This publication was produced at the request of the United States Agency for International Development It was prepared independently by the Disaster Resilience in the Americas Program Extreme Events InstituteFlo da International University Performance Evaluation in LAC Urban DRR Programming: The Neighborhood Approach Final Report April 2018 The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Agency for International Development or the United States Government. Acknowledgements This report would not have been possible without the cooperation of country directors and staff of the eight implementing agencies (Save the Children/US; PREDES; COOPI; Global Communities; Project Concern International; World Concern Development Organization; Habitat for Humanity; and GOAL). We are grateful to the public officials and partners who collaborated on these projects from the six countries (Colombia, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, and Peru) who allowed us to interview them and who provided access to key data for this study. We also thank the IRG-RDAP program for its help in organizing many meetings with key decision makers throughout the project. We are particularly grateful to Suzanne Polak, Acting Lead Sector Advisor for Monitoring and Evaluation at the Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance-USAID for her commitment and guidance throughout the evaluation. Evaluation Team Leader Juan Pablo Sarmiento USAID Suzanne Polak FIU Evaluation Team Members EEI: Vicente Sandoval, Meenakshi Jerath, Gabriela Hoberman HPM: Alejandro Arrieta, Weiwei Chen A01 Marije van Lidth de Jeude, Oliver Schütte, Erick Mazariegos, Erick Palacios Solano Independent Consultants Omar Darío Cardona, Paulo Ruiz Cubillo, Elías Rosales Escalante, Patricia Bittner This research was conducted by Florida International University’s Disaster Resilience in the Americas Program (DRCAP), under Cooperative Agreement # AID-OFDA-A-16-00019 with the United States Agency for International Development’s Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID/OFDA), regional office for Latin American and the Caribbean. Suggested Citation: Sarmiento, J. P., Sandoval, V., Jerath, M., Hoberman, G., Arrieta, A., Chen, W., Lidth de Jeude, M., Schütte, O., Mazariegos, E., Palacios, E., Cardona, O.D., Bernal, G., Ruiz, P., Rosales, E., Polak, S. (2018). Performance Evaluation in LAC Urban DRR Programming: The Neighborhood Approach. United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Table of Contents Abstract.. ……………………………………………………………………………………i Executive Summary …………………………………………………………………………ii 1. Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………..….1 2. Theoretical Framework ……………………………………………………………………..2 3. Research Methods …………………………………………….…………………………….5 4. Evaluation Limitations...……………………………………………………………………..6 5. Summary of Main Findings by Project……………………………………………………….7 6. Response to USAID Questions……………………………………..………………………26 6.1 Objective 1: Effectiveness………………………………………………………….27 6.2 Objective 2: Sustainability……………………………….………………………….34 6.3 The NA Programming Strategy..……………….…………………………………...39 7. Conclusions …………………… …………………………………………………………..40 8. Recommendations…………………………………………………………………………..41 Acronyms and Abbreviations Bibliography Annexes 1. Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming - SOW 2. Research Methodology (complementary information) 4. Main Findings and Survey Results 4. Support Documents 4.1 Physical Works 4.2 Environmental Resilience 4.3 Focus Groups 4.4 Interviews 4.5 Hazard Assessments 4.6 Disaster Risk Assessments Modeling 4.7 Cost-Benefit Analysis 4.8 Life Satisfaction Analysis 4.9 New DRR Strategies 5. Tools 6. List of Respondents i Performance Evaluation LAC Urban DRR Programming The Neighborhood Approach Abstract The goal of this evaluation is to improve the understanding of the Urban Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) programming carried out in Latin America and The Caribbean, and supported by the United States Agency for International Development's Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID/OFDA). The study focused on eight DRR projects awarded by USAID in Colombia, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, and Peru, between FY2012 and FY2016. The projects applied the USAID Neighborhood Approach (NA) to find practical and workable solutions for DRR in densely populated informal urban settlements. Two objectives and specific questions were defined for this evaluation: (1) the effectiveness and (2) the sustainability of the NA. The study comprised an extensive literature review, followed by a mixed research method, including surveys, focus groups, and interviews; disaster risk modeling; georeferencing analysis; and engineering inspections. Finally, an integrative processtriangulationwas used to analyze the data obtained from multiple theoretical positions. The study confirmed that neighborhoods are a living fabric of social, economic, and physical features that provide the residents of a particular territory with an identity, a sense of security, safety, and familiarity. The USAID-NA expands the consideration of DRR interventions beyond individuals and households to a settlement approach, addressing critical disaster risk drivers and development gaps, and encouraging a long-term vision. The study showed the need to balance physical and social interventions to match individual and collective needs, support community cohesion and self-determination, and meet expectations associated with the common good and community resilience. ii Performance Evaluation LAC Urban DRR Programming The Neighborhood Approach Executive Summary This report presents the results of the evaluation of the Urban Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) programming in the Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) region supported by the United States Agency for International Development's Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID/OFDA). The goal of this performance evaluation is to improve USAID/OFDA’s understanding of the performance and outcomes of the urban DRR programs the Agency supports in LAC. Specifically, the evaluation focuses on the effectiveness and sustainability of eight selected USAID/OFDA-funded urban DRR projects that utilized the Neighborhood Approach (NA), which were awarded in six countries (Colombia, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, and Peru) between FY2012 and FY2016. The Neighborhood Approach is an innovative strategy adopted by USAID to find practical and workable solutions for DRR in densely populated informal urban settlements. The concept of the Neighborhood Approach became more utilized after the 2010 Haiti earthquake. Since 2012, it has been introduced into different Latin American and Caribbean countries. Two objectives were defined for this performance evaluation: (1) the effectiveness and (2) the sustainability of the Neighborhood Approach. The Statement of Work (SOW) defined a specific set of questions for each objective that informed the evaluation design. The evaluation included a third objective on the programming strategy itself, including the Annual Program Statement (APS), programming implementation, alliances, and national counterparts. To address USAID’s evaluation questions for the objectives of effectiveness and sustainability, the research design began with an extensive literature review, followed by a mixed research method, including qualitative and quantitative approaches, such as seismic risk modeling for the eight projects selected; landslide risk modeling for four projects; and tropical cyclone risk modeling for one project. In addition, georeferencing and urban pattern analysis were used in the eight projects selected. Site visits and engineering inspections of key physical and environmental interventions in the eight projects also took place. Surveys, focus groups, and interviews were conducted in eight neighborhoods across the six project countries to gather primary data, following an Institutional Review Board (IRB)- approved research protocol. Finally, using an integrative processtriangulationwas used to analyze the data obtained in this study from multiple theoretical positions. The findings include tables that present key data extracted from surveys, focus groups, interviews and site visits, allowing readers to draw comparisons across projects and countries. This section also includes key project interventions as well as the result of the indices that were prepared for this evaluation regarding neighborhood status in terms of urban informality, social cohesion, DRR, disaster risk governance, and the contribution of the NA project to the current status. These findings were selected from an extensive compilation of documents generated during the evaluation, the synthesis of which has been included in the annexes. The complete reports are part of a body of documents that supports the study and will serve as the basis for the preparation of thematic peer-reviewed manuscripts whose publication will help built a DRR evidence-based catalog. Although the eight projects evaluated shared NA characteristics, each project is unique and was designed to respond to community needs and distinct socio-economic and cultural features, thus framing each in specific realities and contexts. Following is a summary of the findings of the questions posed by USAID to guide the evaluation. The first four questions deal with the objective of effectiveness. The last three questions are concerned with project sustainability. iii 1. To what extent have projects implemented under a Neighborhood Approach contributed to reducing community disaster hazard risks in targeted urban communities in the selected projects? Four trajectories or pathways of influence were used to reduce community disaster risk: 1) NA interventions and features associated with secure land occupation. Two key interventions illustrate a successful approach to secure land occupation: a) the land tenure initiative implemented in Portmore, Jamaica, with support from Habitat for Humanity (HfH); and b) relocating at-risk communities in Tegucigalpa, Honduras, with support from the project implementer GOAL. 2) Sufficient and resilient livelihoods. Two main NA initiatives demonstrate effective DRR: a) the small business approach used by Global Communities in Medellín, Colombia; and b) the network of pulperías (grocery stores) implemented by GOAL in Tegucigalpa, Honduras. 3) Robust and resilient ecosystems. Three different NA projects in Lima, Peru implemented afforestation projects, initially designed to reduce the risk of rocks falling from slopes and to recover the fragile ecosystem lost over the past decades. Two other implementers, COOPI and Save the Children, later replicated the project initially designed by PREDES. 4) Adequate disaster risk and emergency management. Physical works such as pathways, access roads, retaining walls and drainage systems are the axes of risk reduction in neighborhood projects. Pathways were common to the six projects in Central and South America, due to the location of settlements on steep slopes. Retaining walls were designed and built in a variety of shapes and sizes to protect against landslides. Infrastructure such as channels to manage the runoff in Port-de-Paix, and gabions in Anse-á-Foleur were built by World Concern in Haiti, and proved to be highly effective during the passage of Hurricane Irma in 2017. Drainage systems were constructed that ranged in magnitude from small works in the projects in Lima, Medellin, Guatemala and Honduras, to more complex systems, such as the one built in the Tegucigalpa project. 2. Which aspects of the urban DRR Neighborhood Approach are most effective? Which aspects of the urban DRR Neighborhood Approach are least effective? To address this question, we used two different approaches: 1) Life Satisfaction Analysis (LSA) to measure the level of well-being attributed to the NA projects’ interventions and 2) Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) to calculate and compare benefits and costs of the specific NA interventions selected. The LSA showed that the categories with the highest impact on life satisfaction improvement were physical works and gains in social mobilization. Neighborhoods that received a community empowerment intervention (social mobilization category) increased their life satisfaction by 0.65 points. Considering that on average, the life satisfaction of all neighborhoods in the study was 2.46, the community empowerment intervention produced an increase in life satisfaction of nearly 27%. Other categories with interventions that significantly impacted life satisfaction were livelihoods and financial mechanisms, and institutional arrangements. The CBA of the DRR interventions revealed that overall, the USAID project interventions had cost-benefit ratios (BCRs) greater than one point, with the access paths being the most cost-beneficial. A BCR of one indicates that the discounted benefit of implementing an intervention equals its cost. The BCR of physical interventions such as access paths ranged from 6.48 in Rímac to 12.16 in Medellin. Using an average value of the statistical cost of life, the BCR for access paths increases to 98.9 and 47.43, respectively, for Medellin and Rímac. The drainage canal in Port-de-Paix, Haiti, yielded a BCR of 13.19, valued for benefits from avoided loss of household assets and increase in productive business days. Sanitation interventions, such as the septic tank in Mixco, obtained a BCR of 1.62. Benefits were projected for certain interventions, such as the land tenure registration effort in Portmore, Jamaica, for which a target has not yet been set. iv 3. To what extent is the Neighborhood Approach effective as compared to more traditional DRR approaches in LAC? We identified six DRR categories to conduct a thorough comparative analysis of the NA with other initiatives: 1) area-based; 2) market-based; 3) system-based; 4) institutional-based; 5) individual/household-based; and 6) operational. Some of the DRR initiatives fall into more than one category. The NA promoted by USAID can be primarily classified as area-based, but it further incorporates other DRR criteria (market-based, system￾based, institutional-based, individual/household-based, and operational-based). In addition, the concept of neighborhood used in the NA goes beyond the pure geographical meaning of the ‘area-based’ category: the neighborhood is a living fabric of social, economic, and physical features that provides the residents of a particular territory with an identity, a sense of security, safety, and familiarity. Our literature review revealed that institutions such as USAID, OXFAM, UNDP, DFID, and the World Bank used area-based approaches to a certain extent, but without emphasis on precariousness, informality, and risk exposure. 4. What factors influence the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of urban DRR programs using the Neighborhood Approach in each country of focus? We considered two categories of influencing factors for the effectiveness of urban DRR programs using the NA: 1) reflecting on internal aspects of each project and their immediate environment and 2) referring to the economic, political and social contexts in a broader sense, that is, outside the project’s control. For instance, in the three projects in Lima (Carabayllo, Independencia, and Rímac) we identified several emergencies triggered by ‘El Niño’ in 2017 in northern Peru that created a ‘window of opportunity’ to introduce innovative DRR practices at different government levels. We also observed that local governments with a greater capacity in urban development avoided silos, fostered cross-sectorial integration, and tended to mainstream DRR practices within urban development. This was particularly effective and a common feature in Carabayllo, Medellin, Mixco, and Tegucigalpa. Other external factors included the volatile political context in Mixco; turnover of municipal personnel in Lima; organized crime and violence in Medellín; and specific land-tenure issues observed in Portmore. 5. To what extent are communities able to integrate DRR practices and take ownership of the Neighborhood Approach? What barriers to utilization of the Neighborhood Approach exist? We developed a community involvement indicator, using qualitative analysis of focus groups and interviews, to assess four aspects of community involvement: a) active involvement in planning; b) allocation of human and financial resources; c) active involvement in maintenance; and d) social control. In general terms, the communities were able to integrate DRR practices, although only in few cases took ownership of the Neighborhood Approach as a whole. With significant differences among countries, neighbors in Mixco, Medellín, Tegucigalpa, and the three projects in Lima demonstrated appropriation of DRR practices such as better garbage and waste water management for reducing flood impacts and afforestation and gardening to stem the risk of landslides and rockslides. People were more conscious of the risks they face and able to develop mechanisms to cope with and reduce them. In some cases, such as Medellín and Mixco, people achieved a certain level of empowerment as they started to demand more attention and action from local authorities. 6. To what extent are municipal and national authorities incorporating and institutionalizing the urban Neighborhood Approach? What evidence (including, but not limited to, policy or urban planning changes) is there that municipal or national authorities are managing urban risk differently due to USAID/OFDA’s urban DRR Neighborhood Approach? A local government involvement indicator was developed using qualitative analysis of interviews and field observations to assess four aspects of local government involvement: a) active involvement in planning; b) v allocation of human and financial resources; c) active involvement in maintenance; and d) regulatory action. In cases like Carabayllo, Independencia, Mixco, Medellín, and Tegucigalpa, the municipalities incorporated new practices, such as the use of GIS and social media for DRR; participatory design and execution of physical works; inter-sectorial working groups for neighborhood development; and inclusion of DRR measures within municipal budget plans. According to our field observations and interviews, the best institutional ownership was achieved in Tegucigalpa, Mixco, and Medellín, primarily due to three factors: 1) the level of municipal autonomy to intervene in DRR; 2) implementers succeeded in creating inter-institutional and inter-sectorial (including private sector) articulations based on agreements and communication, and then translated these into action; and 3) the willingness and commitment of key actors at the highest level of municipal government, such as mayors or municipal managers. On the other hand, factors that limit the institutionalization of the NA were pointed out by the participants from Rímac, Portmore, and Haiti, including: 1) personnel turnover in municipalities; 2) a lack of willingness and commitment from local authorities; and 3) implementer’s lack of capacity/experience in involving local authorities. 