The information and data collected were classified into five categories:

1. Experience and recent disasters including impacts, responses and success story,
2. Progress made on various aspects of disaster management planning;
3. Regional/subregional achievements based on national perspectives;
4. Infrastructures in place including legislative framework, training institutions and networking;
5. Future requirements for successful implementation of disaster reduction activities in the 21^st century at the national and international levels.

2. Summary of findings

In order to provide the readers an overall picture of the survey, the following statistics are extracted from the 18 returned questionnaires:

- 18 completed questionnaires along with additional information were received from 13 members and one associate member of ESCAP. These responses covered all the three targeted subregions of ESCAP: NorthEast Asia (4), South Asia (4) and SouthEast Asia (6).

• 15 responses were from national government agencies, one from a provincial government agency and two from non-governmental organizations. Five responses indicated that their agencies were the focal points of the national IDNDR programmes dealing with disaster prevention, reduction and management. Nine responses from national agencies responsible for activities related to disaster preparedness. Two agencies were responsible for disaster prevention, preparedness and reduction.

The information provided in the completed questionnaires was compiled in the Summary Table. The main findings are summarized below:

a. Experience and recent disasters

Disasters identified by the responses included floods, cyclones, earthquakes, drought, tornado, debris flow including landslide and mudflow, hailstorms, surge, tsunami and regional haze. The most common disaster experienced practically in all the responding countries was floods. These disasters resulted in loss of lives, serious economic damages and severe impacts on the social conditions. The critical years listed in the responses included all the years from 1992 to 1998 (up to the time of the survey). Although the severity of these events, floods or earthquakes or drought and others, is different from one country to another, the most critical year appeared to be 1998, followed by 1997 and 1995. In 1998 alone, the economic damage in these countries was estimated to be over US$23 billion (US$20 billion in China, $1 billion in Bangladesh, $1 billion in Republic of Korea, several hundred millions in India and Viet Nam.)

Various measures were adopted by the respective authorities in all the countries and areas to reduce impacts of disasters and to prevent future disasters. They were structural and non-structural measures, short-term and long-term plans or strategies, legislative measures, institutional development and publicity programmes. The non-structural measures included land-use guidelines and zoning, disaster-prone and risk mapping, disaster-proofing measures and warning systems. The wide spectrum of measures taken by the members and associate members of ESCAP indicates a diversity in the experiences and offers good opportunities for information exchange. All the responses believed that further improvement in disaster preparedness and prevention is possible, particularly with respect to warning systems, public awareness in risk management, institutional capacity building, disaster management planning and coordination, construction of structures, application of advance technology, better land-use planning and enforcement of zoning, and most importantly political commitment.

Almost all the responses indicated that the IDNDR had helped their respective countries to give greater attention to disaster reduction. Few responses indicated lack of direct contact with the respective national IDNDR activities. Examples of the importance of IDNDR’s contribution are given below:

1. "IDNDR has in fact helped our government in taking into consideration the criteria of sustainable development through effective disaster reduction in the planning and implementation of development projects with regard to infrastructure development." (Malaysia)
2. "The Decade has laid down model frameworks which may be adopted by governments in fortifying its disaster management systems." (Philippines National Red Cross)
3. "IDNDR has aroused public awareness and enhanced international cooperation on disaster reduction." (Hong Kong, China)
4. "A national programme in line with IDNDR objectives and resolution is being implemented to minimize the adverse impacts of disaster on population and environment of Bangladesh" (Bangladesh Dhaka Metropolitan Development Planning)
5. IDNDR led to the establishment of China National Committee on IDNDR (CNCIDNDR), IDNDR action in China, National Report, China National Plan for Disaster Reduction, China Centre for Disaster Reduction (CCDR), many projects and programs for disaster reduction, etc. China Modern Setup of Disaster Prevention and Reduction is to be established. (CNCIDNDR, China)
6. "Because of IDNDR, it has been possible to get greater commitments of the Government in disaster management and as such project for comprehensive disaster management in Bangladesh with UNDP, UNICEF sponsorship has been taken up by Government for implementation. To build up public awareness at all levels, Government takes up every year elaborate programme for the observance of IDNDR Day and has also introduced ‘National Disaster Preparedness Day’ for observance on last working day of March every year." (Bangladesh Disaster Management Bureau)
7. "The World Conference on Natural Disaster Reduction in Yokohama 1994 helped us realize the critical situation over the world, in particular in developing countries affected by natural disasters and necessities of international cooperation in the field of disaster mitigation." (Japan)
8. "IDNDR has certainly helped to give greater attention to disaster reduction particularly in the field of activity of the scientific community but there exists wide gaps between planning and its execution due to various reasons." (India)

The above information illustrates a general picture of achievements of the Decade from different angles of disaster management planning and implementation as well as disaster preparedness and risk reduction.

