosystem
services include regulating services such as regulation of floods, drought, land degradation, and disease;
provisioning services such as food and water; supporting services such as soil formation and nutrient cycling;
and cultural services such as recreational, spiritual, religious, and other nonmaterial benefits. Integrated
management of land, water, and living resources that promotes conservation and sustainable use provides the
basis for maintaining ecosystem services, including those that contribute to reduced disaster risks.

To be effective, the use of ecosystem-system based activities requires reliable data on hazard frequency as well
as a good understanding of the ecological context, such as the geologic and hydrologic conditions of a given
area as well as the plant-wildlife-human interactions that take place. These issues need to be addressed on
a location-by-location basis, with decisions on the use of ecological resources arrived at through community
consultations. Technical information on how to apply ecosystem-based DRR activities for a specific geographic
area can be obtained through consultation with environmental specialists as well as government officials in the
environmental, emergency management, and land use planning departments.

COPING WITH STORM FLOW IN MADAGASCAR: THE CASE OF MANTADIA NATIONAL PARK

There is mounting concern, supported by additional evidence from local communities, that the increasing
deforestation rate is causing greater flooding in the eastern half of the island of Madagascar, where the monsoon
rains are particularly severe.
Mantadia National Park, established in 1989 as an outcome of Madagascar’s National Environmental Action Plan,
includes the watershed of the Vohitra River. The establishment of the park helped reduce deforestation rates
in the area. A study of the economic benefits of the park showed that the reduction in deforestation reduced
stormflow and associated losses in farmer’s productivity. The results indicated that conversion from primary to
secondary forest caused a three-fold increase in storm flow, and conversion from secondary forest to agricultural
areas caused up to 1.5 times greater flow. Thus, the analysis concluded that conversion from primary forest
to agriculture can increase storm flow by as much as 4.5 times. The study quantified the benefits from forest
protection within upper watersheds in terms of reduced crop damage from floods in agricultural plots in lower
basins, and concluded that the net value of watershed protection (in 1997) was US$126,700 (to put this figure into
perspective, the authors note that in 1991 Madagascar had per capita GNP of US$207).
Source: Stolton, S., N. Dudley, and J. Randall. 2008. Natural Security: Protected areas and hazard mitigation.

14 Sudmeier-Rieux, K. and N. Ash. 2009. Environmental Guidance Note for Disaster Risk Reduction: Healthy Ecosystems for
Human Security. Revised Ed. Gland: IUCN.
 [ GREEN GUIDE TO DISASTER RISK REDUCTION ] 14

Another way to view ecosystem-based activities is through a ridge-to-reef, or ridge-to-valley floor,15 approach
to risk assessment and management. By looking at regional environmental impacts beyond a community, this
approach focuses on how local actions (e.g., a flood retention wall) impact a broader scale of communities
and ecosystems. This approach also highlights needs and impacts that fall beyond the scope of community
action, such as protection from glacial lake outbursts or coastal flooding. Addressing these needs may require
significant advocacy with provincial or national governments, as well as consultations between communities
within and downstream of the ridge-to-reef watershed.

This type of analysis can define an integrated structure of ecosystem-based risk reduction interventions across
a number of communities and ecological zones. A ridge-to-reef approach reduces the possibility that risk
reduction efforts in one location can increase risks in another; an integrated approach is presumed to be more
sustainable and effective than a set of unconnected risk reduction interventions.

The following table, developed from the publication Natural Security,16 identifies some ecosystem-based
disaster risk reduction interventions. The risk assessment results and community consultations are keys to
identifying which intervention or interventions are most appropriate. Further, root cause analysis can identify
issues of power and conflict that may influence the effectiveness and adoption of specific interventions.

It is important to note that ecosystem-based DRR interventions, like all DRR activities, reduce but does not
remove risk. For instance, using forests to stabilize avalanche-prone slopes reduces the frequency of avalanches
but not the fact that avalanches will still occur under specific conditions. DRR efforts should use multiple
approaches to reduce risk, to ensure that the multifaceted social, economic, and environmental nature of risk is
addressed and avoid overstating the extent to which risk is reduced through a particular action.

15 Ridge-to-reef refers to taking into consideration the environmental conditions from ridge-top to offshore reef (or valley
bottom) in planning sustainable interventions to limit negative environmental impacts. Specifically included in this approach
is the impact of human occupation of a watershed, including use of forest resources, as well as farming, mining, and other
types of land use.
16 Stolton, S., N. Dudley, and J. Randall. 2008. Natural Security: Protected areas and hazard mitigation.
15

TABLE 2: SELECT ECOSYSTEM-BASED HAZARD MITIGATION ACTIONS 17

HAZARD ECOSYSTEM-BASED MITIGATION ACTION

FLOODING, Establish or reestablish overflow space in marshes, estuaries, and open land to reduce size and
INCLUDING speed of flooding.
RIVER, FLASH,
AND SHEET Create retention ponds in up-slope areas (near top of drainage) to hold back and slow run-off.
FLOODING
Reduce speed of run-off to reduce flows leading to flooding by planting vegetation and/or by
stabilizing slopes through bioengineering.

Reduce vegetation blocking drainage routes to speed drainage.

Use channel plugs (rocks and brush to slow water flow) and riprap (rocks to protect channel
banks) to slow flows in streams and occasional water channels.

STORM SURGE Create or reestablish barriers against surge flow from the ocean. The barriers can be
permeable (e.g., forests) to reduce the speed and intensity of surges, or impermeable
(e.g., natural sand dunes) to stop surges.

LANDSLIDES Stabilize slopes with vegetation.

AND OTHER
DOWN-SLOPE Change land use to reduce erosion potential (e.g., from cropping to orchards).
MOVEMENTS OF
ROCKS AND SOILS Establish impact zones with little or no human occupation.

AVALANCHE Stabilize slopes with vegetation.

