Asian Disaster Preparedness Center
Asian Urban Disaster Mitigation Program
C a s e s t u d i e s o n
m i t i g a t i n g d i s a s t e r s
i n A s i a a n d t h e P a c i f i c
Coping with flood in Cambodian communities
Enhancing community solidarity through capacity building
Three decades of internal upheaval and warfare in Cambodia have eroded
the traditions of community solidarity and trust. In times of flood and
other disasters, families feel virtually responsible for themselves. A
community-based approach to flood mitigation and preparedness is now
challenging this attitude by building the capacities of villagers to act
concertedly in building safer communities.
Flood along the Mekong River and the (CBDP) — the first of its kind in Cambodia.
Tonle Sap Lake and tributaries is a The program added depth to CRC s role
recurring event, sometimes reaching as a relief and response agency by taking Abstract
disastrous dimensions, with severe on a development approach, and treating
This case study, the first of a two-
losses in human lives and food communities of Cambodia not as victims part series, is derived from the
production. The annual flood in awaiting assistance but as capable people experience of the Community-Based
Cambodia reached catastrophic who can prepare for and mitigate Flood Mitigation and Preparedness
proportions in 1996, prompting the against flood. Project (CBFMP) (1998-2001). It
Cambodian Red Cross (CRC) and the features the development of an
International Federation of Red Cross Recognizing CRC s leading approach to organizational framework for flood
and Red Crescent Societies (the disaster management, the Asian vulnerability reduction in 23
Federation) to initiate a Community- Disaster Preparedness Center s (ADPC) Cambodian villages. The step-by-
Based Disaster Preparedness Program step process by which this was
Asian Urban Disaster Mitigation
achieved involved: (1) selecting
project sites, targeting most
vulnerable communities (2)
Cambodia selecting community members as
volunteers and training them to
work with communities in reducing
Thailand vulnerabilities; (3) organizing
communities and establishing
Management Committees (CBDMCs)
as a coordinating body; and (4)
Mekong identifying, estimating and ranking
local disaster risks through risk
mapping. Building the capacities of
communities to mitigate, prepare
for and respond to disaster in a self-
reliant and cooperative manner is
The inside story
Selecting project sites and
volunteers, page 3
Capacity building, page 3
Community organizing, page 5
Risk assessment, page 6
Program (AUDMP) worked in partnership CBDP and CBFMP relied on a network sustaining an organizational framework
with CRC, the Federation and Private of Red Cross Volunteers (RCVs) and for identifying needs and cost-effective
Agencies Collaborting Together Cambodian Red Cross (CRC) officials at mitigation strategies that will be
(PACT) to develop a pilot project — the commune, district and provincial levels implemented and maintained by the
the Community-Based Flood Mitigation to tap resources and build capacities communities themselves. This process
and Preparedness Project (CBFMP) in flood mitigation and preparedness was carried out by selecting project
under CRC s CBDP. The CBFMP aimed within communities. This unique network sites, training community volunteers,
to establish sustainable mechanisms of CRC, together with the strong establishing local disaster
for flood vulnerability reduction in 23 support of the Royal Cambodian management committees, and risk
villages under three flood prone districts Government and H.E. Lok Chumteav mapping. From these, community
- Kang Meas District in Kampong Cham, Bun Rany Hun Sen as CRC s President, members have prioritized, planned
Kien Svay District in Kandal, and Peam contributed to the acceptance of this and implemented mitigation solutions
Ro District in Prey Veng (see map on new community-based initiative. (or micro-projects) to minimize the
p.1). The success stories and lessons impact of flood. Lessons from planning
learned from the CBFMP have been This case study is the first of a two-part and implementing the mitigation
replicated to other communities series about CBFMP. This part explores solutions will be discussed in ADPC
throughout Cambodia. the methodology for establishing and Safer Cities 3.
Issues to consider when implementing community-based initiatives to ask
Where will the project be developed? Who will be involved?
What will they do and how will they do it? How do we involve the community?
How do we find out the problems, needs and What next?