7. What enabling factors and factors impeding success contribute to sustainability of the urban DRR Neighborhood Approach? How sustainable could the targeted Urban DRR programs be without external donor support? Five categories were defined to address the sustainability of the Neighborhood Approach projects: social mobilization, institutional arrangements, physical works, environmental improvements and financial mechanisms. Each of these categories comprised both enabling factors and factors that hinder success. Beyond the enabling and impeding factors mentioned, the study found a circumstance called concatenation. Concatenation refers to the capacity of a project to advance on the achievements of other projects or initiatives. In the same way, the project can also offer the opportunity to other projects and initiatives to build on its own outputs or outcomes. Anse-à-Foleur offers a good example. The NA project provided an excellent quality pipeline from the source of the water to the town. Subsequently the World Bank built ten water tanks, followed by the municipality, which built the distribution network. Another example comes from the NA in Tegucigalpa, where a public university in Honduras took advantage of JICA-sponsored geological studies to advance the studies required by the USAID-sponsored NA project. At the same time, the NA project prepared digital elevation mapping based on LIDAR technology (a detection system that uses light from a laser), which now serves the municipality and other projects supported by the international community. Beyond the characteristics that define the NA, such as geographic focus, active participation, and sectoral concentration, the NA program strategy has been characterized by closer cooperation among USAID implementers and partners, beneficiary communities, and local and national governments. Additionally, the introduction of techniques such as systematization and the Post-Project Review stressed the importance of processes, and a closer follow-up to project implementation, with special attention to the long-term impacts and the outcomes’ sustainability. USAID has fostered the exchange of practices and experiences among implementers, which has resulted in a substantial collective learning process, one that is unique in terms of depth and quality. Most of the NA projects lasted beyond the period initially awarded, whether through extensions or applying for an unsolicited proposal to complete, replicate or expand their scope. This study detected another clear trend: a significant impact at national and even regional level in the different countries where there is a second or even third wave of initiatives derived from the initial project. Cases that support this assertion: 1) Jamaica: Habitat for Humanity defined a land tenure strategy that will be extended to the whole country, involving other institutions and civil society organizations; 2) Peru: PREDES along with the mayor of Lima, used afforestation as a strategy for land use management and DRR, now recognized internationally by FAO; 3) Honduras: GOAL, along with the municipality of Tegucigalpa, the Inter-American Development Bank, the University of Manchester, and the Nordic Fund promote the NA approach to develop a project to adapt assets to climate change. Additionally, GOAL is now replicating the Honduras NA experience in Haiti; 4) Colombia: the NA project implemented by Global Communities, Corporación Ayuda Humanitaria and Pontificia University in Medellin, expanded vi the municipal DRR approach by reaching out to communities, and now it has been integrated into the city’s resilience strategy, as part of the 100 Resilient Cities movement. In addition, the NA project inspired a new DRR initiative geared toward small commerce and merchants in precarious areas of the city; 5) Guatemala: Under the leadership of PCI, the NA project convened various local actors, among them the private sectorCementos Progreso and AMANCO expanding the NA impact toward many other cities. On a larger scale, PCI contributed to a proposal to change the public housing policies in the country, with support from international organizations and experts such as Build Change and Elemental, as well as establishing alliances with other NA implementers such as GOAL. The study also included an internal assessment of the NA strategy within USAID. The respondents strongly agreed that the NA supports DRR, the LAC DRR Plan 2015-2019, and the Sendai Framework. The main technical or programmatic challenges to implementing the NA were community participation, followed by a lack of resources in the community; issues with sustainability; and having the right partners with expertise in community development. The main managerial and financial challenges for partners in implementing the NA were identified as government or legal restrictions, followed by the lack of willingness of local governments to institutionalize the policies and activities associated with the program; underestimation by partners of costs during the proposal stage; lack of implementation time, due to the award’s stated period of performance; lack of community leaders or other local partners; and lack of financial resources in the community. In conclusion, the USAID NA expands the consideration of DRR interventions beyond individuals and households to a settlement approach, addressing critical disaster risk drivers and development gaps, and encouraging a long-term vision. The study showed the need to balance physical and social interventions to match individual and collective needs and expectations associated with the common good. Thus, protecting the neighborhood and supporting its cohesion and self-determination, are important strategies to build community resilience. In response to the daily challenges experienced in informal settlements, there is clearly a need to contribute to social mobilization to collectively overcome obstacles such as poverty, marginalization, insecurity and despair. This study shows a broader scope than the one initially foreseen for the NA, identifying different strategies that can stand alone, such as land tenure, rain and storm-water management, housing relocation, and afforestation, among others. The use of state-of-the-art technologies and the exploration and definition of units of measurement were essential to answering the questions proposed by USAID and mark the beginning of a second study phasethe preparation of a series of peer-reviewed publications that will serve to build a catalog of evidence-based DRR practices. Based on the results obtained in this study and the NA Post-Project Review process conducted in 2016-2017, the following recommendations are proposed regarding the USAID NA urban DRR strategy: 1) Continue fostering the NA strategy with some adjustments to the RFA process such as: a) NA projects must have an ideal duration of three years and never less than two years; b) NA projects should be formulated in two stages, the first one encompassing diagnosis, awareness and social mobilization, followed by a second phase of implementation and transfer. The proposals must contemplate a process of programmatic adjustment between the two stages. 2) The NA could be diversified to allow different types of proposals that foster DRR and resilience-building, using the principles of geographic focus, active participation, and sectoral approach through projects that respond to issues associated with DRR of critical incidence such as land tenure, urban drainage systems, afforestation, precariousness, housing retrofitting, among others. 3) The NA projects should have a plan, from the outset, to deal with the inherent uncertainty and lack of continuity in local public administration policies and practices, as well as to face the incongruities between national and local regulations and processes. 4) Intervention costs centers must be established, with files that conserve technical studies, designs, and technical specifications to maintain a permanent archive. The electronic records must be submitted to USAID at the end of the project. 1 1. Introduction This report presents the results of the evaluation of the Urban Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) programming in Latin American and Caribbean (LAC). The goal of the evaluation was to improve USAID/OFDA’s understanding of the performance and outcomes of the urban DRR programs that the Agency supported in the LAC region. Specifically, the evaluation focused on the effectiveness and sustainability of eight selected USAID/OFDA-funded urban DRR projects that utilized the Neighborhood Approach. These projects were awarded in six countries (Colombia, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, and Peru) between FY2012 and FY2016. The findings of this evaluation will inform future programming decisions and enable adjustments to ongoing USAID/OFDA urban DRR programming in the LAC region and across the globe. More broadly, the findings of this evaluation will enhance the evidence base related to the Neighborhood Approach as a DRR tool. Background The Neighborhood Approach is an innovative strategy adopted by USAID to find practical and workable solutions for disaster risk reduction in densely populated informal urban settlements. The concept of the Neighborhood Approach reached was recognized after its implementation in Haiti following the 2010 earthquake. Since 2012, it has been introduced into other LAC countries. Florida International University (FIU), through its contractual agreement with USAID/OFDA, has been involved in the Neighborhood Approach since its inception in LAC. FIU led two processes: 1) the systematization of the first four projects from 2011 until 2015, carried out in Haiti, Guatemala, and Peru, and 2) the post-project review of these same initial Neighborhood Approach projects in 2016, which was carried out 1218 months after completion of the projects. Additionally, at USAID/OFDA’s request, FIU participated in the kick-off meetings in which other Neighborhood Approach projects were launched in Haiti, Colombia, and Jamaica. FIU also worked with USAID/OFDA-LAC advisors during field visits to follow-up on project implementation (Honduras, Peru, and Colombia). Evaluation Objectives Two objectives were defined for this performance evaluation: understanding the effectiveness and the sustainability of the Neighborhood Approach. The Statement of Work (SOW) defined a specific set of questions for each objective that informed the design of this evaluation. Objective 1: Effectiveness 1. To what extent have projects implemented under a Neighborhood Approach contributed to reducing community disaster hazard risks in targeted urban communities in the selected projects? 2. Which aspects of the urban DRR Neighborhood Approach are most effective? Which aspects of the urban DRR Neighborhood Approach are least effective? 3. To what extent is the Neighborhood Approach effective as compared to more traditional DRR approaches in the LAC region? 4. What factors influence the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of urban DRR programs using the Neighborhood Approach in each country of focus? 2 Objective 2: Sustainability 5. To what extent are communities able to integrate DRR practices and take ownership of the Neighborhood Approach? What barriers to utilization of the Neighborhood Approach exist? 6. To what extent are municipal and national authorities incorporating and institutionalizing the urban Neighborhood Approach? What evidence1 is there that municipal or national authorities are managing urban risk differently due to USAID/OFDA’s urban DRR Neighborhood Approach? 7. What enabling factors and factors that impede success contribute to sustainability of the urban DRR Neighborhood Approach? How sustainable could the targeted Urban DRR programs be without external donor support? The evaluation included a third objective on the programming strategy itself, including the APS, programming implementation, alliances, and national counterparts. 2. Theoretical Framework Two major themes interact to build the theoretical framework for the current evaluation. The first refers to disaster risk, understood as: The potential loss of life, injury, or destroyed or damaged assets that could occur to a system, society or a community in a specific period of time, determined probabilistically as a function of hazard, exposure, vulnerability and capacity (United Nations, 2016: 14). Beyond a simple formula, disaster risk is the condition resulting from a complex process of accumulation, as explained by Blaikie et al. (1994) through the pressure and release model. Figure 1. Disaster Pressure and Release Model Figure 1 attributes risk conditions to a progression that originates in root causes: ideological processes of an economic, demographic, and political nature that influence power relationships and the allocation and distribution of resources in a society. These manifest in dynamic pressures of population growth, migration, accelerated urbanization, etc., which in turn, result in and are seen as unsafe conditions, such as the segmentation of society; unstable livelihoods; occupation of insecure land with an exposure to hazards; and inadequate emergency management. More recently, these processes, described by Blaikie et al., are called underlying disaster risk drivers or processes or conditions, often development-related, that influence the level 1 Including, but not limited to, policy or urban planning changes. 3 of disaster risk by increasing levels of exposure and vulnerability or reducing capacity (United Nations, 2016: 24). The second theme is represented by the high growth of urban informality and precariousness in recent decades, leading to the generation of slums or informal settlements. According to Habitat III (2015: 1), informal settlements are residential areas in which 1) inhabitants have no security of tenure vis-à-vis the land or dwellings they inhabit, with modalities ranging from squatting to informal rental housing; 2) the neighborhoods usually lack, or are cut off from, basic services and city infrastructure; and 3) the housing may not comply with current planning and building regulations, and is often situated in geographically and environmentally hazardous areas. According to Sandoval and Sarmiento (2018), approximately 924 million people lived in informal settlements or slums around the world in 2001, representing 31.6% of the world's urban population (UN-Habitat, 2003). The 2014 UN-Habitat report (2016) indicates that 104.8 million now live in informal settlements in LAC (21.1%). An important segment of the world’s population exists in conditions of chronic poverty in urban areas, exposed to stress situations and shocks associated with events of natural or anthropic origin, in a continuous process of disaster risk construction and with very low levels of resilience. In this context, resilience is understood as: the ability of people, households, communities, countries, and systems to mitigate, adapt to, and recover from shocks and stresses in a manner that reduces chronic vulnerability and facilitates inclusive growth(USAID, 2012: 5). Sarmiento (2017: 36) defines the problem as: "The construction of disaster risk in a particular society (including population, territory, infrastructure, goods, and services) that define and determine the potential magnitude of the effects in the presence of a specific hazard(s)." He designs the problem tree using the Blaikie et al. (1994) model, identifying the underlying risk factors or root causes, and then, the main and secondary causes, resulting in a process of concatenation and hierarchy that reaches the visible manifestations of the analyzed problem. Figure 2. Disaster Risk Construction in a Society Translated and adapted from Sarmiento (2018) 4 Using the Theory of Change, Sarmiento (2017) advances in the identification of domains of change or key points of influence (intervention domains), the main areas in which change must occur in order to reach the desired objective’s impact: 'sustainable and secure development for a particular society.' Figure 3. Sustainable and Safe Development in a Society Translated and adapted from Sarmiento (2017) Under the category of unsafe conditions, four domains are identified: 1) insecure land occupation with high hazard exposure; 2) unstable livelihoods; 3) weakened ecosystems; and 4) inadequate disaster risk and emergency management. Additionally, poverty, accompanied by inequality, marginalization, and food insecurity aggravate the conditions. The resulting trajectories are, at the same time, pathways of influence through which action must be taken to influence disaster risk determinants. The actions are taken through specific interventions: 1) secure land occupation; 2) sufficient and resilient livelihoods; 3) robust and resilient ecosystems; and 4) adequate disaster risk and emergency management. It is important to also address the issue of extreme poverty, which influences two of the four identified domains. This framework allows one to identify the intersection of the pathways of influence as a crosscutting topic in the NA’s priority sectors: Shelter and Settlements (S&S); Economic Recovery and Market Systems (ERMS); Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene (WASH); and Natural and Technological Risks (NTR). In addition to these sectors, the evaluation expanded its focus to measure actions geared toward reinforcing community resilience: strengthening social cohesion processes and governance mechanisms, and the well-being attributed to the project's interventions (USAID, 2012). 5 3. Research Methods To address USAID’s evaluation questions for the objectives of effectiveness and sustainability, the research design began with an extensive literature review, followed by a mixed research method, including qualitative and quantitative approaches: Literature review on DRR approaches and interventions implemented in the LAC region. Seismic risk modeling for the eight projects selected, landslide risk modeling for four projects, and tropical cyclone risk modeling for one project. Georeferencing and urban pattern analysis for the eight projects selected. Site visits and engineering inspections for key physical and environmental interventions in the eight projects selected. In order to gather primary data from the selected projects, surveys, focus groups, and interviews were conducted following an IRB-approved research protocol. These techniques were conducted in the eight neighborhoods across the six different countries where the DRR projects were implemented. The study involved both males and females and the subjects of the surveys, interviews, and focus groups were adults (aged 18 and over with no upper age limitation). Surveys The targeted subject for each survey was the head of a household or spouse in the selected neighborhood. We targeted approximately 40 surveys per project and 320 surveys in total for all eight selected projects. However, the survey process was completed with an average of 44 surveys per project, and a total of 349 surveys. The estimated size of the sample was carried out using the sample size calculator, Raosoft Inc. (Bird, D. and Dominey Howes, D., 2008), with a margin of error of 3.94% and a 95% confidence level, resulting in n=349. Subsequently, the sample was distributed in proportion with the estimated population in the selected neighborhoods. We estimated an average of 100 households per project that benefitted directly from the NA projects. The survey consisted of a total of 39 questions grouped into four sub-topics: social cohesion, DRR, urban informality, and Life Satisfaction Analysis (LSA). A preceding section on demographics and housing conditions collected information on household identification, demographic and socioeconomic aspects of household respondents, and housing structural details. The heads of households shared their experience of the NA project and its impacts on their life and community. Through the survey questions, we were able to gauge the contribution of the project to improving social cohesion, disaster risk reduction, and disaster risk governance in the neighborhood, and the impact of the project on the degree of urban informality/precariousness. The section on LSA measured the value of non-market impacts of interventions, and the subjective well-being reported due to the interventions of the projects. Focus Group Studies We conducted one focus group study for each of the eight NA projects. Focus groups for each neighborhood included approximately 812 subjects: community leaders, women, people with disabilities, and elders who lived in the selected neighborhood. These studies gathered the opinions of the representatives of these neighborhoods on the effectiveness and sustainability of the project interventions. 6 Interviews The research team conducted approximately 810 semi-structured interviews per DRR project with local and national government officers, civil society actors, academics, and private sector partners. A total 105 informants participated in the interviews. Interviewees were approached using a snowball stratified sampling technique, as described by Atkinson and Flint (2004). If more than one intervention was carried out in a location, interviews for those interventions were conducted during the same session with national authorities. Where municipal associations or sub-national mechanisms were involved in the project implementation or replication, officers in charge of those mechanisms were interviewed. In addition, an interview for each project implementation manager or designee was conducted. Together with USAID M&E, interviews were carried out with USAID officers in OFDA (Washington, D.C. and LAC regional office) to review the USAID/OFDA program strategy. We developed an integrative strategy, also called triangulation, wherein we purposefully analyzed the data obtained in this study from multiple theoretical positions. This helped increase the validity of the evaluation and research findings to answer and satisfactorily address USAID’s questions. 