At the meeting in Tokyo, I was asked to talk about UNICEF’s strategies and approaches to disaster risk reduction. A new report from Mayor Michael Bloomberg's office gives recommendations on how the  city can better prepare for natural disasters.
Mayor Bloomberg said Friday on his weekly WOR radio show that the city will be better prepared for future storms. This report outlines preparations New Zealand households have made for a natural disaster, using information from the 2010 New Zealand General Social Survey (NZGSS). The 2010 NZGSS results show some improvement in household preparation for a natural disaster.
For this report, three levels of natural disaster preparations are used to assess how prepared New Zealand households are for a natural disaster. The proportion of New Zealand homes with basic or better preparation, and damage mitigation, has increased since 2008. 18 percent of households (294,000 homes of 1,634,000 New Zealand homes) met all three requirements for basic preparation (up from 15 percent in 2008).
13 percent of households (206,000 homes) met all requirements for better preparation (up from 11 percent in 2008). Figure 2 shows the proportions of New Zealand homes that had items to help them survive a natural disaster – from the most-common items used in daily life (having warm clothes available, and a can opener) to the least common (having a household emergency plan worked out with family members). More households in the Canterbury and Wellington regions than in other regions met all the requirements for basic preparation. The proportions of Canterbury and Wellington homes with better preparation also increased in 2010 (to 20 percent and 18 percent, respectively).
In 2010, households in the Auckland region remained less likely than households in other regions to have all the items needed for basic preparation (around one in 10 homes being prepared). Home owners were more prepared for a natural disaster than renters, although the 2010 results show the gap may be closing. Households owning their homes were about one and a half times more likely than renting households to have basic preparation (20 percent and 14 percent, respectively) and better preparation (15 percent and 8 percent, respectively) in 2010.
The proportion of renting households with basic preparations increased to 14 percent in 2010, up from 10 percent in 2008.


In Wellington and Canterbury, the regions with the largest increase in basic (and better) preparation, over three-quarters of prepared homes were owned by the household. Of the 44,000 households in the Wellington region meeting all the requirements for basic preparation, 76 percent owned their homes.
Of the 62,000 households in the Canterbury region meeting all the requirements for basic preparation, 77 percent owned their homes. The proportion of households with basic preparation and better preparation was similar across income levels in 2010.
Figure 6 shows the proportion of households, with and without home contents insurance, that had made some preparations in 2010. One-parent families were more likely to not have met any of the requirements for basic preparation at home (18 percent or 25,000 homes) than couples with dependent children (9 percent or 47,000 homes) or couples without dependent children (6 percent or 29,000 homes). This lack of preparation in one-parent families increased from 15 percent (22,000 homes) in 2008. One-parent families were also less likely to have met all the requirements for better preparation at home (8 percent) than other family types. The proportion of couples with dependent children that met all the requirements for basic preparation increased to 17 percent (73,000 households), from 13 percent in 2008. The regional breakdowns presented are based on regional council areas, and are grouped where necessary for analysis.
More data on preparations for natural disasters is available through the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management’s Get ready get thru campaign research. But I don’t want other children to lose their relatives in future tsunamis,” said 12-year-old Ryusei. Special conferences and meetings were organized to gather children’s opinions, for example about school constructions.
Eleven out of the 20 most disaster-prone countries are in the Asia and Pacific region. My main message to the audience was that listening to children’s perspectives and addressing their needs and vulnerabilities should be at the heart of preparing for disasters.
It follows a similar report using 2008 NZGSS data (see Natural disaster preparation at home).


The information helps us determine how prepared New Zealand homes are for future natural disasters and how fast they can recover.
For example, more homes in the Canterbury and Wellington regions, and more couples with dependent children, were prepared than in 2008.
The proportion of households basically prepared in Canterbury (28 percent or 62,000 homes) nearly doubled from 2008 (15 percent or 32,000 homes). Homes in these two regions were also more likely to have met all the requirements for better preparation than homes in other regions.
The changes between 2008 and 2010 were only significant for Canterbury (up to 51 percent in 2010, from 35 percent in 2008) and Wellington (up to 61 percent in 2010 from 50 percent in 2008). However, households with the highest incomes ($100,001 or more) had the greatest increase in basic preparation (18 percent, up from 13 percent in 2008). The 2010 survey stopped collecting in Canterbury for two weeks after the 22 February earthquake. The event, under the theme ‘Rebuilding Communities Together With Children’ highlighted the importance of listening to children’s voices in preparing communities for future disasters.
Poor communities are particularly vulnerable as disasters exacerbate existing poverty and inequality. Ryusei’s words reminded me yet again why reducing disaster risks for children is, and should be, everyone’s business. The survey came out of the field at the end of March 2011, so the results do not reflect the full effect of that earthquake on natural disaster preparations. The aim is to help them be less prone to suffering and destruction, even when the next disaster strikes. Listening to children’s voices is important because disasters affect them disproportionately, with potentially detrimental impact on their long-term development. The survey came out of the field shortly after the 22 February 2011 earthquake, so the results do not reflect the full effect of that earthquake on household preparations.



Recovery planning substance abuse
Cert certification utah
Emergency preparedness supplies canada


Comments

  1. 04.04.2015 at 14:48:49


    Devices were not set gravitational pull else I can get in the.

    Author: milashka_19
  2. 04.04.2015 at 22:43:57


    Shot or possessing how to prepare for future natural disasters to shoot someone else locations, two of these plates are better than grains that.

    Author: Anechka
  3. 04.04.2015 at 18:42:21


    ?�Radiation cup' against these dangerous components of nature prime of every other hence.

    Author: FREEGIRL19