Asian Disaster Preparedness Center
Step 1: Selecting project sites and volunteers
Red Cross defines selection criteria
C RC headquarters and the provincial Red
Cross officials, with support from the
Federation, selected the target
volunteers, sometimes to ensure that at
least one woman is in a team of RCVs.
Although most villagers had to
Main characteristics of
communities based on the work hard daily to earn just • Highly vulnerable to flood
extent of damage and rate At the first enough for a day s • Limited capacity to recover
of recovery from past sign of flood, I subsistence, a sufficient • Experienced severe damage
floods, particularly during worked with other number of volunteers by flood
1996. All selected villages volunteers to move were recruited with little • Supported by the people in the
are situated along the children and women to a problems. This is
Mekong River or nearby safe place, and livestock to because CRC is a well Criteria for RCV selection:
tributaries. the newly raised road . . . I respected organization • At least 17 years old
didn t have to worry about and community
• Cambodian nationality
Red Cross Volunteers members are generally
(RCVs) residing at the
my family because I proud to be RCVs. • Able to read and write in Khmer
selected communities knew they were well Women might have • Able to do simple
were recruited through taken cared of, said faced additional mathematical calculations
candidates application in Mr. Leang Thea, difficulties due to their • In good health
response to RCV Village Chief of Prek multi-tasked workday, • Has been affected by flood
advertisements posted in but once appointed as • Willing to be an RCV
Andong and Red
the villages. The selection of Cross Volunteer. RCVs both women and men
suitable volunteers was based were committed to the Red Composition of RCVs per village:
on the Red Cross criteria for RCVs Cross principles and felt a sense At least two RCVs (one male and one
(see right box). In some cases, Red of responsibility for the well-being of the female) not from the same family
Cross officials approached potential community.
Step 2: Capacity building
CBFMP trains volunteers
Volunteers go through
Training curriculum for RCVs: Four Modules
1. Red Cross Values and Responsibilities (3 days) — Encompassing the values of
the Red Cross Movement.
Disaster Management and Hazard Mapping (5 days) — Covering concepts of B y June 2000, the project had trained
seven trainers at the CRC headquarters
and a total of 159 RCVs in 23 villages of
disaster and flood mitigation; the role of RCVs; risk mapping and vulnerability
assessments; and exposure to techniques for community organization and the three selected provinces. CRC, the
resource mobilization. Federation, PACT and ADPC developed the
training curriculum for RCVs under four
Community-Based First Aid (CBFA) (6 days) — Demonstrating First techniques modules (see left box).
in case of emergencies.
4. Leadership and Community Organizing (10 days) — Focusing on activating Upon completion of Module 2, RCVs
RCVs to utilize the information gathered in the assessment process to prioritize returned to their communities to conduct
mitigation strategies and mobilize resources from within the community and risk assessments and complete a risk map
from outside sources. This module also covers proposal-writing skills. (see Step 4). This map was intended to
encourage participative identification of
Financial Management — This module was added later to arrange a system for problems and planning of preparedness
the management of funds provided by the community members and donors and mitigation strategies in the
in a transparent manner. communities. At the end of Module 4, RCVs
Safer Cities is a series of case studies that illustrate how people, communities, cities, governments and businesses have been able to make cities safer before
disasters strike. The series presents strategies and approaches to urban disaster mitigation derived from analyses of real-life experiences, good practices and lessons
learned in Asia and the Pacific. This user-friendly resource is designed to provide decision-makers, planners, city and community leaders and trainers with an array of
proven ideas, tools, policy options and strategies for urban disaster mitigation. The key principles emphasized throughout Safer Cities are broad-based participation,
partnerships, sustainability and replication of success stories.