4. Evaluation Limitations The design of the evaluation and the selected methodologies allowed the different actors involved community members, implementers and partners, local and national authoritiesto register perceptions, attitudes, knowledge and advances in risk management and disaster management associated with the implementation of the projects. However, because community members are highly mobile, during the evaluation of some projects, not all the actors who had been involved could be located. Another important limitation was the collection of information related to designs, technical specifications, and budgets of the project interventions that had concluded between one and three years earlier. Likewise, the high turnover of public employees was evidentwith the consequent ignorance of the NA projectthe reason why we resorted to former employees or employees who had changed their position within the same organization for interviews and information gathering. Despite these limitations, returning to the participating public institutions during the evaluation allowed the concerned actors to revisit the issue and their attention to informal settlements exposed to disaster risk. For the communities, the presence of the evaluators was seen as a sign of commitment and trust toward the donor, and for the implementers, an act of accountability. Given the conditions of insecurity in the neighborhoods where the evaluation was carried out common crime, drug trafficking, gangs, and other illicit activitiesit was necessary to implement a careful safety plan for the whole team, limiting the working hours, ensuring appropriate clothing, and in some cases avoiding the use of electronic systems such as tablets for data capture and georeferencing of surveys. This report contains the most relevant findings of the evaluation. However, given the volume of information and data collected, a second phase of the study will be necessary to prepare a series of peer reviewed manuscripts that will serve to build a catalog of evidence-based DRR practices. 7 5. Main Findings This section contains the main evaluation’s findings by project. The next four pages display seven tables containing project information and the indices prepared for this study in order to provide an order of magnitude, necessary for comparisons across projects and countries: 1) NA Projects Assessed; 2) NA General Features; 3) Urban Informality / Precariousness Index; 4) DRR Index; 5) Disaster Risk Governance Index; 6) Social Cohesion Index; and 7) Social Resilience Index. These indices used relevant data coming out of the surveys, transect walks and risk modeling. The following pages of this section address the findings related to each NA project and they are organized as follows: Main Interventions - A table is built on the project transfer matrix. The first column refers to the intervention’s category, the second identifies the project’s outcome studied and a third column synthesizing the main findings coming from the transect walks (engineering and environmental inspections), interviews, and focus groups. Urban Informality - Also referred here as precariousness. This study adopts the UN-Habitat definition of informal settlements: …any specific place, whether a whole city or a neighborhood, as a slum area if half or more of all households lack [i] improved water, [ii] improved sanitation, [iii] sufficient living area, [iv] durable housing, [v] secure tenure, or combinations thereof. An area or neighborhood deprived of improved sanitation alone may experience a lesser degree of deprivation than an area that lacks any adequate services at all, but both are considered slums in this definition. (Castro et al. 2015: 110) Based on this definition we prepared an index composed of three sub-indexes: Legal, Physical, and Social (details in Annex 2) and applied it to each of the neighborhoods selected using the survey. Quintiles are used to create cut-off points, a statistical value of a data set that represents 20% of a given population. The first quintile represents the lowest fifth of the data, 120% in Green; the second quintile, 21% 40% in Yellow; the third quintile, 41% 60% in Orange; the fourth quintile, 61% 80% in Ochre; and the fifth quintile represents the highest fifth, 81% 100% in Red. Higher numbers mean higher informality/precariousness. Disaster Risk Reduction - Based on the most recent United Nations terminology, this study adopts the DRR definition: DRR is aimed at preventing new and reducing existing disaster risk and managing residual risk, all of which contribute to strengthening resilience and therefore to the achievement of sustainable development. (United Nations, 2016: 16). This study developed a DRR Index (details in Annex 2) to measure the perceived DRR status at the neighborhood level, and also measure the contribution of the NA project to the level of DRR found. Higher numbers mean higher DRR implementation. Social Cohesion - The study adopted the Stanley (2003: 5) definition of social cohesion: the willingness of members of a society to cooperate with each other to survive and prosper. Cohesion is a necessary driver of resilience. We developed a Social Cohesion Index (details in Annex 2), to measure the perceived social cohesion at the neighborhood level, and also measure the contribution of the NA projects to the level of social cohesion found. Higher numbers mean higher social cohesion. Disaster Risk Governance - The study adopted the Disaster Risk Governance concept from United Nations (2016: 15), The system of institutions, mechanisms, policy and legal frameworks and other arrangements to guide, coordinate and oversee disaster risk reduction and related areas of policy…Good governance needs to be transparent, inclusive, collective and efficient to reduce existing disaster risks and avoid creating new ones. This study built a Disaster Risk Governance Index (details in Annex 2) to assess the community associativity reported in the surveys, and the institutional involvement both at local and national level registered in the interviews and focus groups. Higher numbers mean higher disaster risk governance. 8 Table 1. Neighborhood Approach Projects Assessed During the Period Dec. 2, 2017 - Mar. 12, 2018 Country Peru Peru Peru Colombia Guatemala Haiti Jamaica Honduras City Lima - Carabayllo Lima - Independencia Lima - Rimac Medellin Mixco Port-de-Paix Portmore Tegucigalpa Project Title Resilient Urban Neighborhoods and Districts in Lima Norte Risk Reduction in Vulnerable Areas of Independencia District, Lima Province Reinforcing Innovative Mechanisms for Arising Capacities in Disaster Risk Reduction in Rimac Programa de Conocimiento y Reducción del Riesgo de Desastres Barrio Mio Community Initiatives in Disaster Risk Reduction (CIDRR) Building Resilience and Capacities for Emerging Disasters (BRACED) Operationalizing a Neighborhood Approach to Reduce Urban Disaster Risk in Latin America and Award No. AID-OFDA-A-14- 00024 AID-OFDA-A-14- 00025 AID-OFDA-A-14 00023 AID-OFDA-A-14- 00026 AID-OFDA-A-12- 00013 AID-OFDA-A-12- 00012 the Caribbean AID-OFDA-A-14- AID-OFDA- A-13- 00023 IP Save the Children/US PREDES COOPI Global Communities Project Concern International World Concern Development Organization Habitat for Humanity GOAL Dates October 1, 2014-- September 30, 2017 October 1, 2014 March 31, 2017 September 15, 2014September 14, 2017 October 1, 2014 January31, 2017 Sept 28, 2012Sept 30, 2016 September 6, 2012March 31, 2014 September 2014 April 2018 September 23, 2013December 23, 2016 Goal Urban neighborhoods and districts in Northern Lima increase their resilience to disasters through the adoption of risk￾sensitive policies and practices. Strengthened capacity of the community, local, and national stakeholders to disaster risk management in vulnerable peripheral urban settlements. Reduced risk of disasters in the vulnerable neighborhoods of Rimac prone to multiple hazards. Reduce the social and economic impact of disasters of highly vulnerable urban populations in Medellín, Colombia High-risk urban neighborhoods are transformed into resilient, safe and productive communities. Vulnerable populations enabled to identify risks associated with, and reduce the impact of, anticipated disasters on their communities. Increasing the neighborhood’s resilience through work at both the settlement and shelter level; contributing to the neighborhood’s ability to formalize itself, connect to the municipality’s redevelopment plan, and bring future investments. Disaster risk reduced in three high-risk neighborhoods in Tegucigalpa with emphasis on the protection of vulnerable groups. Sectors Economic Recovery and Market Systems, Shelter and Settlements, Natural and Technological Risks, Risk Management Policy and Practice Natural and Technological Risks, Risk Management Policy and Practice, Water, Sanitation and Hygiene, Shelter and Settlements Water, Sanitation and Hygiene, Natural and Technological Risks, Risk Management Policy and Practice Policy and Practice, Shelter and Settlements, and Economic Recovery and Market Systems. Water, Sanitation and Hygiene, Economic Recovery and Market Systems, Shelter and Settlements Water, Sanitation and Hygiene, Shelter and Settlements, Natural and Technological Risks BRACED 1: Water, Sanitation and Hygiene, Shelter and Settlements, and Risk Management Policy and Practice. BRACED 2: Land tenure and neighborhood redevelopment plan Water, Sanitation and Hygiene, Economic Recovery and Market Systems, Shelter and Settlements, Natural and Technological Risks, Risk Management Policy and Practice Budget $1,894,843 $1,303,302 $1,012,662 $1,708,726 $3,082,151 $1,608,992 $1,688,000 $1,377,444 Total $13,676,120. This amount includes all projects described in the table. 9 Table 2. Neighborhood Approach Projects - General Features NA General Features Peru Peru Peru Colombia Guatemala Haiti Jamaica Honduras City Carabayllo Independencia Rimac Medellin Mixco Port-de-Paix Portmore Tegucigalpa NA Area - Hectares 53.4 11.2 48.5 95.7 8.1 46.4 110.4 59.3 NA Built area - Hectares 42.6 8.1 44.8 131.0 4.8 14.1 104.3 53.4 House's surface area sqm 127.5 119.3 106.3 67.8 122.9 337.14 75.3 100.8 Total Households 3,338.3 678.1 4,214.3 19,333.1 389.5 419.4 13,854.6 5,299.8 Household members - Average 5 5 5 6 6 7 5 5 Total individuals 15,623.4 3,295.6 20,987.1 115,998.8 2,298.1 2,780.9 62,068.6 27,717.7 Population density - People/Hectare 293 295 433 1,211 285 60 562 467 sqm per person 27.24 24.54 21.34 11.29 20.84 50.85 16.80 19.28 Table 3. Neighborhood Approach Projects - Urban Informality / Precariousness Index Urban Informality / Precariousness Index Peru Peru Peru Colombia Guatemala Haiti Jamaica Honduras City Carabayllo Independencia Rimac Medellin Mixco Port-de-Paix Portmore Tegucigalpa Legal (0-30) 18.44 11.11 13.29 8.12 6.02 22.32 19.53 10.95 a. Issues with land use and land tenure (0-10) 5.40 1.27 1.60 2.12 3.27 6.43 7.07 3.26 b. Unplanned settlements/Lack of compliance with urban planning & Zoning (0-10) 4.44 3.33 4.44 2.22 2.22 8.89 5.56 1.11 c. Issues with building regulations/Lack of compliance with building regulations (0-10) 8.61 6.51 7.25 3.78 0.53 7.00 6.91 6.59 Physical (0-40) 15.72 12.58 14.32 13.55 13.35 21.98 14.75 14.21 a. Issues with access to water, sewage, energy (0-10) 1.21 0.23 0.53 0.15 0.40 7.79 2.12 0.15 b. Deficient or poor housing conditions (0-10) 1.29 0.53 0.61 3.18 2.06 0.78 0.08 0.08 c. Overcrowding, environmental degradation (0-10) 4.85 4.09 5.45 3.64 5.08 4.81 4.11 5.61 d. Exposure to natural and human induced hazards (0-10) 8.38 7.73 7.73 6.58 5.81 8.61 8.44 8.38 Social (0-30) 4.91 5.38 6.27 5.43 4.30 8.12 5.31 6.27 a. Issues with access to social infrastructure: health, education, cultural, commercial (0-10) 3.27 2.78 2.64 2.34 3.27 4.68 2.07 3.85 b. Marginalization (0-10) 0.11 0.91 0.68 0.68 0.48 1.17 0.45 0.45 c. Violence and illegal activities (0- 10) 1.53 1.68 2.95 2.41 0.55 2.26 2.78 1.97 Informality/precariousness Index (0-100) 39.08 29.07 33.88 27.09 23.67 52.41 39.59 31.43 10 Table 4. Neighborhood Approach Projects DRR Index DRR Index Peru Peru Peru Colombia Guatemala Haiti Jamaica Honduras City Carabayllo Independencia Rimac Medellin Mixco Port-de-Paix Portmore Tegucigalpa 1. Community has members trained in DRR 90.5 68.3 53.7 51.5 48.7 52.4 44.4 71.8 Project contributed to it (Agree and strongly agree) 77.3 52.3 34.1 40.9 42.9 51.2 36.4 59.1 2. Community has motivated members who support DRR 90.5 85.7 59.5 73.8 76.9 62.8 72.2 94.9 Project contributed to it (Agree and strongly agree) 81.8 61.4 50.0 61.4 64.3 62.8 56.8 79.5 3. Community has a functional EWS including drills 65.1 68.2 32.6 23.1 37.8 58.1 19.5 64.9 Project contributed to it (Agree and strongly agree) 61.4 59.1 27.3 18.2 31.0 51.2 18.2 50.0 4. Community involved in the emergency plan implementation 87.2 75.6 34.2 36.1 54.8 57.1 51.4 62.2 Project contributed to it (Agree and strongly agree) 70.5 52.3 20.5 25.0 38.1 55.8 40.9 45.5 5. Community involved in maintenance of projects' physical works 82.9 83.3 52.3 90.9 76.3 93.0 85.0 81.4 Project contributed to it (Agree and strongly agree) 70.5 70.5 43.2 86.4 64.3 90.7 68.2 70.5 6. Social Inclusion V+W 85.6 82.6 47.7 82.1 64.1 80.8 66.1 79.2 Project contributed to it (Agree and strongly agree) 76.1 71.6 39.8 65.9 54.8 75.6 52.3 68.2 DRR Index (0-100) 83.6 77.3 46.6 59.6 59.8 67.4 56.4 75.7 1.15 1.26 1.30 1.20 1.22 1.04 1.24 1.22 Table 5. Neighborhood Approach Projects Disaster Risk Governance Index Disaster Risk Governance Index Peru Peru Peru Colombia Guatemala Haiti Jamaica Honduras City Carabayllo Independencia Rimac Medellin Mixco Port-de-Paix Portmore Tegucigalpa 1- Community Associativity 29.6 25.0 38.6 20.5 17.1 26.2 22.7 11.4 2- Community Involvement 55.0 57.5 52.5 64.5 67.5 40.0 42.5 70.0 3- Local Government Involvement 62.5 42.5 42.5 69.5 67.0 25.5 39.5 68.5 Disaster Risk Governance Index (0-100) 49.02 41.67 44.55 51.48 50.52 30.56 34.91 49.95 11 Table 6. Neighborhood Approach Projects Social Cohesion Index Social Cohesion Index Peru Peru Peru Colombia Guatemala Haiti Jamaica Honduras City Carabayllo Independencia Rimac Medellin Mixco Port-de-Paix Portmore Tegucigalpa 1. Strong sense of belonging to this neighborhood 93.2 86.4 90.9 90.9 82.9 54.8 88.1 100.0 Project contributed to it (Agree and strongly agree) 77.3 56.8 70.5 75.0 73.8 51.2 77.3 90.9 2. Living here gives you a sense of community? 86.4 86.4 77.3 84.1 90.2 62.8 88.4 97.7 Project contributed to it (Agree and strongly agree) 68.2 56.8 59.1 68.2 78.6 58.1 79.5 86.4 3. Willingness to work together to improve your neighborhood 78.6 93.0 93.2 95.4 95.1 78.6 100.0 100.0 Project contributed to it (Agree and strongly agree) 86.4 65.9 75.0 79.5 83.3 74.4 90.9 88.6 4. Neighbors would help each other during an emergency 86.4 92.9 72.7 92.9 86.8 71.4 90.0 95.5 Project contributed to it (Agree and strongly agree) 72.7 65.9 54.5 84.1 71.4 65.1 70.5 88.6 Social Cohesion Index (0-100) 90.9 89.7 83.5 90.8 88.8 66.9 91.6 98.3 1.19 1.46 1.29 1.18 1.16 1.08 1.15 1.11 Using the previous three indices, we proceed to prepare a single Community Resilience Index which shows the current resilience capabilities in the different neighborhoods where the NA were implemented. Table 7. Neighborhood Approach Projects Social Resilience Index Community Resilience Index Peru Peru Peru Colombia Guatemala Haiti Jamaica Honduras City Carabayllo Independencia Rimac Medellin Mixco Port-de-Paix Portmore Tegucigalpa DRR 83.6 77.3 46.6 59.6 59.8 67.4 56.4 75.7 Social Cohesion 90.9 89.7 83.5 90.8 88.8 66.9 91.6 98.3 Disaster Risk Governance 49.0 41.7 44.5 51.5 50.5 30.6 34.9 50.0 Community Resilience Index (0-100) 74.5 69.5 58.2 67.3 66.4 54.9 61.0 74.7 12 The following tables contain a selection of the most relevant findings from the analysis of each project. In the column ‘Findings’, common abbreviations are used to indicate the source of the information: FGD: Focus group conducted in the particular neighborhood Interviews: Interviews conducted with public officers, partners and project implementers Technical: Transect walk, physical inspections carried out by engineers and architects ER: Environmental resilience inspection where projects involve environmental interventions A more comprehensive analysis of the survey findings, an exhaustive collection of research outputs and results in available in Annex 3. Project Title: Resilient Urban Neighborhoods and Districts in Lima Norte Implementing Partner (IP): Save the Children/US Location: Lima-Carabayllo, Perú Table 8. Main Interventions in the Lima-Carabayllo NA Project Output Findings Physical Works & Maintenance 12 community centers with seismic design and 5 small markets 6 ‘tambos’ or depots, also called ‘advanced warehouses’ Transferred to : Carabayllo Municipality; community leaders; and INDECI Works built by professionals and community members [Technical]. Good earthquake resistance, followed construction standards and applied a correct selection and use of materials [Technical]. The structures do not require short-term maintenance [Technical]. There are some issues: still vulnerable to strong shocks, long-term maintenance (2 years) not arranged, some columns are not attached to the bases/foundation [Technical]. Physical interventions have worked as ‘catalyzer’ for social mobilization and cohesion [Interviews]. Community boards signed an agreement to maintain the physical works. During trainings they were taught how to do this [FGD]. Social Mobilization Gains [Not declared by implementer] Transferred to : Community Authorities assert that communities were empowered and mobilized [interviews]: Evidence shows that higher individual than collective mobilization [FGD]. Forming community platforms [FGD]. Participation of community members in construction of the physical works has strengthened their knowledge, experience, appropriation and replication [FGD]. Ownership is strengthened by physical works that facilitate daily live activities (e.g. stairs and railings) [FDG]. Environmental Improvements Forestation (2 implemented projects) Forestation ("Iniciative" project) + Irrigation system Green area or park in "tambos" Transferred to : Community leaders and neighbors After project closed out, one forestation has noautomatic irrigation system. The other forestation site has also lost trees. Both areas are marginally functional (50% effectiveness for DRR) [Technical]. ‘Slightly effective’ as barrier to prevent landslides [Technical]. Effective type of vegetation, marginal use of water [Technical]. 13 Output Findings Institutional Arrangements [Not declared by implementer] Transferred to : Municipality High involvement of the municipality, especially related to the creation of the Civil Defense sub-department [Interviews]. Participatory budgeting (previously installed) brought opportunities to better position DRR within the municipal agenda [Interviews]. DRR investments reflected in the annual municipal budget may be seen as evidence of institutional ownership and sustainability [Interviews]. Livelihoods and Financial Mechanisms Livelihood assessment and opinion poll Transferred to : Stakeholders: business, municipality and universities Not a strong emphasis on improving/impacting livelihoods [Interviews] DRR Interventions Methodologies and instruments (plans) for DRR 12 Emergency signs were designed for all neighborhoods Transferred to : Carabayllo Municipality; Communities Municipal personnel were trained in DRR, this accelerated some technical and managerial processes [Interviews] Project mentioned that several risk studies were undertaken, however there is not evidence of how these impacted methodologies and plans for DRR [Interviews] 12 emergency signs were designed for all neighborhoods; these were transferred to community organizations [Interviews]. Some are for ‘wear and tear’ [ER]. People make a household emergency plan and package [FGD] Urban Informality/Precariousness Index Based on the UN-Habitat definition of informal settlements, the informality/precariousness index was designed, composed of three sub-indexes: Legal, Physical and Social (details in Table 3) and used it for the Carabayllo’s neighborhoods. The higher the numbers, the greater is the level of higher informality/precariousness. Carabayllo has an Informality/Precariousness Index of 37.97, the third highest among the eight projects in this study. The legal realm represents the highest score, particularly in the areas of compliance with building regulations and land tenure. In the physical realm, the scores are driven by the high exposure to natural and human-induced hazards. The social realm shows some issues with access to social infrastructure and low levels of violence and illegal activities. Even though the NA project was intended to positively impact some of the variables here, the NA incidence in the final index is marginal (less than 1 unit). Other methodologies used in this study allow the capture of other project impacts. Disaster Risk Reduction Based on the recently adopted United Nations terminology, this study developed a particular DRR Index (details in Table 4) to measure the perceived DRR status in the neighborhood as well as the contribution of the NA project to this level. Carabayllo obtained the highest score on the DRR Index among the eight projects analyzed, and the highest (by far) in terms of the contribution of the NA project to this level. Nevertheless, it is interesting to note that the EWS score is proportionally lower than the other five variables measured, a common trend among all the projects. 