Several examples of "success story" were indicated in the responses from Bangladesh, Malaysia, Myanmar, Republic of Korea, Turkey, and Hong Kong, China. Among these, the most distinguished example from Bangladesh indicated that "Early warning and timely action limited the number of deaths to about one hundred in May 1997. The cyclone of the same intensity of 1988 took 138,000 lives."

All the responses confirmed accessibility to national and local warning systems and some indicated their established link with regional and international mechanisms, such as the Typhoon Committee, the Panel on Tropical Cyclones and WMO programmes. Many countries confirmed availability of various components for risk management but only two indicated existence of comprehensive risk assessment at the national level, one at selected localities. Various stages of preparation of structured mitigation plans were indicated in the responses and six countries indicated availability of national structured mitigation plans and one with provincial and local plans.

Various reasons were identified as obstacles by the countries or areas in their efforts to implement the Decade targets. Among these, the lack of financial resources was the prevailing reason, followed by the lack of technical capacities, particularly advance technology and modern equipment, and weakness in coordination and institutional arrangements. Other reasons included that the Decade targets were too ambitious and prioritization would be necessary; lack of strong political commitments; vigorous international efforts would be required.

In order to generate public awareness, various programmes have been adopted at the national, provincial and local levels. Media and publications are widely accepted. Short-term programmes in the form of workshops or seminars and formal education curriculums have been adopted for training purposes. Involvement of decision-makers and major groups to ensure their support and participation in disaster reduction programme was achieved through various established mechanisms and procedures as indicated in almost all the responses. These mechanisms included those responsible for information dissemination, for disaster management planning, policy formulation, strategy implementation and legislative bodies. Collaboration with other sectors was indicated through the established guidelines and mechanisms (Malaysia), information dissemination (Thailand, Hong Kong, China), development plan (Bangladesh), and projects (China, Singapore, Turkey). Seven responses indicated the benefits of the international arena provided by the IDNDR for information exchange. Others did not get direct access to the arena.

Important achievements from subregional cooperation were identified in several responses in the field of tropical cyclones, floods, tsunami forecasting as well as training in disaster preparedness and management. Reference was made to the work undertaken within the framework of the Typhoon Committee, the ESCAP/WMO Panel on Tropical Cyclones, UNESCO Tsunami Warning System, Eastern Asia Natural Hazards Mapping Project, the Asian Disaster Preparedness Centre, Asian Centre for Disaster Reduction in Tokyo and lately the ASEAN Regional Haze Task Force (1998). It was believed that regional mechanisms are needed to continue promoting exchange of information and experience. Regional cooperation was also expected to make important contribution to disaster reduction in general and enhancement of resource mobilization, communication networks, warning systems, improvement in forecasting techniques and training.

All the responses confirmed commitment of the respective Governments to disaster reduction and also the existence of a designated government authority for coordination. However, there were significant difference among the government institutional arrangements for the designated authority. In some cases, the authority was chaired by the Government Head, others chaired by the Minister concerned and one was a parliamentary commission. Budgetary resources were indicated to be available for the purposes. Firm legislative frameworks have been set up as indicated in most of the responses, for disaster management in general or particular disasters such as floods, forest fires, tropical cyclones, earthquakes or development planning. In one response, it was indicated that the comprehensive Act was being drafted.

With respect to education and training on disaster reduction, most of the responses indicated various measures adopted in the respective members and associate members of ESCAP. However, most of the responses indicated the field of training in their respective areas of work. On the perspectives and experience of the respective agencies participating in the survey, the responses indicated a wide diversity in the established networks to aid in the transfer and application of knowledge and technology, information dissemination and international collaboration. The networks referred to included the existing mechanisms such as the Typhoon Committee, the South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), WMO and Japan Meteorological Agency; newly established bilateral project (Malaysia-France, Pakistan-USA and Japan). In one response, it was indicated that the networks were first established for sectoral disasters and developed into multi-sectoral coordination (China.)