The contents here may be freely quoted with credit given to the implementing institution, Asian Disaster Preparedeness Center (ADPC), and to the Office of Foreign
Disaster Assistance (OFDA) of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). The opinions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily
reflect the views of ADPC or USAID. The information in this series is provided for purposes of dissemination. For more details, please refer to contacts listed at the
end of this material. Publication of this case study was made possible through the support provided by the OFDA, USAID, under the terms of Cooperative Agreement
Safer Cities 2, AUDMP 3
continued to work with communities in existing RCVs to get together; clarify their training. At the same time, these
reaching a consensus on priority mitigation concepts on and practices of flood enabled CRC to monitor progress in the
solutions. Subsequently, communities were preparedness and mitigation planning; and communities and troubleshoot individual
organized and resources were mobilized in learn from each other s experiences. To problems.
order to plan and implement the continue to build the capacity of
solutions. Mr. Sang RCVs, new modules such as CRC expands training program
Kee, Chief of Koh Participatory Risk
RCVs get Assessment and As CBFMP came to completion, CRC
Ta Ngor I Village,
after-training support Community Action replicated its achievements into CBDP.
said, Every time Planning are being CBDP and CBFMP developed a group of
The training curriculum was t h e r e w a s a designed. RCVs and active community members who
developed on the basis of problem, Mr. Kong could be mobilized to mitigate, prepare for
limited funds and time frame. [District Red Cross During CBFMP, additional and respond to flood disasters. To further
However, it was well Officer] came and support after training was build on the achievements of CBFMP, CRC
recognized by CRC, the provided support ensured. Once the training plans to incorporate the following in its
Federation and PACT that and encouraged us had been completed and CBDP: (1) training for provincial Red Cross
training in itself is not sufficient. to do the work the volunteers had returned staff to train RCVs (training of RCVs is
CRC considered this training as a to their communities, CRC currently conducted by the trainers at CRC
n e e d e d .
first step in establishing a long-term organized regular group headquarters); (2) extension of
relationship with the RCVs and meetings and site visits (see box community-based disaster mitigation
community members. It was also developed below) over the next several months to training to Community-Based Disaster
as an orientation to disaster mitigation and support the RCVs as they worked in their Management Committee (CBDMC)
preparedness. Continuing support and respective communities. The group members (more details on CBDMC below);
future training for RCVs have been meetings and site visits provided an and (3) promotion of public awareness on
incorporated in CRC s master plan. It opportunity for the RCVs to exchange flood mitigation and preparedness among
includes refresher courses that would allow experiences in the practical application of villagers.
A schedule of after-training site visits and group meetings
of Red Cross Volunteers
Site visit 1 (after Module 2):
• Clarify roles and responsibilities of RCVs.
• Review hazard and vulnerability assessment processes.
Group Meeting 1 (after Module 2):
• Clarify roles and responsibilities of RCVs.
• Exchange ideas among RCVs and community members on the profile of exceptional
historic disaster events.
Site visit 2 (after Module 4):
• Promote awareness of the prioritized hazards and elements at risk.
• Review preliminary strategies and solution to cope with the hazards.
Training of Red Cross Volunteers
Group Meeting 2 (after Module 4):
• Identify and define strategic measures to cope with potential hazards in the
communities through participatory methods.
Site visit 3 (after Module 4):
• Assess the availability of community capacity and resources for disaster
preparedness and mitigation activities.
Site visit 4 (after Module 4):
• Verify the prioritized community mitigation solution.
• Accept the prioritized solution proposal.
Group Meeting 3 (Solution implementation period):
• Review the basic financial management of the RCVs and the Community-Based
Disaster Management Committee.
• Disburse funds to support community solution.
Site visit 5 (Solution implementation period):
CRC and PACT conduct group
• Monitor and follow up the mitigation activities.
meetings with Red Cross Volunteers
and community representatives. Group Meeting 4 (Solution implementation period):
• Evaluate the completion of community mitigation solution.
Asian Disaster Preparedness Center
CRC s replication of training through DIPECHO (Disaster
Preparedness - European Community Humanitarian Aid Office)
funds in Prek Kreh Village of Kampot Province:
With funding support from DIPECHO, CRC conducted training on
Community-Based Disaster Preparedness to other communities
in the three demonstration provinces of Kampong Cham, Kandal
and Prey Veng as well as to communities in four other
provinces - Kampong Speu, Kampot, Kratie and Pursat.