14 Social Cohesion This study developed a Social Cohesion Index (details in Table 6) to measure the perceived social cohesion at the neighborhood level as well as the contribution of the NA project to this level. Carabayllo obtained the third highest Social Cohesion Index score among the eight projects analyzed and the fifth highest in terms of the contribution of the NA project to the level of social cohesion. Disaster Risk Governance Based on the UNISDR terminology, this study developed a Disaster Risk Governance Index (details in Table 5) to measure the Disaster Risk Governance associated to the particular NA project Carabayllo obtained the fourth highest Risk Governance Index score among the eight projects analyzed. It registered second highest in Community Associativity, which means more than a quarter of the individuals interviewed belong to a community organization. Community involvement in the project was the fourth highest. Local Government was highly involved, even though it is the fourth highest among the eight projects. Project Title: Risk Reduction in Vulnerable Areas of Independencia District, Lima Province Implementing Partner (IP): PREDES Location: Lima-Independencia, Perú Table 9. Main Interventions in the Lima-Independencia NA Project Output Findings Physical Works & Maintenance Water tanks and irrigation system for forestation areas Public areas: green spaces, handrails Retaining walls Access Roads Drainage (rain water runoff) House retrofitting Transferred to : Municipality of Independencia; Neighborhood organizations; Households Water tanks in good structural conditions, comply with technical specifications for construction process [Technical]. Public areas are in good conditions and structural development. Designed were well executed by professionals in engineering and architecting [Technical]. These structures are effective in reducing vulnerability and risks to disasters [Technical]. Physical interventions have worked as ‘catalyzer’ for social mobilization and cohesion [Interviews]. Social Mobilization Gains [Not declared by implementer] Thanks to the process of constructing physical works people engaged with project aims and DRR: physical works as catalyzer of social gains [FGD; Interviews]. Identification of a positive feedback, a ‘snowball effect’, when good practices improve people’s conditions the replicability is assured [Interviews]. Environmental Improvements Forestation areas Transferred to : Municipality; Mancomunidad de Lima Norte (North-Metropolitan area administration) Forestation areas are in good structural conditions; they comply with technical specifications for construction process [Technical]. Risks (landslides, rock falling, etc.) will be reduced if there is adequate growth of the trees [Technical]. 15 Output Findings Institutional Arrangements [Not declared by implementer] Transferred to : National and local authorities El Niño Costero affected the way in which authorities and communities view risks: a window of opportunity for DRR [Interviews]. Implementers play a key role, opening a space for authorities to enter into communities that historically have been reluctant to cooperate [Interviews]. Communities depend largely from the Municipality to sustain some interventions, such as the water tanks [FGD]. Participatory budgeting became as a governance mechanism: but it requires a base to encourage DRR [Interviews]. DRR Interventions DRM plans, municipal and community levels Forestation for reducing risks Transferred to : Municipality; Mancomunidad de Lima Norte Communities are more aware about risks and vulnerabilities [FGD]. See Forestation in ‘What’ section above. Urban Informality/Precariousness Independencia has an Informality/Precariousness Index of 30.18 (Table 3), the third lowest among the eight projects included in this study. The legal realm represents the highest scores, particularly in the areas of compliance with building regulations and urban planning, while land tenure is not a major issue. In the physical realm, scores are driven by the high exposure to natural and human-induced hazards and environmental degradation. The social realm shows some issues with access to social infrastructure and low levels of violence and illegal activities. Even though the NA project was intended to positively impact some of the variables here, the NA incidence in the final index is marginal (less than 1 unit). Other methodologies used in this study allow the capture of other project impacts. Disaster Risk Reduction Independencia obtained the second highest DRR Index score (details in Table 4) among the eight projects analyzed, and the fourth highest in terms of the contribution of the NA project to the level of DRR found. It is interesting to note that the community involved in the emergency plan implementation and the EWS are proportionally lower than the other four variables measured; those are common trends among all the projects. Social Cohesion Independencia obtained the fifth highest Social Cohesion Index score (details in Table 6) among the eight projects analyzed, and the lowest in terms of the contribution of the NA project to the level of social cohesion found. Disaster Risk Governance Independencia obtained the third lowest Disaster Risk Governance Index score (details in Table 5) among the eight projects analyzed. It registered the fourth highest Community Associativity, which means a quarter of the individuals interviewed belong to a community organization. The community was positively involved with NA project (the fourth highest) and continue working on this. 16 Project Title: Reinforcing Innovative Mechanisms for Arising Capacities in Disaster Risk Reduction in Rimac Implementing Partner (IP): COOPI Location: Lima-Rimac, Perú Table 10. Main Interventions in the Lima-Rimac NA Project Output Findings Physical Works & Maintenance Irrigation system with residual water Transferred to : Municipality; Neighborhood organizations In general, physical interventions were ‘Moderately Effective’ and are ‘Slightly Maintained’ [PW; ER]. Irrigation system: Wetland was not complicated to build and it does not require a high maintenance. The pump used inside the storage tank is automatic and does not require a person to manipulate it [PW; ER]. Access roads (evacuation) Transferred to : Municipality; Neighborhood organizations Stairs and handrails are in higher places or in places that are difficult to access, where people are in the highest risk condition. People use these points to meet or rest as they walk around. Some people or families benefited directly with the works, because their house entrances are in a better condition [Technical]. Murals, tribune, bus stop, and park improvements Transferred to : Municipality; Neighborhood organizations These works increase the quality of life of the users [Technical]. In Letícia, the recovery of residual areas in the community is moderately effective on reducing vulnerability, by protecting recreational areas that can be used at the same time as safe areas [ER]. Shoring and ladder Transferred to : Municipality; Neighborhood organizations The location of the columns (part of intervention) is not the most appropriate and is not in symmetry with the existing structural elements. Some of the wooden plates placed in the joints of the elements are damaged, including by the placement of the nails. Columns placed directly on the ground can start to have problems due to humidity and deterioration [Technical]. Social Mobilization Gains Several training courses Empowerment of the recycling group Transferred to : Community Communities are more aware of risks and vulnerability than before. People thank that they were trained in ‘public project management’: i.e. elaboration of proposals for municipal funds. These two element contribute to the sustainability of training interventions [FGD]. There is a ‘replicating factor’ or ‘snowball’ among people on the knowledge acquired during trainings [FGD; Interviews]. Participation in the construction of physical works benefited community ownership for such interventions: physical works as catalyzers [FGD; Interviews]. Environmental Improvements Forestation areas Transferred to : Municipality; Neighborhood organizations • The implemented system has a good functionality and sustainability because there are people who contribute sewage water, the principal resource for the wetland and thus for the irrigation system [Technical]. • Trees, desert shrubs and other superficial vegetation can retain small rocks. They also reduce soil erosion. However, the area does not constitute a high￾risk area, since its slope is moderate [ER]. Due to the early stages of the forestation (22/2017) the protection factor is moderately effective. Urban Informality/Precariousness Rimac has an Informality/Precariousness Index of 33.88 (Table 3), the fifth highest among the eight projects included in this study. The legal realm represents the highest score, particularly in the areas of compliance with building regulations and urban planning, while land tenure is not a major issue. In the physical realm the scores are driven by the high exposure to natural and human induced hazards, and the environmental degradation; housing is in good condition. The social realm shows some levels of violence and illegal activities and some issues 17 with access to social infrastructure. Even though the NA project was intended to positively impact some of the variables here, the NA incidence in the final index is marginal (less than 1 unit). Other methodologies used in this study allow to capture other project impacts. Disaster Risk Reduction Rímac obtained the lowest DRR Index score (details in Table 4) among the eight projects analyzed and the lowest in terms of the contribution of the NA project to the level of DRR found. In addition, the community involved in the implementation of the emergency plan and the EWS is proportionally lower than the other four variables measured; these are common trends among all the projects. Social Cohesion Rímac obtained the third lowest Social Cohesion Index score (details in Table 6) among the eight projects analyzed, and the third lowest in terms of the contribution of the NA project to the level of social cohesion found. Disaster Risk Governance Rímac ranks fifth in the Disaster Risk Governance Index score (details in Table 5) among the eight projects analyzed. Nevertheless, it registered highest in Community Associativity, which means more than a third of the individuals interviewed belong to a community organization. Rímac is sixth in community involvement and sixth in local government involvement among the eight projects. Project Title: Knowledge and Risk Reduction Program (CRRP) Implementing Partner (IP): Global Communities Location: Medellín, Colombia Table 11. Main Interventions in the Medellin NA Project Outputs Findings Physical Works & Maintenance Housing improvements: roofing Retaining walls Transferred to : Community and benefited families Houses are safer due to training, manuals and physical works [FGD]. Houses for improvements were carefully selected in a participatory way, which resulted in community members accepting the selection [FGD]. Drainage (rain water runoff) Access/ Evacuation roads Transferred to : Municipality Sidewalks, stairs and railings have reduced the risk of falling. Previously people died or were seriously injured. They now can get to their destination safer and more easily [FGD]. Street lighting (Solar off-grid) Transferred to : Fundación Litro de Luz and Community Solar lighting was not installed in all the areas where it was needed, due to lack of time and money. During inspection, these lights were not working [FGD]. Social Mobilization Gains [Not declared by implementer] Community members learned their obligation (pay taxes) and rights (access to public works (PW) and property titles), and to demand support from municipality [FGD]. Community associations were strengthened and are recognized by the municipality [Interviews; FGD]. Participatory design has facilitate community ownership [Interviews]. Implementer has highlighted the social value of physical works, this has propitiated community ownership [Interviews]. 18 Outputs Findings Environmental Improvements Environmental gardens Garbage disposal management Transferred to : Community and Fundación Salvaterra Environmental group cleans up, provides maintenance and monitors the state of physical works and natural areas in alliance with institutions through a signed agreement [FGD]. Institutional Arrangements [Not declared by implementer] Private-public alliances may benefit/speed-up transition of local economic activities from informal to formal [Interviews]. Private partners have seen the potential of informal settlements’ small economies and helped to develop innovative ideas: concatenation of projects [Interviews]. Municipality is investing strongly in these communities [FGD; Interviews]. Support from many different institutions augments possibility of continuing projects with some of them: Municipality, UPB, DAGRED, Salvaterra, FENALCO, Police [FGD; Interviews]. Livelihoods and Financial Mechanisms Public-private partnership for financial credit of small businesses Transferred to : Public and private organizations, and merchants Many micro business owners learned to assess risks, how to reduce them, how to stay safe and understood that risk management is their responsibility [FGD]. Vegetable gardens provide an income and food security, which makes people maintain them [FGD]. DRR Interventions Emergency management protocol design for community EWS Housing improvements: roofing Retaining walls (see section Physical Works in this table) Transferred to : Community and benefited families Families have prepared their emergency plans [FGD]. Families benefited from house improvements and retaining walls are safer than before. However, these specific and particular actions are not significant for a overall reduction of risks in the neighborhoods [FGD; Interviews]. Urban Informality/Precariousness Medellin has an Informality/Precariousness Index of 29.32 (Table 3), the second lowest among the eight projects included in this study. The legal realm represents the highest score, particularly in the areas of compliance with urban planning and building regulations there are still issues in land tenure. In the physical realm, the scores are driven by the high exposure to natural and human-induced hazards, and environmental degradation; the housing is in good condition and access to basic utilities is not a major problem. The social realm shows some levels of violence and illegal activities and some issues with access to social infrastructure. Even though the NA project was intended to positively impact some of the variables here, the NA incidence in the final index is marginal (less than 1 unit). Other methodologies used in this study allow the capture of other project impacts. Disaster Risk Reduction Medellín obtained the third lowest DRR Index score (details in Table 4) among the eight projects analyzed, and the fifth highest in terms of the contribution of the NA project to the level of DRR found. In addition, community involved in the emergency plan implementation and the EWS are proportionally lower than the other four variables measured; these are common trends among all the projects. 19 Social Cohesion Medellín obtained the fourth highest Social Cohesion Index score (details in Table 6) among the eight projects analyzed, and the fourth highest in terms of the contribution of the NA project to the level of social cohesion found. Disaster Risk Governance Medellin obtained the highest Disaster Risk Governance Index score (details in Table 5) among the eight projects analyzed. It registered the third lowest Community Associativity, which means a fifth of the individuals interviewed belong to a community organization. The community involvement is the third highest and local government had the highest involvement in the NA project among the eight projects analyzed, and continues working on this initiative in six additional neighborhoods. Project Title: Barrio Mio Implementing Partner (IP): Project Concern International Location: Mixco, Guatemala Table 1 . Main Interventions in the Mixco NA Project Outputs Findings Physical Works & Maintenance Tailored retaining walls Transferred to: Technology transferred to municipal teams Appropriate maintenance by community members [Implementers]. The municipality will not receive the works until land titles are defined. [Interviews]. Drainage system Permeable pavements Transferred to: Municipality of Mixco, through written agreement Working properly. It is considered that the reduction of environmental vulnerability is well achieved by installing sewage and gray water systems that mitigate the disposal of pollutants to natural areas, as well as in the streets and other public and collective areas of the communities [ER]. Rainwater collection system Transferred to: Municipality of Mixco and Neighborhood organization Structures are in good shape, but not enough maintenance: the community is not well organized to maintain clean the structures [Implementers]. The rainwater collection system is an effective measure to address issues related to drinking water availability, reducing vulnerability and so reducing risks. [ER]. Septic tanks: Residual water treatment plan (PTAR) Transferred to : Municipality of Mixco and Neighborhood organization Working well but some neighbors still unconnected to the plan because of miscommunication with local authorities [Implementers]. The treatment plants are effective in mitigating pollution both in natural areas (in the ravines) and public spaces, as well as in reducing disease caused by the presence of surface pollutants in the communities. However, in Cipresales some families have not made their gray water connection and in some cases, the water stagnates, thus generating the appearance of mosquitoes and related health problems [ER]. The assessment found that there are no lab tests to check the Tank’s performance and there are no operational manuals. The implementer is working on this issue. House retrofitting Transferred to : Benefited families The reinforcement made for structural elements comply with seismic￾resistant standards. Blocks and reinforced concrete were used. In construction plans, it was possible to observe the design and dimensioning of the elements. The upper floor is made with horizontal joists and blocks on which the concrete slab is placed. A good finish of the elements and a correct construction technique are observed. The walls have a plaster finish. The work done increases the safety against collapse of the built structures, as long as the weight is not increased or subjected to loads greater than those it was designed for. 20 Outputs Findings Community center in Cipresales Transferred to : Community organization A one-story building used by the different communal groups. The structural section was built using PVC pipes as columns and beam. The structure is very light and does not transmit significant loads to the ground, and therefore, to the walls. We cannot determine whether the structure will be stable in seismic conditions. A little flexion was observed in the horizontal elements. Access roads Transferred to : Municipality of Mixco and Community organization Sidewalks, stairs and accesses built with reinforced concrete. They were mostly placed on slopes. Also, in some points, small walls were built for the safety and integrity of the work. They are rigid structures, safe and of good dimension. Social Mobilization Gains Facilitating neighborhood committee (COCODE) Empowered Women program Transferred to : Community organizations See Livelihoods and Financial Mechanisms. Environmental Improvements [Not declared by implementer] Forestation areas generated during the project are in good condition, they protect the area from erosion. However, there are also areas of clandestine garbage and construction rubble dumping and burning near areas sensitive to erosion [ER]. Institutional Arrangements [Not declared by implementer] NA approach for private sector may be interesting, but it needs to be aligned with market opportunities [Interviews]. Implementers not only enable municipality to enter to communities, but also the private actor (market) [Interviews]. Physical works as catalysts for the relationship between the municipality and the community: corruption acts in an opposite way [Interviews]. Neighborhood organizations can establish direct agreements with private companies [Interviews]. There is lack of presence of the government in the neighborhoods: implementers and NA approach has helped to bridge that gap [Interviews]. Implementers/donors (when they are trusted organizations by governments) may help state organization to create trusted relations with other state or non-state institutions [Interviews]. Livelihoods and Financial Mechanisms Women network for entrepreneurship Transferred to : Community Role of women in implementing interventions: they were always present and willing to contribute [Interviews]. Importance of women as part of the workforce to improve family economies [Interviews]. Urban Informality/Precariousness Mixco has an Informality/Precariousness Index score of 25.90 (Table 3), the lowest among