Although two months are missing for the fourth, which will decide new mechanisms to pay for and accelerate compliance with the UN, a High of the UN is already in Spain, the ground for their agenda. Kamal Kishore (India, 56 years old), a special representative of the UN for the reduction of disaster risks, will seek to increase the interest of national governments and cooperation agencies to invest in a sector that sometimes underestimated.
“It makes no sense that we allocate so little money to an area that has shown to have the best return on investment,” says Kishore in an interview on Monday with El País. Injecting money to this development sector is urgent because there are more and more climatic emergencies on the planet. The organism data directed by Kishore suggests that, between 2015 and 2030, there will be a 40% increase in the number of weather disasters. What must face the human and material costs of catastrophes. Despite that, risk reduction represents only 1% of national governments budgets and a minimal fraction of international aid. More than 90% of the official development aid (AOD) related to meteorological disasters is concentrated in the emergency response and recovery, while only 10% go to prevention. At the Seville conference, Kishore hopes to get this trend to change.
Ask. Two months are missing for the development conference for development. What changes do you expect to improve disaster risk reduction?
Answer. In general, there is a financing deficit for sustainable development. But, in addition, if we do not ensure that all the money spent in development considers disaster risk reduction [como un factor transversal]then all investment can be lost due to catastrophes. One of my expectations is a system led mainly by national governments to finance disaster risk reduction. And it is not only about official development aid, but about a series of financial solutions, to mobilize private capital, to use climatic financing where it is available and seek support in insurance. I also believe that we should look where they are innovating in financing. There are several countries that are at the forefront and it is important to learn those lessons and see how we can expand those good practices in other parts of the world.
P. Its organization has warned that as disaster costs increase, insurance companies are withdrawing from high -risk markets. How should it be reformed then?
R. We need three things. On the one hand, you cannot take insurance solutions that work well in Europe or the United States and transfer them to the global south. It is very important that these are their own so that they are more attractive for those who buy insurance. Secondly, we have to solve the confidence deficit in various parts of the world between insurance and insured suppliers. The third factor is that the insurance premium is, in some way, linked to the client’s efforts to reduce the risks. For example, if I live in a house insured by risk of earthquake damage and, I also invest in adapting it and making it stronger, my risk premium should go down.
P. In countries where risk prevention is a “priority objective”, 1% of national budgets are barely assigned. How to get that percentage to increase?
R. It is necessary to defend that investing in disaster risk reduction is a good macroeconomic measure. It is important that we have good risk quantification systems accepted throughout the world, that allow us to know what the type of risk that each country runs, that is, the expected annual average loss. With such a system, we could tell a country how many losses can be due to disasters and that, if it takes measures, the risk and its economy will be more solid. On the other hand, we must understand that many of the efforts to guarantee universal access to education, food security or poverty reduction will be compromised if it is not invested in risk reduction.
Efforts to guarantee universal access to education, food security or poverty reduction will be compromised if you do not invest in risk reduction.
Kamal Kishore, UN representative for disaster risk reduction
P. How to make this area also generate more interest among the financatives of development aid?
R. The percentage of financing dedicated to disasters, in proportion to global cooperation investments, is really very small. It makes no sense that we allocate so little money to an area that has shown to have the best return on investment. In addition, if financing for international cooperation and humanitarian aid is decreasing today, it is important that we increase investment in disaster risk reduction. If we invest in this today, within a few years the need for [financiar] Humanitarian aid
P. It may be a challenge to give that message at a time when some political leaders deny the effects of climate change …
R. Yes, it will be difficult. But I must say that when I talk about disasters, I not only mean those related to the weather, but those that have to do with geophysical danger, such as earthquakes, tsunamis and landslides. Today, 30% loss risk comes from earthquakes and we are not doing enough to contain it. We already know what to invest [en reducción de riesgos] works. The chances of dying in an area prone to cyclones or hurricanes is today a lower third than 15 years ago because there has been a huge advance in early alert systems. I can assure that if a country invests in improving alert systems, medical services and in the capacity of communities to act, the money is recovered in two or three events. Then, everything is benefits.
P. Last year, Spain lived the largest disaster of the century with which it killed 228 people and caused millionaire losses. What lessons should the country have learned from this?
R. What happened in Valencia occurs throughout the world more frequently and gravity and is that it rains more in less days. This creates challenges in early alerts and water drains. That is why there are five key lessons. One is to see how to manage land use plans: in many cities, for example, it has been built on wetlands. The second is that rainwater drainage systems were designed for a rainfall regime 50 years ago, the question is how to improve it. The third point is to create a specific early warning system for urban areas. Fourth: It is necessary to see how to manage reservoirs to control floods. And, in fifth place, we must promote citizen participation to achieve a good response to catastrophes.
P. In the conference, they say they have decided to “urgently increase” contributions to. How much will that increase be?
R. The request to increase the capital of the fund has long exists. In COP28 there was talk of moving from an investment of thousands of millions to billion. We do not get it, but it is a beginning. I want to contribute a complementary point of view and it is that while investing in that background, let’s work simultaneously with national governments to implement systems to effectively use those resources.
P. The Sendai framework has left for five years, the international agreement that raised since 2015 the need to invest and think more about reducing risks than in the attention of disasters when they have already occurred. Did countries attend to that call? What tasks are urgent from here to 2030?
R. Wherever I go, I hear that Sendai’s frame has contributed to boost disaster risk. 131 countries have a plan for that, for example. But, although we have advanced in reducing life loss and early alert systems, we have not done it in terms of affected people, economic losses or damage to infrastructure. The challenge in the coming years is to address these issues, but that cannot happen until we stop seeing the reduction of disaster risks as something isolated and not like what it is: an integral part of development.