Insights on capacity building learned
Training could be used as an entry point into the Complementing training of RCVs with public awareness
community. campaigns is crucial.
Empowering RCVs through training is strategic in Supplementing training with on-site practical work is
reducing communities vulnerability to flood and essential.
improving communities quality of life in the long term.
Providing additional support after training is helpful.
Step 3: Community organizing
Volunteers establish Community-Based Disaster Management Committees (CBDMCs)
Trained RCVs elect lessons
committee members Composition of CBDMC for effective implementation learned
T rained RCVs established a Community-
Based Disaster Management
Committee (CBDMC) in each targeted
Number of members may vary.
Should at least compose of the Chair, Treasurer, Secretary and a member.
community by election. The CBDMC is
composed of at least four persons - the Should include accepted individuals (e.g., elderly, monk, teacher and members
Committee Chair, the Treasurer, the of religious groups) to add credibility.
Secretary and a member. However, the
size of the CBDMCs varied from 3 to 19 Should capitalize on the existing social structures.
members. The nominated CBDMC
members were well respected, giving
credibility to activities initiated by the as some level of trust within the group Highlighted below are the experiences of
CBDMC. Committee members exists. CBDMCs in communities of Kampong Cham
(predominantly male) often included the after CBFMP had ended (see box on
village chiefs, village deputy chiefs, village CBDMCs go beyond the call of duty page 6). Two cases show that communities
group leaders, elders, monks and members continue to rely primarily on their own
of the wat (or temple) committees, the Initially, CBDMCs were set up for the families but a sense of community
RCVs, teachers, and health workers. management of the project, more We were solidarity seems to be emerging.
According to the CBFMP evaluation specifically, for the management
(August 2001), the composition of the of funds from donors and In some communities, CBDMC
CBDMCs had a great impact on the community contributions.
stockpile food members and RCVs took
effectiveness of the project process. However, at the end of the and animal fodder upon themselves the
project, many committee in preparation for additional role of raising
On the contrary, the size of the CBDMCs members felt responsible to flood and to purify public awareness on
did not seem to have an impact on their carry out further disaster water during community-based flood
effectiveness in resource mobilization or in mitigation and preparedness flood, said Ms. Bee mitigation and preparedness.
implementing the project. Committee sizes activities in collaboration with Savong, a 28-year- As an illustration, Koh
likely reflected the level of village the RCVs. This could be due old villager in Ta Ngor II CBDMC members
organization. Undoubtedly, communities to the completion of a and RCVs reminded the
Koh Ta Ngor II.
that were well organized had an easier time successful project demonstrating community to store food
mobilizing local resources. Furthermore, the benefits of such an initiative to supplies and purify water with
community bodies that had demonstrated the community. As a result, such cholarmine from CRC and other relief
their ability to achieve results on prior committees are supported and sustained in agencies during flood. The impact of
occasions were more likely to be effective, many communities. their awareness promotion efforts could
Safer Cities 2, AUDMP 5
Experiences of Community-Based Disaster Management Committees in Kampong Cham communities
Bang Sang Lech drinking water during flood and the of community collaboration. For example,
building of safe areas for individual families Prek Andong was completely inundated
In Bang Sang Lech community, the near their homes. These safe areas are in 2000 and most people had to help
project to raise 500 meters of road and 4x6x2-meter structures costing Riel themselves. Only families with relatives
construct an 800-meter long and 0.5- 120,000 (USD31.20) including materials and friends in other communities inland
meter high berm reduced the speed of and one-week labor charges. were able to move temporarily to a safer
flood onset on houses further inland, Communities in this village prefer to have place. However, the 2001 flood was met
provided elevated grounds for individual safe areas rather than a public with a more concerted effort in this
communities to evacuate their livestock, one. community, led by the CBDMC and RCVs
and provided road access during flood. in evacuating families in 15 small houses
Following this success, more mitigation Prek Andong to a nearby community of Andong Ong.