the eight projects included in this study. The legal realm shows issues in the areas of compliance with urban planning and land tenure, and less problems related to building regulations. In the physical realm, scores are driven by the high exposure to natural and human-induced hazards, and environmental degradation, while the housing conditions are less problematic and access to basic utilities is not a problem. The social realm shows issues with access to social infrastructure. Even though the NA project was intended to positively impact some of the variables here, the NA incidence in the final index is marginal (less than 1 unit). Other methodologies used in this study allow the capture of other project impacts. Disaster Risk Reduction Mixco obtained the fifth highest DRR Index score (details in Table 4) among the eight projects analyzed, and the third lowest in terms of the contribution of the NA project to the level of DRR found. In addition, the 21 community involved in the implementation of the emergency plan and the EWS is proportionally lower than the other four variables measured; these are common trends among all the projects. Social Cohesion Mixco obtained the second lowest Social Cohesion Index score (details in Table 6) among the eight projects analyzed, and the third highest in terms of the contribution of the NA project to the level of social cohesion found. Disaster Risk Governance Mixco obtained the second highest Disaster Risk Governance Index score (details in Table 5) among the eight projects analyzed. It registered the second lowest Community Associativity, which means less than a fifth of the individuals interviewed belong to a community organization. To the contrary, community involvement registered the second highest score among the eight projects. The local government involvement had ups and downs, but recently was highly involved, and the relationship with the association of municipalities (mancomunity) that adopted the NA was reinforced. Project Title: Community Initiatives in Disaster Risk Reduction (CIDRR) Implementing Partner (IP): World Concern Development Organization Location: Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur, Haiti Table 1 . Main Interventions in the Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur NA Project Outputs Findings Physical Works & Maintenance Shelter improvements (WASH, roofing) Transferred to : Churches, schools, and CDGRD-NO, through written agreements Shelters were extremely effective interventions in Port-de-Paix and Anse-à￾Foleur: they were extensively used during Hurricane Irma (2017) and no electricity shortage was reported [FGD]. Drainage canals Gabions Transferred to : MTPTC and Neighborhood committees through verbal agreement Canals were critical during Hurricane Irma. Decline of flood events since their construction. Nevertheless, most of them are filled with garbage and mud, so better waste management may improve their performance substantially. Some people have fallen down, as the canals lack of handrails. [FGD]. Water supply (pipe that runs) Transferred to : MTP DINEPA through written agreement The project provided an excellent quality pipeline from the source of the water to the town. The World Bank built 10 water tanks and the municipality built the distribution network. An excellent effect of concatenation of projects [Interviews]. Social Mobilization Gains Youth volunteers trained for EWS/DRR: including a siren crank by community Transferred to : CPC and CDGRD-NO Not all communities developed ownership with regards to their physical works (FGD]. Hiring locals enhances community participation, awareness, and neighbors’ appreciation on the interventions [Interviews]. Environmental Improvements Canal and coastal clean-out, and garbage disposal Transferred to : MTPTC, Municipality, and Neighborhood committees through verbal agreement Garbage disposal was not an effective intervention. Cans were removed and/or vandalized, and garbage were not collected by the municipality [FGD]. 22 Outputs Findings Institutional Arrangements [Not declared by implementer] Institutional ownership is lacking. Municipality is not picking up the trash deposited in the trash cans or in other areas. When it rains the trash floods into the canal; also people throw trash in the canal. There is however some civil society organizations that support the sustainability of the works (e.g. Bon vive maintaining the canals with young male community members) [FGD]. Communities appreciate the role of implementers, over even the municipality and other public organizations [Interviews]. NA approach enabled a ‘concatenation’ of interventions built from previous works: canals [Interviews]. DRR Interventions Shelter (and other) improvements (WASH, roofing) Transferred to : Churches, schools, and CDGRD-NO, through written agreements Shelters operated efficiently during Hurricane Irma (2017). Protection Civil provided good logistical support during Hurricane Irma (2017). [FGD]. People feel that they have learned how to react during emergencies: siren crank manager recognizes importance of being ready in case of emergencies (as he did during Hurricane Irma) [FGD]. Institutions recognize that canals, gabions and shelters worked well during Hurricane Irma [Interviews]. Urban Informality/Precariousness Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur have a combined Informality/Precariousness Index score of 52.41 (Table 3), the highest (by far) among the eight projects included in this study. The legal realm shows serious issues in the areas of compliance with urban planning and land tenure and building regulations, and also important deficiencies with land tenure. In the physical realm, the scores are driven by the high exposure to natural and human-induced hazards, lack of access to basic utilities and environmental degradation, while the housing conditions are much less problematic. The social realm shows issues with access to social infrastructure, violence and illegal activities, and some level of marginalization issues. Even though the NA project was intended to positively impact some of the variables here, the NA incidence in the final index is marginal (less than 1 unit). Other methodologies used in this study allow the capture of other project impacts. Disaster Risk Reduction Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur obtained the fourth highest DRR Index score (details in Table 4) among the eight projects analyzed, and the second highest in terms of the contribution of the NA project to the level of DRR found. Compared to the other NA projects, the scores in the DRR Index related to the Haitian community’s involvement in the implementation of the emergency plan and the EWS are similar to the other four variables measured. It is interesting to note the importance that the community attributes to the project’s physical works built and their involvement in their maintenance. Social Cohesion Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur obtained the lowest Social Cohesion Index score (details in Table 6) among the eight projects analyzed, and the second lowest in terms of the contribution of the NA project to the level of social cohesion found. Disaster Risk Governance Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur obtained by far the lowest Disaster Risk Governance Index score (details in Table 5) among the eight projects analyzed. Nevertheless, it registered the third highest in Community Associativity, which means more than a quarter of the individuals interviewed belong to a community 23 organization. The community involvement in the NA was mediated by the cash-for-work formula and the local government involvement in the NA was by far the lower in the eight projects. Project Title: Building Resilience and Capacities for Emerging Disasters (BRACED) Implementing Partner (IP): Habitat for Humanity Location: Portmore, Jamaica Table 1 . Main Interventions in the Portmore NA Project Outputs Findings Physical Works & Maintenance Housing improvements: retrofitting and roofing Transferred to : Community members, families Interventions have helped to reduce problems with heavy storms in 2017 [FGD]. Ventilated Improved Dry Pits (VIDPs) Transferred to : Community households and Sanitation committees Reduction of environmental vulnerability is moderately achieved by installing the sanitation modules inside the communities. This mitigates the disposal of pollutants (fecal matter) in case of potential flooding in streets and collective areas of the communities. It also reduces potential contamination to water source [ER]. VIDPs demonstrated that they are effective in reduction of health risks. During the visit, it was observed that the modules have been adopted by the members of the community, which translates into a lower risk of diseases caused by fecal matter that were previously superficial and close to all homes [ER]. It was observed that the VIDPs are well maintained. And at the level of management and sustainability of the interventions, it is considered that since a limited number of families have access to each bathroom (between 4 and 5 families), it is expected that their maintenance will be easier to coordinate among family members. The use of a double dry tank system for the VIDP's helps to facilitate long-term maintenance [ER]. Social Mobilization Gains CERT trainings Transferred to : Social development commission - PMC Construction skills training for youth (mostly men) with certification gave them (temporary) jobs [FGD]. Environmental Improvements Garbage receptacles Transferred to : Neighborhood Committees: NSWMA Receptacles in Naggos Head and Gregory Park have helped to reduce health risks and prevent contamination in natural areas [ER]. In addition, garbage in open areas interrupt the raining runoff, increasing the risk of flooding during the rainy season. The receptacles for waste management are effective in reducing informal or clandestine dumps in open areas. Because of the height of these infrastructures, it is less possible that dogs or goats try to look for food waste. Some neighbors report that the garbage collection is irregular and that also affects its functionality in relation to preventing garbage from being exposed [ER]. The receptacles are robust infrastructure that requires very little maintenance [ER]. Construction of receptacles helped to reduce the risk of inundations as garbage used to block drainages. And in case of inundations there is less garbage floating into the houses [FGD]. 24 Outputs Findings Institutional Arrangements Land tenure mapping and regularization Transferred to : National Land Agency, LAMP, NSWMA and Naggos Head Citizen’s Association Local government incorporated new methods for land management as experience from the project: this may result in future replication [Interviews]. Land tenureship augmented willingness to make improvements and helps to attain wealth: and pay taxes and demand public services [FGD]. Implementer has helped in rendering more visible the informal settlements to local authorities and national government [Interviews]. Implementer has demonstrated how to speed up processes of land-tenure by supporting people with knowledge, data and financial resources [Interviews]. Community awareness and mobilization have facilitated land-tenure surveying [Interviews]. Maps of Naggos Head Transferred to : Portmore Municipal Council - Planning Division Neighbors learned about map reading and evacuation routes [FGD]. Doing a survey / mapping to define levels of risk helps to get everybody to agree on location of physical works [FGD]. Urban Informality/Precariousness Portmore has a combined Informality/Precariousness Index score of 38.48 (Table 3), the second highest among the eight projects included in this study. The legal realm shows serious issues with land tenure and compliance with building regulations and urban planning. In the physical realm, the scores are driven by the high exposure to natural and human-induced hazards, environmental degradation, and access to basic utilities. The social realm shows issues with violence and illegal activities, and access to social infrastructure. Marginalization is not a major issue. In the case of Portmore, some of the interventions are still in an implementation phase. Those related to land tenure will be completed in 10-12 months, and they would have a moderate positive incidence in the final index, 2-3 units. Other methodologies used in this study allow the capture of additional project impacts. Disaster Risk Reduction Portmore obtained the second lowest DRR Index score (details in Table 4) among the eight projects analyzed and the second lowest in terms of the contribution of the NA project to the level of DRR found. It is interesting to note that the EWS is proportionally lower than the other five variables measured, a common trend among all the projects; it is also the lowest EWS score among the eight projects. Social Cohesion Portmore obtained the second highest (by far) Social Cohesion Index score (details in Table 6) among the eight projects analyzed, and the second highest (by far) in terms of the contribution of the NA project to the level of social cohesion found. Disaster Risk Governance Portmore is the second lowest in Disaster Risk Governance Index score (details in Table 5) among the eight projects analyzed. It registered in the fifth position with regard to the Community Associativity, which means less than a four of the individuals interviewed belong to a community organization. Community involvement is the second lowest and local government involvement in the NA project is very low, second lowest among the eight projects. Project Title: Operationalizing a Neighborhood Approach to Reduce Urban Disaster Risk in Latin America and the Caribbean Implementing Partner (IP): GOAL Location: Tegucigalpa, Honduras 25 Table 1 Main Interventions in the Tegucigalpa NA Project Outputs Findings Physical Works & Maintenance Drainage systems Transferred to : Committees of Water Management, Neighborhood organizations (Patronatos), and CODEL Gray and rainwater drainage with ditches is effective to reduce potential flooding in the communities. Moreover, it mitigates soil erosion produced by superficial runoff water to natural areas. This helps to protect the streams, mainly by conducting the discharges to lower areas and by using trenches to reduce water flow speed [ER]. The ditches for rainwater runoff and domestic gray water management are in good condition [ER]. It is important to mention that the risk areas in the communities are well monitored, both by the community (with measuring instruments for rain, fissures in walls, inclination of sensitive areas) as well as by a new project with the World Bank, who gave financing to locate 16 drill points with an early alteration system [ER]. Committees pay a plumber to conduct maintenance and repairs of the system [Implementer]. The system works well, although some maintenance issues were raised: collection trucks cannot access some areas [Implementer]. Housing improvements and new houses (relocation) Transferred to : Households/families Three years after improvements, 36 of 47 show to be in good condition. 39 of 47 households have conduced maintenance regularly. 14 of 47 have made new improvements. Seven additional households, non-related to the project, have initiated improvements to their houses, based in the project [Implementers]. Gabions Transferred to : Community organization Gabions were built in the relocation area. Even though there are some technical issues, with acceptable specifications and an estimated life of 20 years. There are some observations regarding the size of the stones, as well as the quality of the wire that tightens-up the metal mesh. WASH drinking water systems Transferred to : Director of Educational Centers, CODEL, and Parents organizations The implementation of sanitation modules is very effective. It mitigates superficial contamination in the communities by providing an effective solution to the lack of municipal sewage collectors in most parts of Duarte and Ulloa communities. Also, it controls ground pollution, thus improving people’s health. Some modules had an improvised harvesting rainwater system, which gives an alternative solution for water consumption for domestic use (as no potable water is needed) [ER]. Families maintain regularly their sanitation systems [ER; Implementers]. Social Mobilization Gains [Not declared by implementer] Social control (auditoria social) mechanisms are an opportunity to people to have voice in decision making and for empowerment [Interviews]. Institutional Arrangements Household relocation GIS outputs Transferred to : Households/families and diverse public institutions NA for EWS is being replicated by national institutions (COPECO) [Interviews]. 8 of 9 constructed houses are being well maintained by families [Implementers]. Technical studies of hazards have been delivered to different local and national institutions, some of them are informing decisions regarding to mitigation measures and future relocations [Implementers]. Livelihoods and Financial Mechanisms Grocery stores (pulperías) network and the savings strategy Transferred to : Merchants network organized in a cooperative saving and credit entity Many grocery stores have incremented their stock and have done improvements to their infrastructure [Implementers]. 17 of 21 members have maintained their businesses after a year [Implementers]. A system of basic baskets is being working within the stores. 26 Outputs Findings DRR Interventions Early warning systems (SAT) Transferred to : CODEM and CODEL Two of three CODELs maintain an operative EWS. Main limitations are: reliable communication and a massive broadcasting system for warnings [Implementers]. Note: There are two interventions that were not reported within the Project Transfer Matrix submitted by the implementers: the Resilience Analysis for Social Systems (R4S); and the Analysis of the Resilience of Communities to Disasters (ARC-D) Toolkit. More information about these interventions can be found in Annexes. Urban Informality/Precariousness Tegucigalpa has a combined Informality/Precariousness Index score of 35.88 (Table 3), the fourth highest among the eight projects included in this study. The legal realm shows serious issues with compliance with building regulations and urban planning, and also problems with land tenure. In the physical realm, the scores are driven by the high exposure to natural and human-induced hazards and environmental degradation. The social realm shows issues with access to social infrastructure and violence and illegal activities. Marginalization is not a major issue. In the case of Tegucigalpa, an intervention related to community relocation due to existing disaster risk is still in an implementation phase. This intervention is related to land tenure, urban planning and building regulations and will be completed in the next four months; it will have a moderate positive incidence in the final index, 3-4 units. Other methodologies used in this study allow to capture additional project impacts. Disaster Risk Reduction Tegucigalpa obtained the third highest DRR Index score (details in Table 4) among the eight projects analyzed, and the third highest in terms of the contribution of the NA project to the level of DRR found. In comparison with other NA projects, community involvement in Tegucigalpa in the implementation of the emergency plan and the EWS has closer scores to the other four variables measured. Social Cohesion Tegucigalpa obtained the highest Social Cohesion Index score (details in Table 6) among the eight projects analyzed, and the highest in terms of the contribution of the NA project to the level of social cohesion found. Disaster Risk Governance Tegucigalpa obtained the third highest Disaster Risk Governance Index score (details in Table 5) among the eight projects analyzed. It is interesting that this NA project registered the lowest in Community Associativity, which means only a tenth of the individuals interviewed belong to a community organization. Community involvement registered the highest score and local government involvement had the second highest score among the eight projects. 