Establish impact zones with little or no human occupation.

DROUGHT Use drought-resistant vegetation for food production, commercial use, and environmental
management (e.g., trees for shade).

Increase soil quality to increase moisture retention during dry periods.

Use crop diversity and intercropping to reduce impact of dry conditions on mono-crops.

Maintain agriculture diversity and include wild foods and other indigenous sources of food in
agricultural systems.

Use low- or no-till methods to limit water loss and wind erosion.

Maintain areas of natural vegetation intermixed with fields to reduce pest impacts.

Reduce or ban burning of natural vegetation to maintain land cover and reduce
evapotranspiration.
 [ GREEN GUIDE TO DISASTER RISK REDUCTION ] 16

HAZARD ECOSYSTEM-BASED MITIGATION ACTION

HIGH WINDS Use indigenous vegetation adapted to regenerate following high-wind events.

Plant wind-resistant vegetation near buildings to reduce impact of high winds.

Plant trees and bushes to break flow of winds to reduce wind erosion.

HEAVY Use indigenous vegetation for shade and food production to reduce damage caused by impacts.
RAINFALL/HAIL

See methods above under Flooding for dealing with run-off and flooding.

EROSION Use indigenous vegetation to maintain soil on slopes and areas subject to erosion.

Construct berms, bunds, and compost pits along contours of erosion-prone hills/slopes to
trap or slow the flow of eroded soil.

See High Winds above on wind erosion.

EARTHQUAKE Increase spacing between buildings to reduce impact of building collapse.

Create open areas to serve as refuge following earthquakes. These areas can be used as
parks, floor channels, or other public space between earthquakes.

FIRE Encourage indigenous vegetation if this vegetation is considered to be fire resistant, and
reduce the presence of non-fire-resistant vegetation where possible.

Reduce vegetation load near buildings and habituated areas and avoid the use of
non-fire-resistant vegetation in fire-prone areas.

Reduce vegetation load in forests and wooded areas at risk of burning through controlled
burning and/or mechanical treatment, including hand labor to trim trees and bush.

17

GOOD PRACTICES FOR RISK REDUCTION USING ECOSYSTEMS

❑❑ Maintain natural ecosystems, such as coastal mangroves, coral reefs, floodplains, forest, etc., to help buffer against
natural hazards
❑❑ Maintain traditional cultural ecosystems that have an important role in mitigating extreme weather events, such as
agroforestry systems, terraced crop growing, and fruit-tree forests in arid lands
❑❑ Provide an opportunity for active or passive restoration of such systems where they have been degraded or lost17
❑❑ Promote policies for the protection of ecosystems for the purpose of disaster risk reduction, climate change
adaptation, and the other services ecosystems provide

17 Stolton, S., N. Dudley, and J. Randall. 2008. Natural Security: Protected areas and hazard mitigation.
17

REDUCING FIRE DISASTERS THROUGH ECOSYSTEM MANAGEMENT IN THE MEDITERRANEAN

Fire is the main cause of forest loss in the northern Mediterranean, with considerable impact on properties
and livelihoods. An average of over 400,000 ha is burnt each year, with a massive 751,798 ha burnt in 2003
alone. National strategies allocating major efforts and resources to firefighting (e.g., buying of hydroplanes and
helicopters) have proved to be inefficient in the growing trend of large-scale devastating fires. An integrated
fire management strategy should be based on a risk reduction management framework aiming to increase
ecological and social resilience to adapt to the complex interrelation between the predicted increase of
heat waves and the human-induced impacts on natural ecosystems. In April 2008, IUCN, WWF, FAO, and
other partners agreed on a common position – the Athens Statement – for climate change adaptation in
Mediterranean forest conservation and management, with a special focus on increasing resilience to major
disturbances.
A new forest fire strategy was adopted in Lebanon through a participatory process with the Lebanese
government, incorporating a climate change adaptation goal: Reducing the risk of intense and frequent
forest fires whilst allowing for fire regimes that are socially, economically and ecologically sustainable.
IUCN is building ecological and social resilience to climate change impacts in high-fire-risk landscapes by doing
the following:
• developing a participatory planning process to design landscape patterns resilient to fire and prevent land use
changes that may alter the landscape’s traditional mosaic structure and increase fire risk (e.g., the current trend of
intensification of pine plantations);
• identifying fuel reduction opportunities through traditional and innovative land uses (e.g., promoting livestock
grazing in high-fire-risk areas);
• developing and exploring opportunities to help adopt fire resilient land uses and landscape patterns (e.g.,
innovative management systems, economic incentives);
• the ecological restoration of healthy forest conditions diversifying forest land with a higher number of native
resprouting species, which regenerate better after fire; and
• preventive forest practices and fuel management aiming at reducing high-forest-fuel litter and the landscape
susceptibility to fires.

Source: Regato, P. 2008. Adapting to Global Change - Mediterranean Forests. Gland, Switzerland and Malaga,
Spain: IUCN.
 [ GREEN GUIDE TO DISASTER RISK REDUCTION ] 18

6 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS OF DISASTER RISK REDUCTION ACTIVITIES

DRR seeks to reduce the risk of harm from disasters. However, the implementation of activities defined by
disaster risk assessments, or by interventions presumed to reduce risk, itself has a risk of doing harm if the
activities do not address environmental sustainability. For instance, a risk reduction intervention to build
concrete floodwalls in one location may exacerbate flooding in another location. These “downstream” or
unintended impacts are often not incorporated into the planning of DRR interventions.

As a result, DRR activities should be subject to an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) to ensure that harm
will not be done or, where harm may occur, that mitigation activities are taken and are acceptable to those
targeted by the assistance.