projects have been planned by the With the help of the Village Chief of
CBDMC with community members, Concern for one s family only continues Andong Ong, these families moved to
including the construction of higher well to be typical of the communities in stay with those who had stronger
caps to prevent contamination of Kampong Cham but we could see hints houses for more than a month.
be felt in other sites. For example, they presentation skills to promote awareness staff at the provincial office and the head-
encouraged mobilization of human and not only in their own villages but also in quarters should also be involved in pro-
financial resources to raise the road in neighboring villages. moting awareness and providing advice
neighboring Angkor Ban Village. on flood mitigation and preparedness. It
It was suggested by a number of was believed that this would boost the
The CBDMC members were keen to be community members and RCVs during credibility of the messages conveyed.
trained on improving public speaking and the 2001 evaluation of CBFMP that CRC
Step 4: Risk assessment
Risk mapping goes wrong
R CVs were trained to facilitate a mapping
exercise in their communities to
identify hazard-prone areas in order to
What is a risk map?
discuss and reach consensus on planning A sketch or a scale model that:
and implementing mitigation solutions. This
process, however, was conducted in such • shows geography (e.g., location of rivers and mountains)
a way that had no identifiable value to • shows settlements and infrastructure
any of the people in the communities • identifies location of high-risk areas in the community
(CBFMP Evaluation Report, August 2001, • employs symbols to identify key places that serve as reference points
p. 13). (e.g., Red Cross, Health Center, police, temples, schools and so on)
• identifies location of high-risk areas in the community
Often, the RCVs felt responsible to lead • highlights location of resources (e.g., wells and boats)
the production of the risk map, thus, there • marks safe areas for evacuation
was limited community participation and
some community members had not even
seen the map. Moreover, these maps were As a result, these maps were neither One of the reasons for non-use of hazard
often not risk maps but sketch maps of visually displayed nor updated. However, maps may be the absence of a scenario-
the villages. Understandably, the local they could be useful tools for identifying building exercise for extreme disaster
villagers felt they did not require a map to hazardous areas and mitigation planning. situations as an integral part of the risk
locate or designate hazardous areas at For example, residents of Koh Tah Ngor II assessment. It is vital for community
times of flood. These people were born Village of Kampong Cham Province members to discuss community risks and
and raised in the community and have an perceived the nearby Mekong riverbank hazards or even take a tour of the
intimate knowledge of the local geography. to be eroding at a rate of as much as 200 community to identify these risks and
Therefore, the RCVs and the CBDMC meters per year. The regular update of hazards. Following the recent and
members felt that the map served more the risk map would clearly demonstrate devastating high floods of 2000 and 2001,
of the needs of the CRC staff and NGO the increased vulnerability of the communities are beginning to learn the
representatives who visited their communities (see map and photo on importance of mitigation and preparedness
community. page 7). planning.
Asian Disaster Preparedness Center
Key points in risk mapping lessons
Risk mapping is not necessarily the panacea to all
problems of hazard identification.
It is important to get into the social psyche of how
perceptions of risk are quantified and represented.
Full involvement of all groups in the community (e.g.,
elders, monks, women, children, and others) is
Communities should have a risk map NOT a sketch map. fundamental.
The map has to be initiated and drawn by villagers
(not by RCVs).
Mapping is an effective tool to encourage participation
in the community.
Agreeable ideas or conflicts can be identified during
the mapping process.
Usefulness of risk mapping needs to be incorporated
into community planning over a continuous period
Riverbank erosion is a major concern of villagers in through training and practical application.
Kampong Cham. The village map clearly shows houses
and roads as elements at high risk.
Conclusion: What next?