Most responses indicated their agreement to the importance of the criteria identified in the questionnaire as requirements for successful implementation of disaster reduction activities in the 21^st century. However, the order of priority of the elements of requirements was different among the responses. Policy and budgetary commitment and public awareness together with strong linkage to economic and social development programmes were commonly accepted as top priority. Other priority included international cooperation, information dissemination, strengthening of local authorities, and network building. Several responses provided additional criteria as necessary conditions for the future operations:

1. Proper land-use planning and to apply integrated approach in management of resources.
2. Establishment of programmes to promote awareness on disaster prevention and reduction. Cooperation can be made on specific tasks, projects, information dissemination and warning systems, and post disaster management assessment.
3. Latest technology be used.
4. Improvement of sophisticated numerical models to predict local heavy rainfalls; to simulate tsunamic generation and propagation; to improve seismic observation network.
5. To support science and technology transfer. Establish central data and information systems in the region. Cross-sectoral coordination.
6. A strong bonding mechanism among the IDNDR related international programs and national projects is required.
7. Build up effective networking at national, regional and global levels.
8. TCDC be improved; lack of financial resources; common policy needed in the region; regional network and communication be upgraded.
9. More budget resources; strengthening legal system.

All the responses reaffirmed the needs and importance of international cooperation for future disaster reduction activities. Among the top priorities identified by most of the responses were technical assistance, financial support and technology transfer. With regards to technical cooperation, most of the responses attached priority to subregional cooperation on early warning systems, communication networks and disaster preparedness.

With regard to future programmes and measures, several responses identified the need to put in place national disaster reduction programmes (or plans or strategies) with political commitment, proper institutional framework for coordination and resources availability. Several responses confirmed the need to establish or strengthen regional/subregional mechanisms for better interaction, information exchange, forecasting systems, enhanced public awareness and technology transfer. One country suggested that "IDNDR be changed to International Committee on Natural Disaster Reduction (ICNDR) to keep up the momentum at international and national levels."

The responses provided an overwhelming amount of information, including important developments in the legal and institutional frameworks of the respective members and associate members of ESCAP related to disaster reduction. The information provided in the completed questionnaire together with attachments is expected to be analyzed in more detail in two separate papers on the water-related and geology-related disasters. However, various gaps of information could also be identified during this initial analysis and it is hoped that additional information could be further provided during the Regional Seminar by the respective delegations, particularly from those countries, which have not participated in this survey yet..

3. Conclusions

During the past decade, the region was severely affected by various types of natural disasters, particularly during the past few years. To cope with these disasters, a variety of measures have been adopted and the diversity in the experiences in the region offers good opportunities for effective regional cooperation among the developing countries in the related fields. Most of the responses noted a significant increase in the awareness on the importance of disaster preparedness and in the commitments by the Governments to disaster reduction. In several countries, these commitments were translated into institutional infrastructures to ensure effective mobilization of resources and sustained public participation in the national efforts, such as creation of national disaster reduction coordinating committees, establishment of disaster management systems, formulation of national strategies and action plans, and preparation of disaster management programmes. Apart from the national achievements, the responses also noted achievements of regional efforts in sharing information and experiences as well as in coordination of activities. Examples included the sharing of meteorological data for better flood warnings by Bangladesh, India and Pakistan realized through the Panel on Tropical Cyclones; the achievements of the members of the Typhoon Committee in typhoon tracking and flood forecasting; and the establishment of the Regional Haze Action Plan by ASEAN countries. In this context, space technology applications were highlighted as an important tool for monitoring of natural hazards and related communications. With respect to future requirements, most of the responses endorsed the need to integrate disaster preparedness and mitigation activities into the economic and social development process, to increase public awareness and participation, to strengthen regional networking and transfer of technologies.

In order to have a more complete picture of regional achievements, additional information is necessary, particularly from those countries which have not participated in the survey. The participants to the IDNDR-ESCAP Regional Meeting for Asia: Risk Reduction & Society in the 21st Century are therefore urged to provide the information so as to fill up the gaps.