The principal aim of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is “to give the environment its due place in
the decision-making process by clearly evaluating the environmental consequences of a proposed activity
before action is taken. The concept has ramifications in the long run for almost all activity because sustainable
development depends on protecting natural resources which are the foundation for further development.”18

EIA aims to predict environmental impacts at an early stage in project planning and design, find ways to reduce
adverse impacts, shape projects to suit the local environment, and present the predictions and options to
decision makers. With EIA, both environmental and economic benefits can be achieved, such as reductions
in the costs and duration of project implementation and design, avoidance of treatment/clean-up costs, and
compliance with the mandatory requirements of some environmental laws and regulations.

The context of a classic EIA is often understood to be a non-disaster situation. In such situations, an EIA is often
mandated by law for major infrastructure, commercial, industrial, or residential development proposals. It is
a widely recognized environmental management tool for mainstreaming the environment into development
projects, and has been made mandatory by legal systems in many countries. The EIA process does not have to
be a lengthy one, and there are EIA tools that have been specifically developed for the humanitarian setting,
such as the Environmental Stewardship Review for Humanitarian Aid (ESR) described below and in GRRT Module
3, Green Guide to Environmental Impact Assessment Tools and Techniques. Many existing DRR assessment
tools can also be modified to include EIA components in order to streamline the process. For example, a
Community Vulnerability Assessment (CVA) can include a section that clearly examines the environmental
impacts of the proposed action items and suggests ways to minimize the environmental impacts.

MINIMIZING THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF DRR ACTIVITIES

There are several environmental impact assessment tools available for DRR project planners and managers to
determine the environmental impact of their proposed project and take steps to minimize these impacts. One
such tool is the Environmental Stewardship Review (ESR) for Humanitarian Aid that was developed by World
Wildlife Fund (WWF) and the American Red Cross. The ESR is meant to operate at the project level to analyze
how the project may impact or be impacted by environmental factors such as air quality, water quality, water
supply, hazardous resources, and natural resources. A full discussion of this topic, and a sample ESR, is contained
in GRRT Module 3, Green Guide to Environmental Impact Assessment Tools and Techniques.

18 Gilpin, Alan. 1995. Environmental Impact Assessment – Cutting Edge for the Twenty-First Century.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19

DRR interventions seek to reduce risk by reducing either hazard impacts or vulnerability levels. Hazard impact
reduction often involves efforts to directly modify the environment, such as building a dam to reduce the
impact of drought. The environmental impact of the dam is not just about the placement of a new artifact – the
dam – in the environment, but is also related to the sourcing of the resources needed to build the dam (e.g.,
construction of rock quarries and sand extraction from rivers) and the impact of retained waters on river and
onshore environmental conditions (e.g., increased malaria or changes in aquatic flora and fauna).

A physical structure built to reduce risk is generally referred to as a structural intervention. Interventions such
as warning systems, which may also have direct or indirect links to the environment, are generally referred to as
nonstructural interventions. Ecology-based risk reduction interventions, such as the establishment of wetlands
for flood-water retention, are generally considered to be structural interventions, although they may involve
less engineering and resource mobilization (e.g., creation of borrow pits19) than do more traditional, engineered
structures (e.g., flood barriers).

Vulnerability reduction often involves nonstructural activities with a strong focus on building capacity to avoid a
disaster (e.g., evacuation planning) or respond to a disaster (e.g., training in first aid). The process of addressing
the root causes of vulnerability may also involve actions that have a direct impact on the environment.

For instance, reducing the risk of drought and food insecurity can involve tree planting and intercropping,
contouring to retain rainfall, installing water pumps for plant nurseries, and providing credit to buy improved
seed varieties and fertilizer. Each of these interventions has an impact on the environment, and some of them
can be negative if not managed properly; this is the case, for example, with overpumping ground water or
excessive application of fertilizer.

Post-disaster recovery and reconstruction interventions have trade-offs in terms of environmental impacts:
Increasing crop production with chemical fertilizers can lead to contaminated drinking water and fish die-offs.
Environmental reviews should be conducted in order to determine the positive and negative environmental
consequences of undertaking a recovery and reconstruction project.

Where these reviews are effective and are complemented by ongoing monitoring of environmental conditions,
the chance that DRR efforts will have an unanticipated negative impact on the environment is reduced.

19 A borrow pit is a location where soil or sand is taken for use elsewhere in construction.
 [ GREEN GUIDE TO DISASTER RISK REDUCTION ] 20

COST EFFECTIVENESS OF ECOSYSTEMS AS NATURAL BUFFERS TO COASTAL PROTECTION IN INDONESIA.

• One hotel in West Lombok has spent US$880,000 over a seven-year period to restore a 250-meter stretch of beach
that had been damaged by past coral mining.
• More than US$1 million has been spent in Bali to protect 500 meters of coastline that is no longer protected by
coral reefs.

When marine and coastal ecosystems are degraded and these important coastal defense functions are lost, high
economic costs can arise as the examples above from Indonesia describe. Along Indonesia’s coastlines, the
value of marine and coastal ecosystems in decreasing vulnerability to risks and disasters accrues mainly through
damage costs avoided – and these averted losses are typically substantial. A study in Bintuni Bay, West Papua,
valued mangroves at US$600 per household per year based on their ability to control erosion. A variety of values
have been calculated for the coastal protection functions of coral reefs in Indonesia, depending on their location:
Reefs adjacent to sparsely populated areas where agriculture is the main activity have been valued at US$829/
km (based on the value of agricultural production that would be lost), reefs adjacent to areas of high population
densities at US$50,000/km (based on the cost of replacing housing and roads), and reefs in areas where tourism
is the main use at US$1 million/km (based on the cost of maintaining sandy beaches). In total, Indonesia’s coral
reefs are estimated to have a value of some US$314 million for coastal erosion prevention.
Source: Sudmeier-Rieux, K. and N. Ash. 2009. Environmental Guidance Note for Disaster Risk Reduction: Healthy
Ecosystems for Human Security. Revised Ed. Gland: IUCN.