Sustainable disaster management solutions will be made in the second of depend on outside charity for anything
recognizes community capabilities the two-part series about CBFMP (see above their basic needs. The project has
ADPC Safer Cities 3). The people in each allowed the communities to recognize that
The aim of community-based disaster community were evidently proud of what there are outside resources that could be
mitigation and preparedness is to reduce had been achieved and recognized that tapped.
vulnerabilities and strengthen people s ownership of the end result of the project
capacity to cope with hazards. In this resided with them. During the flood of Community-based approach builds
process it is essential to recognize people s 2001, villagers of Bang Sang Lech in safety and solidarity
capacities. Communities are not helpless Kampong Cham protected their newly
and they have lived with flood for centuries. raised road by topping the community- All in all, CBDP and CBFMP had not only
They are capable of preparing, responding raised berm with sandbags made of soil contributed towards building safer
to and recovering from disasters. When from their own paddy fields. When it communities but also towards
the capacities of communities are was realized that this measure was
Mr. Peng building trust through working
recognized, the solution comes from within insufficient to protect the road, together on a common problem
the community itself, making it stronger the community s insistence on Eourn, a 63- — flood — to redevelop
and more self-reliant. The solutions are protecting the road led them year-old villager, communities. The evaluation
realistic and the community feels to buy additional sandbags on stated, As we of CBFMP revealed that
responsible and involved in the disaster credit from CRC. completed our almost every villager took
management process. This leads to more project, our com- pride in what had been
effective and sustainable mitigation of Communities may tap munity became achieved in his or her
disasters. Implementing the program external funding closer. This is community. Some villagers
through the existing structure of the expressed sentiments that
something I have
Cambodian Red Cross contributed The most common problem for the project had served to
not seen in a
significantly to the success of the activities. community-based disaster build community solidarity and
management initiatives is the long time. bring people together. The
Communities need to implement lack of resources. It could be village elders recognized aspects
mitigation solutions argued that seeking funding from of this important social element
outside sources create communities resurface in the process of this project.
Discussion on the process of planning, dependence, but most villages have no This provides the foundation for further
designing and implementing the mitigation other resources and so are compelled to community initiatives.
Safer Cities 2, AUDMP 7
Further references On community-based Other relevant
disaster management Safer Cities case studies
ADPC Community- Based Disaster Management ADPC Safer Cities 1: Community-Based Initiaties
CBFMP Training Modules, August 2001. Course Curriculum (including Trainer s Guide, in Kathmandu Valley
CBFMP Completion Report for Phase 1 and 2 Coordinator s Guide, Participant s Workbook ADPC Safer Cities 3: Mitigating Flood Risk in
(AUDMP Project Report No. 2), August 2000. and Reading Materials). Cambodian Communities
CBFMP Completion Report for Phase 3. ADPC Information Resources on Community- ADPC Safer Cities 5: Community-Based Initiatives
CBFMP Evaluation Report: Lessons Learned from Based Disaster Management (CD-ROM), in Sri Lanka
Community-Based Flood Mitigation and September 2001.
Preparedness Project in Cambodia (AUDMP Nee, M., 1995, Towards Restoring Life:
Working Paper No. 3), August 2001. Cambodian Villages, JSRC Phnom Penh. Editorial Board
Dr. Suvit Yodmani, ADPC
On community-based disaster management initiatives in Cambodia Col. Brian Ward, ADPC
Mr. Aloysius Rego, ADPC
Action Against Hunger (AAH) CARE Cambodia Oxfam Great Britain Mr. Kamal Kishore, ADPC
15 Street 7 (Okhna Suor Srong) House 52 St. 352 P.O Box 883, No. 54, Road 352 Dr. Apichai Thirathon, ADPC
Sangkat Chak Tomok Khan, Doun Penh Quarter Boeung Keng Kang 1 Boeung Keng Kang 1, Chamkamon Mr. Touch Thearat, ADPC (formerly at PACT)
Phnom Penh, Cambodia Dist. Chamcar Morn Phnom Penh, Cambodia Dr. Uy Sam Ath, CRC