6. Response to the USAID Questions The following premises are essential to answering the questions posed by USAID: 1) The eight projects evaluated share NA characteristics such as a geographical approach and a participatory action process; they address specific sectors, and aim to reduce risk and build resilience of the target communities; 2) However, each project is unique, responding to the communities’ needs, their distinct socio-economic and cultural features, and is framed in specific realities and contexts; and 3) the answers to the USAID questions will refer, in some cases, to common NA characteristics, and in other cases, to strategies, methods and techniques used by some of the implementers, which enriched, complemented and even came to guide the NA. 27 6.1 Objective 1: Effectiveness 1. To what extent have projects implemented under a Neighborhood Approach contributed to reducing community disaster hazard risks in targeted urban communities in the selected projects? To answer this question one must return to the proposed conceptual framework, specify the areas where the construction of risk (the social construction of exposure and vulnerability) must be tackled, and identify the NA interventions in each area that have proven to be appropriate and sufficiently implemented. The four trajectories or pathways of influence to reduce community disaster risk are: a) secure land occupation; b) sufficient and resilient livelihoods; c) robust and resilient ecosystems; and d) adequate disaster risk and emergency management. As indicated earlier, in communities suffering from significant levels of precariousness, it is critical to first address the basic and survival needs that influence all the other domains. a) NA interventions and features associated with secure land occupation Two main interventions illustrate a successful approach to secure land occupation: 1) Land tenure initiative implemented in Portmore, Jamaica, with support from Habitat for Humanity (HfH), and 2) Relocating of at-risk communities in Tegucigalpa, Honduras, with support from GOAL. The former is being implemented in the community of Naggo-Head in Portmore as a pilot activity by the HfH and Jamaica’s Land Administration and Management Program. This initiative helps communities exposed to disaster risk acquire a registered title. Empirically, there is a positive link between land registration and access to credit, housing improvement, and risk reduction. Nevertheless, there is not enough evidence that obtaining property titles alone will address the issue of access to credit, and even more, reduce risk (Domeher & Abdulai, 2011). What is clear and can be stated with confidence is that land tenure issues and exposure to natural hazards may result in an exclusion of aid distribution and post-disaster reconstruction programs, making these communities more vulnerable to future disasters. Secure land tenure is critical to assure restoration of shelter and livelihoods and to reduce the risks of precariousness in communities (Caron et al., 2015), as observed in the 2010 earthquake in Haiti (Desir & Jackson, 2012; Jahn et al. 2017), the 2004 tsunami in Sri Lanka (Boano, 2009), and the 2013 Typhoon Haiyan in Philippines (Oxfam, 2014). The relocation of at-risk communities in Tegucigalpa’s Berlin neighborhood by GOAL is currently in the implementation phase after several months of delay due to the extensive paperwork required to fulfill environmental standards and secure land tenure for the beneficiaries in the new location. The complex process involved multiple actors such as the Municipality, the national housing authority, the water authority, universities, and a private engineering and geologist consultancy firm, among others. The initiative included a detailed hazard assessment in both the original location and receiving territory, a socio-economic and resilience study, and a carefully designed participatory process. The local government and GOAL joined efforts to ensure an effective and efficient process, keeping the relocating community together in the selected destination, and ensuring that the at-risk lots remain unoccupied through reforestation and community surveillance/control. 28 b) Sufficient and resilient livelihoods Two main NA initiatives can illustrate effective DRR: 1) the small business approach used by Global Communities in Medellín, Colombia; and 2) the pulperias networks implemented by GOAL in Tegucigalpa, Honduras. c) Robust and resilient ecosystems In Lima, Perú, three different NA projects implemented an afforestation project, initially designed to reduce the risk of rocks falling from the slopes and to recover the fragile ecosystem lost over the past decades. The project, initially designed by PREDES, was later replicated by the other two implementers, COOPI and Save the Children. However, the endeavor grew in magnitude, in both geographical size and scope, achieving the status of a timely and a much-relevant intervention for the neighborhood, given its geographical and environmental context. The afforestation project then became an effort, by the city of Lima, to limit the expansion of informal settlements in its surrounding hills with high slopes, which are susceptible to landslides and earthquakes. The initiative integrates different components that demand locally available technical capabilities: 1) a subsystem of gray water collection and treatment; 2) a pumping, storage and irrigation subsystem; 3) the selection and sowing of native trees; 4) the use of synthetic materials (hydrogel) that retain moisture in the soil for prolonged periods; and 5) most importantly, involvement of the surrounding communities to develop and maintain this initiative. This strategy obeys the theoretical model proposed by the implementers and supported by local forestry technicians, but lacks evidence as to its effectiveness and the long-term impacts of some of the materials used (hydrogel), including the extensive use of gray water (e.g., physical-chemical or bacteriological controls of the water used in irrigation have not been carried out). d) Adequate disaster risk and emergency management Physical works such as pathways, access roads, retaining walls and drainage systems are the axes of risk reduction in neighborhood projects. Since these settlements usually lack most of the urban amenities, the NA projects contributed to ease some essential basic infrastructure, which is directly associated with reducing vulnerability and disaster risk. The pathways were common to the six projects implemented in Central and South America due to the location of settlements on steep slopes. This infrastructure offers appropriate conditions for carrying out a safe evacuation in case of an emergency, reducing time, accidents, and allowing a rapid and safe evacuation of people with disabilities. Additionally, this is one of the interventions with the greatest impact on the quality of life of the members of the community, an externality that can benefit the community on a day-to-day basis. Another physical work of great importance is the retaining wall, designed and built in a variety of shapes and sizes to protect against landslides. The smaller-sized walls accompany and protect the pathways and access roads, while the larger walls protect individual homes or even a set of dwellings, sewage treatment tanks, and other vital structures. Infrastructure such as channels to manage the runoff in Port-de-Paix, as well as gabions in Anse-à-Foleur, were built by World Concern in Haiti, and proved to be highly effective during the passage of Hurricane 29 Irma in 2017. The works reduced the intensity of the 2017 impact and the duration of the emergency, especially in comparison to previous events such as Tropical Storm Joanne in September 2004. In addition, the community was provided with a hand crank alarm siren, and community training and improvements were made to the shelters provided by Civil Protection. These measures allowed for an early and safe evacuation to the shelters and a restoration of activities in less than 72 hours after the passage of Hurricane Irma. Drainage systems are recorded in different magnitudes, from small works associated with the pathways and retaining wallsthe most common in the projects in Lima, Medellin, Guatemala and Hondurasto more complex systems such as the one seen in the Tegucigalpa project, whose design demanded digital elevation mapping, generated with LIDAR (a detection system that works on the principle of radar, but uses light from a laser), a runoff, modeling and the generation of multiple scenarios to ensure a lifespan of 20-30 years. The issue of drainage is considered an essential DRR intervention, associated with the problem of managing rain and storm water, landslides and slope instability, particularly in urban settings. The officials from institutions responsible for emergency management, private organizations and the private sector acknowledged a significant contribution of the NA to DRR in the eight projects when interviewed. However, with no system in place to measure DRR progress in general, they could not quantify the DRR advances contributed by the NA projects. In the surveys directed to the community present in the selected neighborhoods, the study measured the progress and attribution of the NA to DRR. Figure 4. Project’s contribution to community Disaster Risk and Emergency Management We built an attribution index relating to the community’s perception of their current neighborhood’s DRR status and of the NA project’s contribution toward it. An index of 1 means that the surveyed population attributes the DRR advances 100% to the NA project. This is an inverse relationship; numbers greater than 1 mean that the attribution to the project is lower. 0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 Haiti L Carabayllo L Independencia L Rimac Mixco Medellin Portmore Tegucigalpa Disaster Risk and Emergency Management Project's contribution to DRR status DRR Status 30 Table 1 . Ratio project’s contribution to DRR status Haiti Carabayllo Independencia Rimac Mixco Medellin Portmore Tegucigalpa 1.04 1.15 1.26 1.30 1.22 1.20 1.24 1.22 As can be seen, the community attribution of DRR advances in the NA Project is very high in Haiti, followed by the communities of Carabayllo in Lima, Medellín, Tegucigalpa and Mixco. The lowest values correspond to the community of Rímac, Lima. 2. Which aspects of the urban DRR Neighborhood Approach are most effective? Which aspects of the urban DRR Neighborhood Approach are least effective? To address this question, we used two different approaches: 1) Life Satisfaction Analysis (LSA), and 2) Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA). Using these two approaches allowed us to measure different NA project dimensions, the former measuring the level of well-being attributed to the NA projects’ interventions and the latter focusing on calculating and comparing benefits and costs of the specific NA interventions selected. For the LSA, we used a multivariate regression analysis to evaluate the association between each of the 14 neighborhood DRR interventions and changes in life satisfaction (more details in Annex 4-8). Figure 5 presents the results of our estimation for all interventions grouped by categories. The categories with the highest impact on life satisfaction improvement are physical works and social mobilization gains. Neighborhoods that received a community empowerment intervention (social mobilization category) increased their life satisfaction by 0.65 points. Considering that on average, the life satisfaction of all neighborhoods in the study was 2.46, the community empowerment intervention produced an increase in life satisfaction of nearly 27%. Figure 5. Impact of Interventions on Life Satisfaction Other categories with interventions that had a significant impact on life satisfaction are livelihoods and financial mechanisms (rural approaches intervention and markets and financing), and institutional arrangements (GIS, information and communication technologies intervention). While in most cases the interventions were implemented in several neighborhoods, the rural approach case with the positive impact corresponds only to the Medellin neighborhood so, a generalization of this case should be taken with caution. 31 Other interventions such as capacity building, governance, regulatory framework, urban livelihoods, early warning systems, emergency/disaster management and disaster risk reduction were not statistically associated to changes in life satisfaction. The CBA of the DRR interventions revealed that overall, the USAID project interventions have benefit-cost ratios (BCRs) of more than one, with the access paths being the most cost-beneficial. A BCR of one indicates that the discounted benefit of implementing an intervention equals its cost. The BCR of physical interventions such as access paths ranged from 6.48 in Rímac to 8.5 in Medellin. On using an average value of statistical life ($107,000 for lower income countries, Viscusi & Masterman, 2017), the BCR for access paths increases to 138 and 122, for Medellin and Rímac, respectively. The drainage canal in Port-de-Paix, Haiti, yielded a BCR of 13.19, valued for benefits from avoided loss of household assets and increase in productive business days. Sanitation interventions like the septic tank in Mixco obtained a BCR of 1.62. The analyses were performed using conservative estimates and a discount rate of 10%. The life span for most cases was taken as 10 years considering the nature of the interventions and that the project implementers did not factor in maintenance costs in their estimates. For interventions in which benefits could not be monetized, we enumerated the benefits in terms of value gained to residents, potential monetary gains, and qualitative improvements for the neighborhoods to underscore the importance of the interventions. Benefits were projected for certain interventions like the land tenure registration effort in Portmore, Jamaica, which has not attained its target as yet. Our results match the evidence from the statistical analysis of BCRs of various categories of a heterogeneous group of risk management interventions by Wethli (2014), for the World Bank Development Report 2014), which also reveals a wide range of results. The table below compares the results of the CBA of some of our interventions with the estimates of the World Bank study. Table 1 . Comparative Benefit-Cost data from World Bank and USAID DRR Evaluations Intervention Category World Bank Report USAID Evaluation Median BCR (MinMax) BCR Flood mitigation 5.1 (0.01 60.1) 13.19 Improved Water and Sanitation 3.7 (1.27 61.5) 1.62 Earthquake mitigation 2.5 (0.016.5) Tropical Storm mitigation 3.4 (1.5018.6) Early warning systems: 5.0 (0.9357) Evacuation paths 6.48138 Similarly, the CBA of 5,500 FEMA mitigation grants for earthquake, flood and winds hazards yielded an overall benefit-cost ratio of 4:1 (although the range varies between 1.5 for earthquakes to 5.1 for flood mitigation) (Rose et al. 2007). The most significant limitation of the analysis has been the lack of detailed and organized cost data files in a technical format from the project implementers. Hastily collected cost data after project close out does not support good analyses. Ideally, project personnel should be trained in the basics of economic impact analysis from project inception onward and should be able to account for comprehensive costs associated with the interventions, articulate project benefits, and support a robust analytical process. 3. To what extent is the Neighborhood Approach effective as compared to more traditional DRR initiatives in the LAC region? 32 To address Question # 3, we conducted an extensive literature review for the years 20002018 that resulted in a total of 210 documents. Most were institutional documents (gray literature), from which we selected works prioritizing disaster risk reduction approaches in urban risk with a focus on precariousness, informality, and risk exposure in the Latin American and Caribbean region. The results were narrowed down to twenty six (26) disaster risk reduction approaches with a focus on urban risk in the LAC region. The five implementing agencies or funding sponsors that were most frequently mentioned in the DRR approaches with a focus on urban risk were: UNDP (4), USAID (4), World Bank (3), OXFAM (3), and IADB (2). We identified six DRR categories to conduct a thorough comparative analysis of the neighborhood approach with other DRR initiatives: 1) area-based, 2) market-based, 3) system-based, 4) institutional-based, 5) individual/household-based, and 6) operational. It is worth noting that some DRR initiatives fall within more than one category. Table 1 . DRR Categories DRR Approach Characteristics Number of Documents Area-Based Identified geographical area Participatory Multi-sectoral Neighborhood as the ‘unit’ of the intervention 13 Market-Based Existing or new markets Cash or voucher program Supporting recovery and improving supply chain 2 System-Based Rehabilitation of critical infrastructure (water, sanitation, roads, communications) 8 Institutional-Based Individuals based on affiliation with a specific institution school, health clinic or workplace (USAID 2008; DFID 2014) Supporting local authorities to recover 12 Individual/Household-Based Beneficiaries from violence, conflict and IDPs. Gender, education, health, disabilities, etc. 2 Operational Capacity building associated with emergency preparedness, response and recovery May include minor equipment devices such as radios, flashlights, helmets, etc. 3 Adapted from Parker, E., & Maynard, V. (2015). Humanitarian response to urban crises: A review of area-based approaches (Rep.). International Institute for Environment and Development. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep01316 The neighborhood approach promoted by USAID/OFDA, primarily identified in the area-based category, incorporates most of the criteria utilized by other approaches (market-based, system-based, institutional-based, individual/household-based, and operational-based). Nevertheless, there is a significant difference between the pure geographical meaning of the term ‘area-based’ versus the richness of the neighborhood concept used by USAID: a living fabric of social, economic, and physical features that provides the residents of a particular territory with an identity, a sense of security, safety, and familiarity. The results showed a limited number of initiatives/projects in urban settings, with an emphasis on areas with precariousness, informality, and risk exposure. However, some area-based approaches in institutions such as USAID, OXFAM, UNDP, DFID, and the World Bank have been identified. It is worth mentioning that several articles reviewed focused on policy recommendations but failed to identify specific 33 interventions/approaches that can be measurable in terms of community-based disaster risk reduction. Regarding methodological approaches, most of the literature review utilized qualitative methods. Only a few used mixed-methods. More traditional DRR strategies (such as system-based and/or operational-based) are less prevalent than neighborhood approaches (or area-based) or institutional-based, with a primary focus on local/national/INGOs efforts in disaster risk reduction. An increasing consensus on the determinant role of the community/neighborhood, both for purposes of effectiveness and sustainability, indicates the benefits of including a more participatory and multi-sectoral approach in a limited geographical area. Many of the DRR initiatives identified as participatory in nature include multiple stakeholders with a focus on community input, which can later work toward the creation of appropriation mechanisms in favor of making these efforts sustainable. Another positive consideration of the area-based in comparison to other categories is their geographically-based nature, which has been utilized by different organizations in the response to the Haitian earthquake in 2010 (UN-HABITAT), suggesting the need to maintain, if possible, the same location for rebuilding if safety is guaranteed, or in the case of USAID/OFDA’s neighborhood approach, that focused on communities with high socioeconomic vulnerability and exposure to natural hazards. As Sanderson (2017) notes, the area-based initiatives involve sectoral interaction of multiple stakeholders and focus on community engagement, which helps in identifying vulnerable populations. Other examples, such as the system-based Homeowner-Driven Housing Reconstruction and Retrofitting in Haiti (Build Change, 2014) has demonstrated effectiveness in empowering homeowners in Haiti by improving awareness on reconstruction after a disaster. This approach, along with mitigating disaster risk, has resulted in about 1,330 buildings retrofitted or built new and enabled 8,150 people to live in safer homes. Worth noting in the literature review is the comparison between the Latin American and Caribbean regions and other regions such as Asia or Africa. The number of disaster risk reduction approaches such as the neighborhood approach or other area-based is significantly lower in the LAC region in comparison to other regions (e.g., Asia, Africa). Regarding the time span of the DRR approaches identified, the following timeframe applied: area-based (20042017); system-based (20092017); institutional-based (20072015); household/individual-based (20072011); operational-based (20072016); and market-based (20092015). These results suggest that while most of the DRR initiatives have been in place over a significant period of time (area-based, system-based, and institutional-based), others such as the household/individual-based approach have been less utilized or reported. On a less positive note, the multiplicity of actorslocal and national levels, implementers, and international organizationscan help to promote or hinder the integration of DRR practices and appropriation of the neighborhood approach by local actors. As a methodological note, most of the studies fall under a descriptive level of analysis and do not reach the theoretical, indicative, or causal analysis. Some of the themes addressed in these approaches are: water management, public investment in urban developments, resettlement and resilience, early warning system, vulnerability reduction of landslides, eco-system based adaptation DRR strategies, homeowner-driven reconstruction and retrofitting. 