In addition to valuable roles in coastal protection and erosion control, mangrove forests serve as habitat for a variety
of fish and shellfish critical to livelihoods and food security in tropical regions. Through these ecosystem services, a
healthy mangrove forest can reduce the vulnerability of a community both before and after a disaster event.
© Jurgen Freund/WWF-Canon
21

ANNEX 1. RELEVANT AGENCIES AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION

The following organizations and publications provide additional resources that elaborate on the concepts
presented in this module.

Organizations
ActionAid: ActionAid is a non-profit organization committed to fighting poverty worldwide. ActionAid’s
approach to climate mitigation and disaster risk reduction is focused on the effects of climate change and
disasters on the rural poor and other vulnerable groups. [Link]

Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC): The Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC) is a non-profit
organization supporting the advancement of safer communities and sustainable development through the
implementation of programs and projects that reduce the impact of disasters upon countries and communities
in Asia and the Pacific. Especially relevant to this module is its Community-Based Disaster Risk Management
Program. [Link]

Emergency Capacity Building (ECB) Project: The ECB Project is a collaborative effort of seven leading
humanitarian organizations that aims to improve the quality and effectiveness of humanitarian efforts. ECB
offers numerous publications on disaster risk reduction topics, including case studies and pilot project reports.
[Link]

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC): IFRC is a leading humanitarian
organization that stresses disaster management as one of its core areas. IFRC provides a variety of publications
and approaches to risk reduction and disaster response and preparedness. [Link]

Prevention Web: Prevention Web is an information source managed by UN/ISDR that provides current news
and information related to disasters and disaster risk reduction around the world. [Link]

Tearfund: Tearfund is a Christian humanitarian organization that indentifies environmental restoration and
disaster reduction as two of its core issue areas. CEDRA (Climate change and Environmental Degradation
Risk and Adaptation assessment) is an assessment tool designed to help humanitarian workers in developing
countries assess and understand environmental hazards as they relate to disaster risk reduction. CEDRA is
available through Tearfund’s International Learning Zone Web site. [Link]

United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR): The ISDR is a system of partnerships
under the UN banner with the goal of global disaster risk reduction. ISDR releases a variety of tools,
publications, statistics, and other information about disaster risk reduction. [Link]

Publications

Cutter, S. Ed. 1994. Environmental Risk and Hazards. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

Cutter, S. and E. Arnold. 1993. Living With Risk: The Geography of Technological Hazards. New York.

De Dios, H. 2002. Participatory Capacities and Vulnerabilities Assessment: Finding the link between disasters
and development. Oxfam Great Britain.

ECB Project. 2007. Emergency Capacity Building Pilot Projects: Promising Practices for Risk Reduction.
 [ GREEN GUIDE TO DISASTER RISK REDUCTION ] 22

IUCN. 2007. Disaster Risk, Livelihoods and Natural Barriers, Strengthening Decision-Making Tools for Disaster
Risk Reduction: A Case Study from Northern Pakistan.

La Trobe, S. and P. Venton. 2003. Natural Disaster Risk Reduction: The policy and practice of selected
institutional donors. Tearfund.

Miththapala, S. 2008. Integrating Environmental Safeguards into Disaster Management: a field manual. 3 vols. IUCN.

Shepherd, G. Ed. 2008. The Ecosystem Approach: Learning from Experience. IUCN.

Stolton, S., N. Dudley, and J. Randall. 2008. Natural Security: Protected areas and hazard mitigation.

Sudmeier-Rieux, K., H. Masundire, A. Rizvi, and S. Rietbergen. Eds. 2006. Ecosystems, Livelihoods and
Disasters: An integrated approach to disaster risk management. IUCN.

Sudmeier-Rieux, K. and N. Ash. 2009. Environmental Guidance Note for Disaster Risk Reduction: Healthy
Ecosystems for Human Security. IUCN.

Twigg, J. 2001. Sustainable Livelihoods and Vulnerability to Disasters. Benfield Hazard Research Center.

UN/ISDR. 2004. Living with Risk: A global review of disaster reduction initiatives.

Wisner, B. 2004. At Risk: Natural Hazards, People’s Vulnerability, and Disasters. London: Routledge.
23

GLOSSARY
The following is a comprehensive list of the key terms used throughout the Green Recovery and Reconstruction
Toolkit. In some cases, the definitions have been adapted from the original source. If no source is given, this
indicates that the module author developed a common definition for use in the toolkit.

Anaerobic Filter (or Biofilter): Filter system mainly used for treatment of secondary effluent from primary
treatment chambers such as septic tanks. The anaerobic filter comprises a watertight tank containing a bed
of submerged media, which acts as a support matrix for anaerobic biological activity. For humanitarian aid
agencies, the prefabricated biofilters that combine primary and secondary treatment into one unit can provide
a higher level of treatment than do traditional systems such as precast cylindrical septic tanks or soakage pit
systems. Source: SANDEC. 2006. Greywater Management in Low and Middle Income Countries. Swiss Federal
Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology. Switzerland.

Better Management Practices (BMPs): BMPs are flexible, field-tested, and cost-effective techniques that
protect the environment by helping to measurably reduce major impacts of growing of commodities on the
planet’s water, air, soil, and biological diversity. They help producers make a profit in a sustainable way. BMPs
have been developed for a wide range of activities, including fishing, farming, and forestry. Source: Clay, Jason.
2004. World agriculture and the environment: a commodity-by-commodity guide to impacts and practices.
Island Press: Washington, DC.

