Reducing the impact of natural disasters requires a comprehensive approach that accounts for the causes of a society’s vulnerability to disasters. Not only must a comprehensive strategy be articulated, but the political will must be established to sustain new policies. The key elements of a comprehensive approach to disaster risk reduction consist of:

- Political will and governance aspects (policies, legal frameworks, resources and organizational structures)

- Risk identification (risk and impact assessment, early warning)

- Knowledge management (information management, communication, education & training, public awareness, research)

- Risk management applications (environmental and natural resource management, social and economic development practices, physical and technical measures)

- Preparedness and emergency management

Over recent years many countries have developed institutions for disaster risk management and reduction. UNDP played a significant part in encouraging this process. In order to improve UNDP’s performance in supporting national institutional structures for disaster risk management, a global analysis of the results of these interventions will be conducted to capture good practices and lessons learned. The results of this analysis will be presented at the World Conference on Disaster Reduction in Kobe and will be the major focus of an international pannel on institutional and legislative systems for disaster reduction to be organized by UNDP. The consolidated results of the analysis will provide opportunities for strengthening UNDP’s future support to national disaster risk reduction and management institutions, a key element of disaster reduction capacity building programmes.

The UNDP Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery defines institutional and legislative systems (ILS) or national disaster management and risk reduction systems as:

This definition implies that ILS for disaster risk management (DRM) also comprises the broader management functions, such as leadership, planning, organizing, developing and controlling. Management is often described as creative problem solving, a much needed skill in the context of complex risk management functions. Ultimately, the effectiveness of the ILS will depend on good management support, which ensures that the individuals, institutions and departments involved are aware of their roles and responsibilities and have the skills to exercise these.

The strengthening or establishment of such national systems includes the preparation and formalisation of policy frameworks, the setting up of national structures for disaster management, the preparation of national plans and other planning instruments, the review and revision of existing legislation, the development of new legislation and the setting up of national capacity building and management support programme. Not all countries pass through all these phases. However, the establishment of such institutions is considered important from a governance perspective in view of minimising losses and deaths from disasters and limiting disruption of socio-economic systems.

Experiences with national disaster management institutions showed that only some countries have been able to sustain effective institutions over long periods of time (e.g. Viet Nam, India, Philippines, and Georgia). The majority of disaster management agencies, although often well institutionalised, remained only partially effective, focusing largely on managing disaster preparedness and response, whilst often neglecting risk reduction aspects. At the same time, many are centralised and have difficulties in engaging local actors, particularly from civil society. In addition, a range of other aspects in the institutional environment of the supported agencies may have hampered their effectiveness, such as diverging national development priorities, a lack of human and financial resources and so forth. Meanwhile other government sectors, such as planning and environment ministries or utility providers may have advanced in factoring disaster risk reduction into their plans and operations, without reference to the disaster reduction systems.

The recently released UNDP global report Reducing Disaster Risk: A Challenge for Development has highlighted governance as a key unresolved issue in both the configuration as well as the reduction of disaster risk. The need to further strengthen institutional capacities for disaster risk management remains as topical and needed as ever, if lasting and profound improvements are to be achieved in reducing the level of disaster risk to which the majority of poor and marginalized populations are still exposed to.