4. What factors influence the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of urban DRR programs using the Neighborhood Approach in each country of focus? 34 We consider two categories of influencing factors for the effectiveness of urban DRR programs using the NA: 1) reflecting on internal aspects of each project and their immediate environment and 2) referring to the economic, political and social contexts in a broader sense, that is beyond the project’s control. For instance, in the three projects in Lima (Carabayllo, Independencia, and Rímac), several emergencies triggered by ‘El Niño’ in 2017 in northern Peru created a sort of ‘window of opportunity’ to introduce innovative DRR practices at different government levels. The three project implementers found these 'disasters' as influencing factors that facilitated the process of building disaster risk awareness among authorities, which allowed them to get endorsement of authorities for the NA projects. Subsequently, we corroborated these causality relations across several interviews with national and local government authorities. These factors affect the effectiveness of DRR programs and limit collaboration and engagement among communities, local and national authorities in a particular territory. Other positive influencing factors can be the capacity to lead and the ability of some implementers to bring together a very diverse group of actors with different agendas, interests and expectations under a common goal and principles, and especially the ability to preserve and enhance the significance of social processes such as building awareness, capacity development, and empowerment. This was particularly effective for the NA projects in Mixco, Medellín, and Tegucigalpa. We also observed that local governments with more comprehensive urban development capabilities avoided silos, fostered cross-sectorial integration and tended to mainstream DRR practices within urban development. Through interviews with several municipal and national directors in all projects, we concluded that this factor was particularly effective and a common feature in Carabayllo, Medellin, Mixco, and Tegucigalpa. Other external factors, in this case negative, may be related to bad past experiences between NGOs and donors which created mistrust among communities; the volatile political contexts in Mixco; municipal personnel turnover in Lima; organized crime and violence in Medellín; and specific land-tenure issues observed in Portmore. 6.2 Objective 2: Sustainability 5. To what extent are communities able to integrate DRR practices and take ownership of the Neighborhood Approach? What barriers to utilization of the Neighborhood Approach exist? The answer to this question stems from focus group discussions conducted in the eight projects, in conjunction with inputs from interviews and field observations. We estimate that, in general terms, the communities were able to integrate DRR practices, although only in few cases took ownership of the Neighborhood Approach as a whole. With significant differences among countries, neighbors in Mixco, Medellín, Tegucigalpa, and the three projects in Lima demonstrated appropriation of DRR practices such as better garbage and waste water management for reducing flood impacts and afforestation and gardening for the risk of landslides and stone falls. This can be explained by the projects’ strong emphasis on training and awareness development within communities; through techniques such as participation in the design and construction of physical works (e.g., murals, drainage construction, etc.); development of manuals and courses; among others. People were able to generate more consciousness about the risks they face and develop mechanisms to cope with and reduce them. In some cases, such as Medellín and Mixco, people achieved a certain level of empowerment as they began to demand more attention and action from local authorities. The Community Involvement indicator (see Figure 6) was developed using qualitative analysis of focus groups and interviews, assessing four aspects of community involvement: a) active involvement in planning; b) allocation of human and financial resources; c) active involvement in maintenance; and d) social control (‘auditoria social’). The figure also seeks to inform the dimension of governance within each project and reflects participation and appropriation by communities. 35 Figure 6. Community Involvement per Country, in Percentages Each of the four aspects was weighted equally from 0 to 25. On the other hand, communities less able to integrate DRR practices were in Haiti (Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur) and Jamaica (Portmore), where appropriation of the project interventions was very limited. Community members in Haiti and Portmore explained that they expected more involvement and participation from implementers, municipalities, or ‘others’ in solving local problems. Other factors pointed out were that participation by fewer men (in proportion to women) and land-tenure insecurity may have limited the level of participation and subsequent ownership. Although most of the barriers to utilization of the NA refer to contextual circumstances of each country, there are some general difficulties present in different degrees in all cases. The lack of participation tended to generate lack of appropriation when interventions were carried out, and this affected the potential of utilizing NA by the communities in the future. Likewise, precariousness and unemployment seem to have an important effect on how people interact and create community spaces for sharing and cohesion; the latter was especially observed in Portmore and Haiti. 6. To what extent are municipal and national authorities incorporating and institutionalizing the urban Neighborhood Approach? What evidence (including, but not limited to, policy or urban planning changes) is there that municipal or national authorities are managing urban risk differently due to USAID/OFDA’s urban DRR Neighborhood Approach? Considering an overall analysis of eight NA projects, we were able to estimate that municipal and national authorities are ‘moderately’ incorporating and institutionalizing the urban Neighborhood Approach. Nevertheless, there are specific cases where the institutionalization has been intense due to a particular context. Local and national governments show a reasonable, but not a strong or intense, incorporation of DRR approaches into urban planning practices that change the paradigm from just response to emergencies and disaster situations. Hence, there is a moderate acknowledgment of the complex interconnected reality of disaster risk in an urban environment. Based on the interviews with 105 key informants from national to local levels of government in the eight projects, the evidence shows that most of the impact (in terms of institutionalization) was achieved at the municipal level. In cases like Carabayllo, Independencia, Mixco, Medellín, and Tegucigalpa, the 36 municipalities moderately incorporated new practices such as the use of GIS and social media for DRR; participatory design and execution of physical works; inter-sectorial working groups for neighborhood development (including DRR components); and inclusion of DRR measures within municipal budget plans, among others. According to our field observations and in conversation with the above-mentioned key informants, the best institutional ownership was accomplished in Tegucigalpa, Mixco, and Medellín, mainly due to three factors: 1) level of municipalization or municipal autonomy to intervene regarding DRR; 2) implementers succeeded in creating inter-institutional and inter-sectorial (including private sector) articulations based on agreements and communication, and then translated them into actions; and 3) willingness and commitment of key actors at the highest level of municipal government, such as mayors or municipal managers. The municipalization or municipal autonomy, however, poses a sort of ‘distance’ between local governments and the national players and practices, becoming an important limitation to incorporating and institutionalizing the NA and its practices into upper government levels. The majority of municipal authorities pointed to a ‘gap’ between municipalities and national authorities. The Local Government Involvement Indicator (see Figure 7) was developed using qualitative analysis of interviews and field observations, assessing four aspects of local government involvement: a) active involvement in planning; b) allocation of human and financial resources; c) active involvement in maintenance; and d) regulatory action. The figure also seeks to inform the dimension of governance within each project and reflects participation and appropriation by local and national governments. Figure 7. Local Government Involvement per Country, in Percentages Each of the four aspects was weighted equally from 0 to 25. On the other hand, factors that limit the institutionalization of the NA were pointed out by the participants from Rímac, Portmore, and Haiti: 1) personnel turnover in municipalities, particularly after popular elections, leads to difficulties in maintaining institutional memory and integrating knowledge and experiences from project implementation within these institutions, resulting in very fragile long-term approaches; 2) lack of willingness and commitment from local authorities; and 3) implementer’s lack of capacity/experience in involving local authorities and thereby fostering DRR awareness and motivation. 7. What enabling factors and factors impeding success contribute to sustainability of the urban DRR Neighborhood Approach? How sustainable could the targeted Urban DRR programs be without external donor support? 37 Building on USAID’s Post-Project Review’s five categories to address project sustainability of the Neighborhood Approach projects: social mobilization, institutional arrangements, physical works, environmental improvements and financial mechanisms, we complemented the analysis with the outputs of the different methodologies utilized throughout the study. Each of these categories comprises both enabling factors and factors that hinder success. Social Mobilization Enabling Factors Impeding Success Community awareness aimed at active and inclusive participation. Shared interests among neighborhoods and strengthen links between neighborhoods and local actors. Participation of vulnerable groups (women, youth) and collaboration with civil society organizations. Rapid response toward conflict resolution. Physical evidence of the project and design of identifying elements. Transparency as a key factor when sharing project’s results. Shared responsibility by stimulating a sense of belonging. Lack of presence of state actors aggravated by limited interaction with the municipality. Combination of poor levels of education, lack of empowerment, and socioeconomic barriers in the community. Time limitations of community members that hamper participation in the project. Entrenched political interests and authoritarian leadership. Frustrated experiences with previous organizations that negatively impacted on the levels of confidence of beneficiaries. Isolated and sporadic collaboration that can impede the projects’ sustainability. Institutional Arrangements Enabling Factors Impeding Success Political will to participate in the project that translated into committed leadership, adequate involvement of local authorities and shared credit. Appropriate legal frameworks that support the sustainability of these kind of projects, such as Peru’s SINAGERD (National Disaster Risk Management Policy). Established relationships among stakeholders that generate trust in the community. Comprehensive knowledge of the territory, including its main local actors as well as the intervening sector. Flexible structures that contribute to planning and implementation in pursuit of project’s sustainability. Rotation of staff and nepotism that hinders the sustainability of the project. Lack of transparency and accountability and deep-rooted corruption. Disconnection between national and local frameworks and lack of enforcement. Political interests and competing priorities that impedes community participation. Other efforts are considered to be more visible than DRR, affecting the sustainability of the project. Rigid structures that fail to contemplate the neighborhood approach demand for high level of flexibility in planning and administration. Environmental Improvements Enabling Factors Impeding Success Recognition of previous outcomes in the environmental dimension that ensured sustainability of the project and identification of community advocates. Education and awareness for environmental protection with a focus on youth and their parents. Use of environmentally-friendly technological options that comply with environmental norms. Selection of experts that can demonstrate knowledge on the topic while identifying potential negative consequences. Lack of compliance and regulation of environmental standards and urban zoning regulations. Deficient land use planning, lack of legal frameworks and environmental standards. Lack of government funding for public works and infrastructure and poor interaction of all stakeholders. Limited community awareness on how certain habits (e.g., waste disposal) can contribute to environmental degradation. Solutions implemented contribute to environmental problems. 38 Physical Works Enabling Factors Impeding Success Identification of physical works that can help mitigate the neighborhood’s risks. Active participation in decisions on work projects can promote transparency and credibility. Shared funding between local/national government and NGOs. Neighborhood contribution to physical works in a variety of forms (workforce, monetary contributions, in-kind activities). Improved social inclusion through the participation of marginalized members of the community/neighborhood. Replication of physical community housing projects as a result of knowledge/techniques learned during the project. Lack of community participation and deficient socialization of the physical work to be conducted. Uncertain legal ownership of the location to be utilized and deficient municipality leadership over public spaces. Lack of awareness on best techniques to perform maintenance and quality control of the physical work implemented. Deficient knowledge of potential/alternative solutions and how to enforce safe construction standards. Maintenance of public works is managed by few leaders. Theft of construction materials. Financial Mechanisms Enabling Factors Impeding Success Promotion of self-saving groups with the support from financial/banking institutions that help empower community members (e.g., women). Legal restrictions to preserve the allocation of DRR funds. Public supply of approved vouchers to improve accountability. Competitive process to evaluate suppliers. Economic methodologies and metrics along with financial models from other sectors. Deficient coordination between local actors and the municipality. NGOs working in double capacity which hinders repayment rate. Uncertain land tenure and limited understanding of credit. Volatile market prices that prevent project’s sustainability. Lack of awareness of DRR funds’ allocation as well as limited financial information. Beyond the enabling and impeding factors mentioned above, it is worth mentioning a common finding to the different NA projects, a circumstance referred to as concatenation, and that has been recorded in interviews, engineering inspections and transect walks. The concatenation consists of the capacity of a project to advance on the achievements of other projects or initiatives. In the same way, the project can at the same time offer the opportunity to other projects and initiatives to build on its own outputs or outcomes. The case of Anse-à-Foleur is a good example, where the NA project provided an excellent quality pipeline from the source of the water to the town, and then the World Bank built 10 water tanks followed by the municipality who built the distribution network. Although this mechanism could be confused with 'alliances' or 'partnerships', in the case of concatenation it is not necessary to reach an agreement between those who lead the undertakings. This can be illustrated with the opportunity that the Bank of Ireland and the microfinance company Alfasic saw to commercialize at low-cost a rainwater harvesting program through microfinance on the NA project in Tegucigalpa, and then in different neighborhoods. A final example, also from NA in Tegucigalpa, where a public university in Honduras took advantage of the geological studies sponsored by JICA to advance the studies required by the NA project supported by USAID. At the same time, the NA project prepared a digital elevation mapping based on Lidar technology, which is now serving the municipality and other projects supported by the international community. 39 6.3 Objective 3: NA Programming Strategy The evolution of the NA strategy has been evident in other programmatic lines within USAID/OFDA since the first APS launch in 2012. Beyond the characteristics that define the NA, such as geographic focus, active participation, and sectoral concentration, the NA has been characterized by a closer cooperation among USAID implementers and partners, beneficiary communities, and local and national governments. Additionally, systematization has helped to reestablish the balance between project processes and outputs/outcomes, a closer follow-up to project implementation, and attention to the long-term impacts and their sustainability. By sharing techniques and results with the other awardees following the post-project evaluation of the first NA projects, greater awareness of project transfer and close-out was achieved. Through its regional advisers, USAID has promoted a space for the exchange of practices and experiences among implementers. This has resulted in an important collective learning process, one that is unique in terms of depth and quality in the short amount of time that the NA strategy has been implemented. Over the five year strategywith the exception of the NA project in Haitithe implementation period of the projects has exceeded the period initially awarded, whether through a no-cost extension, a cost-extension, or as an unsolicited proposal to complete, replicate or expand the scope. Beyond the replicability and scalability of the NA strategy as a package in itself, this study has detected another clear trend with an enormous impact at national and even regional level in the different countries, where we are witnessing a second or even third wave of initiatives derived from the initial project. Cases that support this assertion: 1) Jamaica: Habitat for Humanity defined a land tenure strategy, together with the land authority in Jamaica (LAMP) and the University of Technology, that will be extended to the entire country, involving several other institutions and civil society organizations. 2) Peru: PREDES, along with the mayor of Lima, has led afforestation as a strategy for land use management and disaster risk reduction, now recognized internationally by FAO as "Forests and Sustainable Cities Inspiring Stories from Around the World." Additionally, the agreement reached among the three NA implementers in LimaPREDES, COOPI, and Save the Childrenand one common partner, Practical Solutions, resulted in a coalition that shares practices and learning on different topics, including the aforementioned forestry project, replicated in all NA projects. 3) Honduras: GOAL, along with the municipality of Tegucigalpa, the Inter-American Development Bank, the University of Manchester, and the Nordic Fund are promoting the NA approach to develop a project to adapt assets to climate change. Additionally, GOAL is now replicating the Honduras NA experience in Haiti. 