Biodiversity: Biological diversity means the variability among living organisms from all sources, including
inter alia, terrestrial, and marine and other aquatic ecosystems, as well as the ecological complexes of which
they are part; this includes diversity within species, between species, and of ecosystems. Source: United
Nations. Convention on Biological Diversity. [Link]/convention/[Link]?a=cbd-02 (Accessed on
June 18, 2010)

Carbon Footprint: The total set of greenhouse gas emissions caused directly and indirectly by an individual,
organization, event, or product. For simplicity of reporting, the carbon footprint is often expressed in terms
of the amount of carbon dioxide, or its equivalent of other greenhouse gases, emitted. Source: Carbon Trust.
Carbon Footprinting. [Link] (Accessed on June 22, 2010)

Carbon Offset: A financial instrument aimed at a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. Carbon offsets
are measured in metric tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent (CO2e) and may represent six primary categories
of greenhouse gases. One carbon offset represents the reduction of one metric ton of carbon dioxide or its
equivalent in other greenhouse gases. Source: World Bank. 2007. State and Trends of the Carbon Market.
Washington, DC

Climate Change: The climate of a place or region is considered to have changed if over an extended period
(typically decades or longer) there is a statistically significant change in measurements of either the mean state
or the variability of the climate for that place or region. Changes in climate may be due to natural processes
or to persistent anthropogenic changes in atmosphere or in land use. Source: UN International Strategy for
Disaster Reduction. Terminology of disaster risk reduction. [Link]/eng/terminology/terminology-2009-
[Link] (Accessed on April 1, 2010)

Construction: Construction is broadly defined as the process or mechanism for the realization of human
settlements and the creation of infrastructure that supports development. This includes the extraction and
processing of raw materials, the manufacturing of construction materials and components, the construction
project cycle from feasibility to deconstruction, and the management and operation of the built environment.
 [ GREEN GUIDE TO DISASTER RISK REDUCTION ] 24

Source: du Plessis, Chrisna. 2002. Agenda 21 for Sustainable Construction in Developing Countries. Pretoria,
South Africa: CSIR Building and Construction Technology.

Disaster: Serious disruption of the functioning of a society, causing widespread human, material, or
environmental losses which exceed the ability of the affected society to cope using only its own resources.
Disasters are often classified according to their speed of onset (sudden or slow) and their cause (natural or
man-made). Disasters occur when a natural or human-made hazard meets and adversely impacts vulnerable
people, their communities, and/or their environment. Source: UNDP/UNDRO. 1992. Overview of Disaster
Management. 2nd Ed.

Disaster preparedness: Activities designed to minimize loss of life and damage; organize the temporary
removal of people and property from a threatened location; and facilitate timely and effective rescue, relief,
and rehabilitation. Source: UNDP/UNDRO. 1992. Overview of Disaster Management. 2nd Ed.

Disaster Risk: Potential disaster losses in lives, health status, livelihoods, assets, and services that could occur
to a particular community or a society over some specified future time period. Risk can be expressed as a
simple mathematical formula: Risk = Hazard X Vulnerability. This formula illustrates the concept that the greater
the potential occurrence of a hazard and the more vulnerable a population, the greater the risk. Source: UN
International Strategy for Disaster Reduction. Terminology of disaster risk reduction. [Link]/eng/
terminology/[Link] (Accessed on April 1, 2010)

Disaster Risk Reduction: The practice of reducing disaster risks through systematic efforts to analyze and
manage the causal factors of disasters, including reduced exposure to hazards, lessened vulnerability of people
and property, wise management of land and the environment, and improved preparedness for adverse events.
Source: UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction. Terminology of disaster risk reduction.
[Link]/eng/terminology/[Link] (Accessed on April 1, 2010)

Ecosystem: Dynamic complexes of plants, animals, and other living communities and the nonliving
environment interacting as functional units. Humans are an integral part of ecosystems. Source: UN.
Convention on Biological Diversity. [Link]/convention/[Link]?a=cbd-02 (Accessed on
June 18, 2010)

Ecosystem Services: The benefits that people and communities obtain from ecosystems. This definition
is drawn from the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. The benefits that ecosystems can provide include
“regulating services” such as regulation of floods, drought, land degradation, and disease; “provisioning
services” such as provision of food and water; “supporting services” such as help with soil formation and
nutrient cycling; and “cultural services” such as recreational, spiritual, religious, and other nonmaterial benefits.
Integrated management of land, water, and living resources that promotes conservation and sustainable use
provides the basis for maintenance of ecosystem services, including those that contribute to the reduction of
disaster risks. Source: UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction. Terminology of disaster risk reduction.
[Link]/eng/terminology/[Link] (Accessed on April 1, 2010)

Embodied Energy: The available energy that was used in the work of making a product. Embodied energy is
an accounting methodology used to find the sum total of the energy necessary for an entire product life cycle.
Source: Glavinich, Thomas. 2008. Contractor’s Guide to Green Building Construction: Management, Project
Delivery, Documentation, and Risk Reduction. John Wiley & Sons, Inc: New Jersey.

Environment: The complex of physical, chemical, and biotic factors (such as climate, soil, and living things)
that act upon individual organisms and communities, including humans, and ultimately determine their form
25

and survival. It is also the aggregate of social and cultural conditions that influence the life of an individual or
community. The environment includes natural resources and ecosystem services that comprise essential life-
supporting functions for humans, including clean water, food, materials for shelter, and livelihood generation.
Source: Adapted from: Merriam Webster Dictionary, “Environment.” [Link]/netdict/
environment (Accessed on June 15, 2010)

Environmental Impact Assessment: A tool used to identify the environmental, social, and economic impacts
of a project prior to decision making. It aims to predict environmental impacts at an early stage in project
planning and design, find ways and means to reduce adverse impacts, shape projects to suit the local
environment, and present the predictions and options to decision makers. Source: International Association of
Environmental Impact Assessment in cooperation with Institute of Environmental Assessment. 1999. Principles
of Environmental Impact Assessment Best Practice.