Tel: (855-23) 426-934; 363-701 Phnom Penh, Cambodia Tel: (855-23) 720-036 Mme. Seija Tyrninoksa, IFRC
Fax: (855-23) 361-291 Tel. (855-23) 215-269 Fax: (855-23) 720-929 Ms. Megan Meline, USAID
URL: http://www.aah-usa.org Fax: (855-23) 426-233 URL: http://www.oxfam.org.uk
Contact: Mr. Dominic Carroll Contact: Ms. Kate Angus Contact: Mr. Phoeuk Sok Author: Christine Apikul, ADPC
E-mail: email@example.com E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org E-mail: email@example.com Editor & designer: Lichelle Carlos
CBDP and CBFMP
The Cambodian Red Cross (CRC) Community-Based Disaster Preparedness Program (CBDP) aimed to reduce the vulnerability of flood-prone communities
in Cambodia. As part of the CBDP, the Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC) under its Asian Urban Disaster Mitigation Program (AUDMP) developed
the Community-Based Flood Mitigation and Preparedness Project (CBFMP) through a partnership approach with CRC, the Federation and PACT. Disaster
preparedness and mitigation activities were piloted in Kampong Cham, Kandal and Prey Veng Provinces. The project brought together a variety of
humanitarian organizations to address the susceptibility of the general population and its infrastructure, livelihoods and shelter. Together, they focused
on training volunteers and facilitating implementation of mitigation solutions for flood risk reduction in communities.
Cambodian Red Cross International Federation of Red Cross Private Agencies Collaborating Together Office of Foreign Disaster
17 Vithei de la Croix Rouge and Red Crescent Societies Hong Kong Center, Ground Fl. Assistance (OFDA),
Cambodgienne 17 Vithei de la Croix Rouge 108-112 Preah Sothearos Blvd. U.S. Agency for
Phnom Penh, Cambodia Cambodgienne P.O. Box 149 International Development
Tel: (855-23) 210-773 Phnom Penh,Cambodia Phnom Penh, Cambodia (USAID)
Fax: (855-23) 212-875 Tel: (855-23) 217-855-6 P a c t
Tel: (855-23) 210-162, 362-690
Contact: Dr. Uy Sam Ath Fax: (855-23) 210-163 Fax: (855-23) 217-820
Director, Disaster URL: http://www.ifrc.org URL: http://www.pactworld.org
Management Department Contact: Head of Delegation of the Contact: Mr. Kurt A. MacLeod
E-mail: dmd.crc@bigpond. Federation Country Representative
com.kh E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org E-mail: email@example.com
The Asian Urban Disaster Mitigation Program (AUDMP) is the first of six regional programs implemented by ADPC. The AUDMP started in 1995
with core funding from USAID’s Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA) until 2003. The program was developed with the recognition of
increased disaster vulnerability of urban populations, infrastructure, critical facilities and shelter in Asian cities. In an environment where good
governance and decentralization are high in most countries’ political agenda, AUDMP aims to demonstrate the importance of and strategic
approaches to urban disaster mitigation as part of the urban development planning process in targeted cities of Asia.
AUDMP supports this demonstration by building the capacity of local authorities, national governments, non-government organizations, businesses and
others responsible for establishing public and private sector mechanisms for urban disaster mitigation as part of city management. AUDMP also facilitates
knowledge sharing and dialogue between the key stakeholders to promote replication of the AUDMP approaches to other cities and countries worldwide.
Currently, the AUDMP approaches have been introduced and sustained by national partner institutions in targeted cities of Bangladesh, Cambodia,
India, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Nepal, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Vietnam.
The Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC) is a regional resource center dedicated to safer communities and sustainable development through
disaster reduction in Asia and the Pacific. Established in 1986 in Bangkok, Thailand, ADPC is recognized as an important focal point for promoting disaster
awareness and developing capabilities to foster institutionalized disaster management and mitigation policies.
For more information, please get in touch with us at: Asian Disaster Preparedness Center
P.O. Box 4, Klong Luang Tel: (66-2) 524-5354
Pathumthani 12120 Fax: (66-2) 524-5350
THAILAND E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Contact: Information Scientist URL: http://www.adpc.ait.ac.th
Safer Cities 2, AUDMP