Green Construction: Green construction is planning and managing a construction project in accordance
with the building design in order to minimize the impact of the construction process on the environment.
This includes 1) improving the efficiency of the construction process; 2) conserving energy, water, and other
resources during construction; and 3) minimizing the amount of construction waste. A “green building” is one
that provides the specific building performance requirements while minimizing disturbance to and improving
the functioning of local, regional, and global ecosystems both during and after the structure’s construction and
specified service life. Source: Glavinich, Thomas E. 2008. Contractor’s Guide to Green Building Construction:
Management, Project Delivery, Documentation, and Risk Reduction. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley &
Sons, Inc.

Green Purchasing: Green Purchasing is often referred to as environmentally preferable purchasing (EPP), and
is the affirmative selection and acquisition of products and services that most effectively minimize negative
environmental impacts over their life cycle of manufacturing, transportation, use, and recycling or disposal.
Examples of environmentally preferable characteristics include products and services that conserve energy and
water and minimize generation of waste and release of pollutants; products made from recycled materials and
that can be reused or recycled; energy from renewable resources such as biobased fuels and solar and wind
power; alternate fuel vehicles; and products using alternatives to hazardous or toxic chemicals, radioactive
materials, and biohazardous agents. Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1999. Final Guidance on
Environmentally Preferred Purchasing. Federal Register. Vol. 64 No. 161.

Greening: The process of transforming artifacts such as a space, a lifestyle, or a brand image into a more
environmentally friendly version (i.e., “greening your home” or “greening your office”). The act of greening
involves incorporating “green” products and processes into one’s environment, such as the home, workplace,
and general lifestyle. Source: Based on: Glavinich, T. 2008. Contractor’s Guide to Green Building Construction:
Management, Project Delivery, Documentation, and Risk Reduction. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley &
Sons, Inc.

Hazard: A potentially damaging physical event, phenomenon, or human activity that may cause the loss of
life or injury, property damage, social and economic disruption, or environmental degradation. Hazards can
include latent conditions that may represent future threats and can have different origins: natural (geological,
hydrometeorological, and biological) or induced by human processes (environmental degradation and
technological hazards). Source: UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction. Terminology of disaster risk
reduction. [Link]/eng/terminology/[Link] (Accessed on April 1, 2010)
 [ GREEN GUIDE TO DISASTER RISK REDUCTION ] 26

Impact: Any effect caused by a proposed activity on the environment, including effects on human health and
safety, flora, fauna, soil, air, water, climate, landscape and historical monuments, or other physical structures, or
the interaction among those factors. It also includes effects on cultural heritage or socioeconomic conditions
resulting from alterations to those factors. Source: United Nations Economic Commission for Europe. 1991.
The Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context. [Link] (Accessed
June 22, 2010)

Indicator: A measurement of achievement or change for the specific objective. The change can be positive
or negative, direct or indirect. They provide a way of measuring and communicating the impact, or result,
of programs as well as the process, or methods used. The indicator may be qualitative or quantitative.
Indicators are usually classified according to their level: input indicators (which measure the resources
provided), output indicators (direct results), outcome indicators (benefits for the target group) and impact
indicators (long-term consequences). Source: Chaplowe, Scott G. 2008. Monitoring and Evaluation Planning.
American Red Cross/CRS M&E Module Series. American Red Cross and Catholic Relief Services: Washington,
DC and Baltimore, MD.

Integrated Water Resources Management: Systemic, participatory process for the sustainable development,
allocation, and monitoring of water resource use in the context of social, economic, and environmental
objectives. Source: Based on: Sustainable Development Policy Institute. Training Workshop on Integrated
Water Resource Management. [Link] (Accessed June 22, 2010)

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA): A technique to assess the environmental aspects and potential impacts
of a product, process, or service by compiling an inventory of relevant energy and material inputs and
environmental releases; evaluating the potential environmental impacts associated with identified inputs and
releases; and interpreting the results to help make a more informed decision. Source: Scientific Applications
International Corporation. 2006. Life Cycle Assessment: Principle’s and Practice. Report prepared for U.S. EPA.

Life Cycle Materials Management: Maximizing the productive use and reuse of a material throughout its life
cycle in order to minimize the amount of materials involved and the associated environmental impacts.

Life Cycle of a Material: The various stages of a building material, from the extraction or harvesting of
raw materials to their reuse, recycling, and disposal.

Livelihoods: A livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets (including both material and social resources), and
activities required for a means of living. A livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with and recover from
stresses and shocks and can maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets both now and in the future, without
undermining the natural resource base. Source: DFID. 1999. Sustainable Livelihoods Approach Guidance
Sheets. London: Department for International Development.

Logframe: Logical framework, or logframe, analysis is a popular tool for project design and management.
Logframe analysis provides a structured logical approach to the determination of project priorities, design
and budget and to the identification of related results and performance targets. It also provides an iterative
management tool for project implementation, monitoring and evaluation. Logframe analysis begins with
problem analysis followed by the determination of objectives, before moving on to identify project activities,
related performance indicators and key assumptions and risks that could influence the project’s success.
Source: Provention Consortium. 2007. Logical and Results Based Frameworks. Tools for Mainstreaming Disaster
Risk Reduction. Guidance Note 6. Geneva, Switzerland.
27

Primary Wastewater Treatment: Use of gravity to separate settleable and floatable materials from the
wastewater. Source: National Research Council. 1993. Managing Wastewater in Coastal Urban Areas.
Washington DC: National Academy Press.

Project Design: An early stage of the project cycle in which a project’s objectives and intended outcomes are
described and the project’s inputs and activities are identified.

Project Evaluation: Systematic and impartial examination of humanitarian action intended to draw lessons that
improve policy and practice, and enhance accountability. Source: Active Learning Network for Accountability
and Performance in Humanitarian Action (ALNAP). Report Types. [Link] (Accessed June 25, 2010)

Project Monitoring: A continuous and systematic process of recording, collecting, measuring, analyzing, and
communicating information. Source: Chaplowe, Scott G. 2008. Monitoring and Evaluation Planning. American
Red Cross/CRS M&E Module Series. American Red Cross and Catholic Relief Services : Washington, DC and
Baltimore, MD.

Reconstruction: The actions taken to reestablish a community after a period of recovery subsequent to a
disaster. Actions would include construction of permanent housing, full restoration of all services, and complete
resumption of the pre-disaster state. Source: UNDP/UNDRO. 1992. Overview of Disaster Management. 2nd Ed.

Recovery: The restoration, and improvement where appropriate, of facilities, livelihoods, and living conditions
of disaster-affected communities, including efforts to reduce disaster risk factors. Source: UN International
Strategy for Disaster Reduction. Terminology of disaster risk reduction. [Link]/eng/terminology/
[Link] (Accessed on April 1, 2010)

Recycle: Melting, crushing, or otherwise altering a component and separating it from the other materials with
which it was originally produced. The component then reenters the manufacturing process as a raw material
(e.g., discarded plastic bags reprocessed into plastic water bottles). Source: Based on: Glavinich, Thomas E.
2008. Contractor’s Guide to Green Building Construction: Management, Project Delivery, Documentation, and
Risk Reduction. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Resilience: The capacity of a system, community, or society potentially exposed to hazards to adapt, by
resisting or changing, in order to reach and maintain an acceptable level of functioning and structure. This is
determined by the degree to which the social system is capable of organizing itself to increase its capacity
for learning from past disasters for better future protection and to improve risk reduction measures. Source:
UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction. Terminology of disaster risk reduction. [Link]/eng/
terminology/[Link] (Accessed on April 1, 2010)

Response (also called Disaster Relief): The provision of emergency services and public assistance during or
immediately after a disaster in order to save lives, reduce health impacts, ensure public safety, and meet the
basic subsistence needs of the people affected.

Comment: Disaster response is predominantly focused on immediate and short-term needs and is sometimes
called disaster relief. The division between this response stage and the subsequent recovery stage is not clear-
cut. Some response actions, such as the supply of temporary housing and water supplies, may extend well into
the recovery stage.

Source: UN International Strategy for Disaster Reduction. Terminology of disaster risk reduction. [Link].
org/eng/terminology/[Link] (Accessed on April 1, 2010)
 [ GREEN GUIDE TO DISASTER RISK REDUCTION ] 28

Reuse: The reuse of an existing component in largely unchanged form and for a similar function (e.g., reusing
ceramic roof tiles for a reconstructed house). Source: Based on: Glavinich, Thomas E. 2008. Contractor’s Guide
to Green Building Construction: Management, Project Delivery, Documentation, and Risk Reduction. Hoboken,
New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Secondary Wastewater Treatment: Use of both biological (i.e., microorganisms) and physical (i.e., gravity)
processes designed to remove biological oxygen demand (BOD) and total suspended solids (TSS) from
wastewater. Source: National Research Council. 1993. Managing Wastewater in Coastal Urban Areas.
Washington DC: National Academy Press.

Site Development: The physical process of construction at a building site. These construction-related activities
include clearing land, mobilizing resources to be used in the physical infrastructure (including water), the
fabrication of building components on site, and the process of assembling components and raw materials into
the physical elements planned for the site. The site development process also includes the provision of access
to basic amenities (e.g., water, sewage, fuel) as well as improvements to the environmental conditions of the
site (e.g., through planting vegetation or other environment-focused actions).

Site Selection: The process encompasses many steps from planning to construction, including initial inventory,
assessment, alternative analysis, detailed design, and construction procedures and services. Site selection
includes the housing, basic services (e.g., water, fuel, sewage, etc.), access infrastructure (e.g., roads, paths,
bridges, etc.) and social and economic structures commonly used by site residents (e.g., schools, clinics,
markets, transport facilities, etc.).

SMART Indicator: An indicator that meets the SMART criteria: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and
Time-bound. Source: Based on: Doran, G. T. 1981. There’s a S.M.A.R.T. way to write management›s goals and
objectives. Management Review: 70, Issue 11.

Sustainable Construction: Sustainable construction goes beyond the definition of “green construction”
and offers a more holistic approach to defining the interactions between construction and the environment.
Sustainable construction means that the principles of sustainable development are applied to the
comprehensive construction cycle, from the extraction and processing of raw materials through the planning,
design, and construction of buildings and infrastructure, and is also concerned with any building’s final
deconstruction and the management of the resultant waste. It is a holistic process aimed at restoring and
maintaining harmony between the natural and built environments, while creating settlements that affirm
human dignity and encourage economic equity. Source: du Plessis, Chrisna. 2002. Agenda 21 for Sustainable
Construction in Developing Countries. Pretoria, South Africa: CSIR Building and Construction Technology.

Sustainable development: Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Source: World Commission on Environment and
Development. 1987. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common
Future. Document A/42/427. [Link] (Accessed June 22, 2010)

Tertiary Wastewater Treatment: Use of a wide variety of physical, biological, and chemical processes aimed
at removing nitrogen and phosphorus from wastewater. Source: National Research Council. 1993. Managing
Wastewater in Coastal Urban Areas. Washington DC: National Academy Press. p. 58

Vulnerability. Human vulnerability is the relative lack of capacity of a person or community to anticipate, cope
with, resist, and recover from the impact of a hazard. Structural or physical vulnerability is the extent to which
a structure or service is likely to be damaged or disrupted by a hazard event. Community vulnerability exists
29

when the elements at risk are in the path or area of the hazard and are susceptible to damage by it. The losses
caused by a hazard, such as a storm or earthquake, will be proportionally much greater for more vulnerable
populations, e.g., those living in poverty, with weak structures, and without adequate coping strategies. Source:
UNDHA. 1997. Building Capacities for Risk Reduction. 1st Ed.

Watershed: An area of land that drains down slope to the lowest point. The water moves through a network
of drainage pathways, both underground and on the surface. Generally, these pathways converge into streams
and rivers that become progressively larger as the water moves downstream, eventually reaching a water basin
(i.e., lake, estuary, ocean). Source: Based on: Oregon Watershed Enhancement Board. 1999. Oregon Watershed
Assessment Manual. [Link] Salem.
 [ GREEN GUIDE TO DISASTER RISK REDUCTION ] 30

ACRONYMS
The following is a comprehensive list of the acronyms used throughout the Green Recovery and
Reconstruction Toolkit.

ADB Asian Development Bank

ADPC Asian Disaster Preparedness Center

ADRA Adventist Development and Relief Agency

AECB Association for Environment Conscious Building

AJK Azad Jammu Kashmir

ALNAP Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in Humanitarian Action

ANSI American National Standards Institute

BMPS best management practices

BOD biological oxygen demand

CAP Consolidated Appeals Process

CEDRA Climate Change and Environmental Degradation Risk and Adaptation Assessment

CFL compact fluorescent lamp

CGIAR Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research

CHAPS Common Humanitarian Assistance Program

CIDEM Centro de Investigación y Desarrollo de Estructuras y Materiales

CO Country Office

CRISTAL Community-based Risk Screening Tool – Adaptation and Livelihoods

CRS Catholic Relief Services

CVA community vulnerability assessment

DFID Department for International Development

DRR disaster risk reduction

EAWAG Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology

31

ECB Emergency Capacity Building Project

EE embodied energy

EIA environmental impact assessment

EMMA Emergency Market Mapping and Analysis Toolkit

EMP environmental management plan

ENA Environmental Needs Assessment in Post-Disaster Situations

ENCAP Environmentally Sound Design and Management Capacity Building for Partners and Programs in Africa

EPP environmentally preferable purchasing

ESR Environmental Stewardship Review for Humanitarian Aid

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization

FEAT Flash Environmental Assessment Tool

FRAME Framework for Assessing, Monitoring and Evaluating the Environment in Refuge Related Operations

FSC Forest Stewardship Council

G2O2 Greening Organizational Operations

GBCI Green Building Certification Institute

GBP Green Building Programme

GIS geographic information system

GRR Green Recovery and Reconstruction

GRRT Green Recovery and Reconstruction Toolkit

GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit

GWP Global Water Partnership

HQ headquarters

HVAC heating, ventilation, and air conditioning

IAS International Accreditation Service

IASC Inter-Agency Standing Committee

 [ GREEN GUIDE TO DISASTER RISK REDUCTION ] 32

IAIA International Association for Impact Assessment

IBRD International Bank for Reconstruction and Development

ICE Inventory of Carbon and Energy

ICT information and communication technology

IDA International Development Association

IDP internally displaced peoples

IDRC International Development Research Centre

IFC International Finance Corporation

IFRC International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

IFMA International Facilities Management Association

ILO International Labour Organization

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

IRC International Rescue Committee

ISAAC Institute for Applied Sustainability to the Built Environment

ISDR International Strategy for Disaster Reduction

ISO International Standards Organization

IT information technology

ITDG Intermediate Technology Development Group

IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature

ISWM integrated solid waste management

IWA International Water Association

IWMI International Water Management Institute

IWRM integrated water resource management

IWQA International Water Quality Association

IWSA International Water Supply Association

33

KW H Kilowatt hour

LCA life cycle assessment

LEDEG Ladakh Ecological Development Group

LEED Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design

M&E monitoring and evaluation

MAC Marine Aquarium Council

MDGS Millennium Development Goals

MSC Marine Stewardship Council

NACA Network of Aquaculture Centers

NGO non-governmental organization

NSF-ERS National Science Foundation - Engineering and Research Services

NWFP North Western Frontier Province

OCHA Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs

PDNA Post Disaster Needs Assessment

PEFC Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification

PET Polyethylene terephthalate

PMI Indonesian Red Cross Society

PVC Polyvinyl chloride

PV photovoltaic

REA Rapid Environmental Assessment

RIVM Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment

SC sustainable construction

SCC Standards Council of Canada

SEA Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment

SIDA Swedish International Development Agency

 [ GREEN GUIDE TO DISASTER RISK REDUCTION ] 34

SKAT Swiss Centre for Development Cooperation in Technology and Management

SL sustainable livelihoods

SMART Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound

SODIS solar water disinfection

TRP Tsunami Recovery Program

TSS total suspended solids

UN United Nations

UNDHA United Nations Department of Humanitarian Affairs

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNDRO United Nations Disaster Relief Organization

UNEP United Nations Environment Program

UNGM United Nations Global Marketplace

UN-HABITAT United Nations Human Settlements Programme

UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

UNICEF The United Nations Children’s Fund

USAID United States Agency for International Development

USAID-ESP United States Agency for International Development- Environmental Services Program

VROM Dutch Ministry of Spatial Planning, Housing and the Environment

WEDC Water, Engineering, and Development Centre

WGBC World Green Building Council

WHO World Health Organization

WWF World Wildlife Fund

Soon after the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, the The Green Recovery and Reconstruction Toolkit
American Red Cross and the World Wildlife Fund has been informed by our experiences in this
(WWF) formed an innovative, five-year partnership partnership as well as over 30 international
to help ensure that the recovery efforts of the authors and experts who have contributed
American Red Cross did not have unintended to its content. WWF and the American Red
negative effects on the environment. Combining Cross offer the knowledge captured here in the
the environmental expertise of WWF with the hopes that the humanitarian and environmental
humanitarian aid expertise of the American communities will continue to work together to
Red Cross, the partnership has worked across effectively incorporate environmentally sustainable
the tsunami-affected region to make sure that solutions into disaster recovery. The development
recovery programs include environmentally and publication of the Green Recovery and
sustainable considerations, which are critical to Reconstruction Toolkit was made possible with
ensuring a long-lasting recovery for communities. support from the American Red Cross.