4) Colombia: the NA project implemented by Global Communities, Corporación Ayuda Humanitaria and Pontificia University in Medellin, expanded the municipal DRR approach to communities; it has now been integrated into the City’s resilience strategy. Medellin is recognized as part of the 100 Resilient Cities movement. In addition, the NA project inspired a new DRR initiative geared toward small commerce and merchants in precarious areas of the city. The project led by FENALCOa merchants associationis undergoing an internal transformation to include DRR and business continuity in all its businesses and promote this strategy among its affiliates. Moreover, they are strengthening disaster resilience in communities where they work. 5) Guatemala: Under the leadership of PCI, the NA project convened various local actors, among them the private sectorCementos Progreso and AMANCOexpanding the impact of the NA to many other cities. On a larger scale, PCI contributed to a proposal to change public housing policies 40 in the country, introducing participatory solutions, technological approaches, and financial strategies with the support of international organizations and experts such as Build Change and Elemental. It is also establishing alliances with other NA implementers such as GLOBAL. To gauge how the NA strategy is viewed within the USAID, a voluntary and anonymous questionnaire was shared internally at OFDA (Washington, D.C. and LAC). The respondents strongly agreed that the NA supports disaster risk reduction, the LAC DRR Plan 2015-2019, and the Sendai Framework. In the same vein, the respondents agreed it would be opportune to expand the NA within the LAC region and to other areas of the world where OFDA supports DRR activities. The following were cited as the main technical or programmatic challenges for implementing the NA: community participation; followed by lack of resources in the community; issues with sustainability; and having the right partners with expertise in community development. Partners pointed to the main managerial and financial challenges for implementing the NA primarily as: government or legal restrictions; followed by the lack of willingness of local governments to institutionalize the policies and activities associated with the program; underestimation of costs during proposal stage; lack of time due to the performance period of the award; a lack of community leaders or other local partners; and a lack of financial resources in the community. In the event that the NA continues, one respondent suggested that, in the future, the APS should request that each partner clearly demonstrate examples of successful implementation and institutionalization of urban DRR through the NA. 7. Conclusions 1. As described in the NA Post-Project Review report, the USAID-NA responds to the growing urban population that lives in informal settlements, made up of diverse and unique neighborhoods that extend beyond geographical jurisdictions. Neighborhoods are a living fabric of social, economic, and physical features that provide the residents of a particular territory with an identity, a sense of security, safety, and familiarity. 2. The NA contributes to marginalized communities’ sustainable and safe development while protecting the neighborhood and supporting its cohesion and self-determination. 3. The USAID-NA expands the attention of DRR interventions beyond individuals and households to a settlement approach, addressing critical disaster risk drivers and development gaps, and encouraging a long￾term vision. 4. The study showed the need to balance physical and social interventions to match individual and collective needs and expectations associated with the common good. Thus, protecting the neighborhood and supporting its cohesion and self-determination, are important strategies to build community resilience. 5. In response to the daily challenges experienced by informal settlements, there is clearly a need to facilitate social mobilization to collectively overcome obstacles such as poverty, marginalization, insecurity and despair. 6. The NA shifts from the stereotypical humanitarian response to empower in communities, helping them become active members of the neighborhood planning processes and local governance mechanisms to build a resilient community, strengthen livelihoods, and improve the quality of life. 41 7. This study has expanded the scope initially foreseen for the NA, identifying different strategies that can stand alone, such as: land tenure, rain and storm-water management, housing relocation, and afforestation, among others. 8. The use of state-of-the-art technologies such as geographic information systems and remote sensing; methods for modeling hazards and risks based on global platforms complemented by local studies; methods of economic evaluation and econometrics in public health coupled with the use of traditional techniques based on surveys, focus groups, interviews, engineering inspections and transect walksall of these allowed for the development of a comprehensive assessment of the NA strategy proposed by USAID. 9. The exploration and definition of units of measurement was essential to answering the questions proposed by USAID and marks the beginning of a second phase of the studythe preparation of a series of peer reviewed manuscripts that will serve to build a catalog of evidence-based DRR practices. 8. Recommendations Based on the results obtained in this study and the NA Post-Project Review process conducted in 2016- 2017, the following recommendations are proposed regarding the USAID NA urban DRR strategy: Continue fostering the NA strategy with some adjustments to the RFA process such as: 1) NA projects must have an ideal duration of three years; never less than two years; 2) NA projects should be formulated in two stages, the first one of diagnosis, awareness and social mobilization, followed by a second phase of implementation and transfer. The proposals must contemplate a process of programmatic adjustment between the two stages based on changes in assumptions and a better understanding of the territory and its social, cultural, economic, institutional, political, and environmental conditions. The NA could be diversified to allow different types of proposals that foster DRR and resilience-building, using the principles of geographic focus, active participation, and sectoral approach through projects that respond to issues associated with DRR of critical incidence such as land tenure, urban drainage systems, afforestation, precariousness, housing retrofitting, among others. Promote the use of tools to support decision-making, such as those used in the present study, including GIS and remote sensing applications, hazard and risk modeling, cost analysis, cost-benefit analysis, life satisfaction analysis, use of specific indicators, among others. Ideally, the proposals themselves should be prepared based on the principles of the above-mentioned techniques. All NA projects must have a communications plan, in a permanent form, to reach out to beneficiaries, and internal and external partners. The NA projects should have a plan, from the outset, to deal with the inherent uncertainty and lack of continuity in local public administration policies and practices, along with the rapid turnover of public employees. Likewise, strategies must be designed to deal with the incongruities between national and local regulations and processes. Intervention cost centers must be established, with files that conserve technical studies, designs, and technical specifications to maintain a permanent archive, which must be submitted to USAID at the end of the project. NA projects must strengthen its M & E system; beyond a contractual requirement its purpose is to assess the project's performance, improve practices, inform decisions, and increase accountability. 42 Consistent with the evidence-based practice approach used in this evaluation, a second phase of the study is recommended in the upcoming 12 months, in which a series of peer reviewed publications should be prepared based on the knowledge, data, and information generated in the first phase. The publications: papers, book chapters, technical and institutional documents, would be prepared by the evaluation team based in FIU in collaboration with USAID, other evaluation team members from the LAC region, national academic and institutional counterparts. The documents produced will serve as foundation to build a catalog of evidence￾based DRR practices in informal settlements. The topics initially identified are: Evidence-based evaluation of Urban DRR practices: the Neighborhood Approach Systematic Review on Urban DRR initiatives DRR metrics and Informal settlements Governance and informal settlements Risk Assessments and Modeling Economic Impact Analysis and NA Life Satisfaction Analysis Land Tenure and Disaster Resilience Exploring Urban Patterns in Informal Settlements Urban Integration and Multi-Functionality These subjects could be addressed independently or jointly, depending on the editors’ interests, publications scope, and opportunities identified. 43 Acronyms and Abbreviations APS Annual Program Statement CDGRD Departmental committees on risk and disaster management. In instances of CDGRD-NO, this refers Haiti’s North-west Department (NO). CENEPRED Centro Nacional de Estimación, Prevención y Reducción del Riesgo de Desastres CLPC Comité Local de Protection Civile (Local Civil Protection Committee Haiti) COCODE Community Development Committees CODEDE Departmental Development Councils COLRED Local Disaster Reduction Committee CONRED National System for the Coordination of Disaster Reduction (Guatemala) COOPI Cooperazione Internazionale Fondaziones COPECO Comisión Permanente de Contingencias de Honduras DAGRD Departamento Administrativo de Gestión del Riesgo de Desastres (Medellin, Colombia) DINEPA Direction Nationale de l’Eau Potable et de l’Assannissement (National Directorate for Drinking Water and Sanitation Haiti) DPC Directorate of Civil Protection DRM Disaster Risk Management DRR Disaster Risk Reduction FENALCO Federación Nacional de Comerciantes (Colombia) FIU Florida International University FY Fiscal Year GC Global Communities (formerly CHF International) GOAL GOAL Global is an Irish Aid Charity HfH Habitat for Humanity INDECI Instituto Nacional de Defensa Civil de Perú LUM Land Use Management LAMP Land Administration and Management Programme (Jamaica) MICOOPE Federación Nacional de Cooperativos Asociados (National Federation of Associated Cooperatives Guatemala) NA Neighborhood Approach ODPEM Office of Disaster Preparedness and Emergency Management PCI Project Concern International PPR Post-Project Review PREDES Centro de Estudios y Prevención de Desastres SC Save the Children SINAGERD Secretaria de Gestion del Riesgo de Desastres (Secretariat for Disaster Risk Management Peru) UNGRD Unidad Nacional para la Gestión del Riesgo de Desastre (Colombia) USAID/OFDA United States Agency for International Development, Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance UTECH University of Technology (Jamaica) WCDO World Concern Development Organization WE Women’s Empowerment 44 Bibliography Atkinson, R., & Flint, J. (2004). Snowball sampling. In M. S. Lewis-Beck, A. Bryman & T. F. Liao (Eds.), The Encyclopaedia of Social Science Research Methods (pp. 1044-1045). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Berezin, I. V., Ugarova, N. N., Dmitrieva-Getling, M. P., & Kershengoltz, B. M. (1975). [Kinetics and mechanism of action of horseradish peroxidase in the reaction of dioxyfumaric acid oxidation with atmospheric oxygen]. Biokhimiia (Moscow, Russia), 40(3), 475483. Birkmann, J., Fernando, N., Hettige, S., Amarasingh, S., Jayasingam, T., Paranagama, D., Nandana, M., Nassel, M., Voigt, S., Grote, U., Engel, S., Schraven, B.and Wolferts, J., 2006, ‘Rapid and Multidimensional Vulnerability Assessment in Sri Lanka at the Local Level’. UNITED NATIONS UNIVERSITY Institute for Environment and Human Security (UNU-EHS), Bonn/Germany. Boano, C. (2009). Housing anxiety and multiple geographies in post tsunami Sri Lanka. Disasters, 33(4). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0361-3666.2009.01108.x Caron, C., Menon, G., & Kuritz, L. (2014, October 15). Land Tenure & Disasters Strengthening and Clarifying Land Rights in Disaster Risk Reduction and Post-Disaster Programming. Retrieved from https://www.land-links.org/issue-brief/land-tenure-and-disasters/ Castro, C. P., Ibarra, I., Lukas, M., Ortiz, J., & Sarmiento, J. P. (2015). Disaster Risk Construction in the Progressive Consolidation of Informal Settlements: Iquique and Puerto Montt (Chile) Case Studies. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2015.05.001 Chern, C. J., & Beutler, E. (1976). Biochemical and electrophoretic studies of erythrocyte pyridoxine kinase in white and black Americans. American Journal of Human Genetics, 28(1), 917. Cramm, J. M., & Nieboer, A. P. (2015). Social cohesion and belonging predict the well-being of community￾dwelling older people. BMC Geriatrics, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-015-0027-y Desir, B., & Jackson, A. (2012, June). Dealing with Land Barriers to Shelter Construction in Haiti: The Experience of the IOM Haiti Legal Team. IOM International Organization for Migration. Retrieved from http://www.globalprotectioncluster.org/_assets/files/field_protection_clusters/Haiti/files/HLP%20AoR /Haiti_Land_Barriers_to_Shelter_Construction_2012_EN.pdf Domeher, D., & Abdulai, R. (2012). Access to Credit in the Developing World: does land registration matter? Third World Quarterly, 33(1), 161175. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2012.627254 Jahn, I. R., Guadagno, L., Gandia, E., & Bonnefoy, V. (2017). Overcoming Land Tenure Barriers in Shelter and Other Reconstruction Activities in Post-disaster Settings. In K. Sudmeier-Rieux, M. Fernández, I. M. Penna, M. Jaboyedoff, & J. C. Gaillard (Eds.), Identifying Emerging Issues in Disaster Risk Reduction, Migration, Climate Change and Sustainable Development (pp. 161176). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33880-4_10 OXFAM. (2014, August). Beyond Safe Land. JOINT AGENCY BRIEFING PAPER. Retrieved from https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/file_attachments/bp-beyond-safe-land-security￾tenure-philippines-110814-en.pdf Patel, R., J. King, L. Phelps and D. Sanderson (2017). What are the practices to identify and prioritize vulnerable populations affected by urban humanitarian emergencies?, Systematic review, Humanitarian Evidence Programme, Tufts University, available at http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/rr-identify-prioritize￾vulnerable-populations-urban-170217-en.pdf Peynet, J., Techenet, P., Roujeau, J., & Rousselet, F. (1976). [The role of gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase in hepato-biliary pathology]. Medecine & Chirurgie Digestives, 5(4), 207213. Pirone, T. P., & Kassanis, B. K. (1975). Polyamino acid induced aphid transmission of plant viruses. The Journal of General Virology, 29(3), 257266. https://doi.org/10.1099/0022-1317-29-3-257 45 Rose, A. Porter, K., Nicole, D., Bouabid, J., Huyck, C., Whitehead, J., Shaw, D., Eguchi, R., Taylor, C., McLane, T., Thomas, L., Ganderton, P. T., Godschalk, D., Kiremidjian, A. S., Tierney, K., & West, C. T. (2007). Benefit-Cost Analysis of FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grants. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)1527-69 Sarmiento, J. P., Gelman, P., & Bittner, P. (2017). The Post-Project Review of Urban Disaster Risk Reduction Neighborhood Approach Projects. Florida International University - Extreme Events Institute. Sarmiento, J. P., Gelman, P., Herard, D., & Bittner, P. (2017). Urban Disaster Risk: Systematization of Neighborhood Practices. Florida International University - Extreme Events Institute. Sarmiento, J.-P., Gelman, P., Jordão, G., & Bittner, P. (2017). Post-project review in urban disaster risk reduction. Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal, 26(2), 148161. https://doi.org/10.1108/DPM-10-2016-0205 Sarmiento, J.-P., & Herard, D. (2015). Sistematización in urban disaster risk reduction. Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal, 24(2), 221229. https://doi.org/10.1108/DPM-10-2014-0201 Sarmiento, J. P. (2017). ¿Cuál es la Agenda de Desarrollo Pos-2015? Una Mirada desde los Determinantes del Riesgo de Desastre. Revista de Estudios Latinoamericanos Sobre Reducción Del Riesgo de Desastres REDER, 1(1), 2942. Sarmiento, J.-P. (2018). What is the post-2015 development agenda? A look from the underlying disaster risk drivers. Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal, 27(3). https://doi.org/10.1108 / DPM￾03-2018-0088 Sinelnikova, E. M., Dvoretskova, T. V., & Kagan, Z. S. (1975). [Intermediate plateaux in kinetics of the reaction catalyzed by biodegradative L-threonine dehydratase from Escherichia coli]. Biokhimiia (Moscow, Russia), 40(3), 645651. Stanley, D. (2003). What Do We Know about Social Cohesion: The Research Perspective of the Federal Government’s Social Cohesion Research Network. Canadian Journal of Sociology / Cahiers Canadiens de Sociologie, 28(1), 5. https://doi.org/10.2307/3341872 Townshend, I., Awosoga, O., Kulig, J., & Fan, H. (2015). Social cohesion and resilience across communities that have experienced a disaster. Natural Hazards, 76(2), 913938. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-014-1526-4 Una Mirada sobre la Gobernanza del Riesgo y la Resiliencia Urbana en América Latina y ell Caribe: Los Asentamientos Informales en la Nueva Agenda Urbana. (n.d.). UN-Habitat. (2008). State of the world’s cities 2008/2009. London: Earthscan. UN-Habitat III. (2015, May 31). HABITAT III Issue Papers 22 Informal Settlements. United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development. Retrieved from https://unhabitat.org/wp￾content/uploads/2015/04/Habitat-III-Issue-Paper-22_Informal-Settlements.pdf UN-Habitat. (2016). World Cities Report 2016: Urbanization and Development - Emerging Futures. New York: United Nations. United Nations, G. A. Sustainable Development: Disaster Risk Reduction, Pub. L. No. A/71/644, 39 (2016). Retrieved from http://www.preventionweb.net/files/50683_oiewgreportenglish.pdf USAID. (2012, December). Building Resilience to Recurrent Crisis - USAID POLICY AND PROGRAM GUIDANCE. U.S. Agency for International Development. Retrieved from https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1866/Policy%20%26%20Program%20Guidance %20-%20Building%20Resilience%20to%20Recurrent%20Crisis_Dec%202012.pdf Viscusi, W.K. & Masterman, C.J. 2017. Income elasticities and global values of a statistical life. J. Benefit Cost Anal. 8(2): 226250 Wethli, K. 2013. Benefit-cost analysis for risk management: summary of selected examples. Background Paper, World Development Report, The World Bank. Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming The Neighborhood Approach ANNEXES ANNEX 1 Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance U.S Agency for International Development Scope of Work ANNEX 2 Research methodology (Complementary information) Evaluation Team Members IRB Exempt Review Process Neighborhood Approach - Project Interventions Indices Used in the Urban DRR Evaluation Indices Mapping ANNEX 3 Main Findings and Survey Results Formality Informality Relationship in Urban Settings Social Cohesion DRR Disaster Risk Governance ANNEX 4-1 Supporting Documents Physical Works Lima Carabayllo, Peru Lima - Independencia, Peru Lima - Rimac, Peru Medellin, Colombia Mixco, Guatemala Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur, Haiti Portmore, Jamaica Tegucigalpa, Honduras ANNEX 4-2 Supporting Documents Environmental Resilience Lima Carabayllo, Peru Lima - Independencia, Peru Lima - Rimac, Peru Medellin, Colombia Mixco, Guatemala Portmore, Jamaica Tegucigalpa, Honduras ANNEX 4-3 Supporting Documents Focus Groups Lima Carabayllo, Peru Lima - Independencia, Peru Lima - Rimac, Peru Medellin, Colombia Mixco, Guatemala Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur, Haiti Portmore, Jamaica Tegucigalpa, Honduras ANNEX 4-4 Supporting Documents Interviews Lima Carabayllo, Peru Lima - Independencia, Peru Lima - Rimac, Peru Medellin, Colombia Mixco, Guatemala Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur, Haiti Portmore, Jamaica Tegucigalpa, Honduras ANNEX 4-5 Supporting Documents Hazard Assessments Mixco, Guatemala Lima - Independencia, Peru Tegucigalpa, Honduras Medellin, Colombia ANNEX 4-6 Supporting Documents Disaster Risk AssessmentModeling Deliverable 1 - Seismic Risk Assessment for the eight projects (AAL & PML) Deliverable 2 - Hurricane Risk for Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur (Haiti) Landslide Risk for Independencia (Perú), Medellín (Colombia), Mixco (Guatemala) and Tegucigalpa (Honduras) (AAL & PML) ANNEX 4-7 Supporting Documents Cost-Benefit Analysis Intervention: Access Path Intervention: Drainage canal in Port de Paix (PdP), Haiti ANNEX 4-8 Supporting Documents Life Satisfaction Survey Life Satisfaction Approach ANNEX 4-9 Supporting Documents New DRR Strategies 1. Land Tenure Mapping and Regularization 2. Analysis of the Resilience of Communities to Disasters (ARC-D) 3. Resilience Analysis for Social Systems (R4S) 4. Basic Basket Market System 5. Provision and Maintenance of Drainage Systems ANNEX 5 Tools Survey (Questionaire) Interview Guide for Government Officials Focus Group Guide Informed Consent ANNEX 6 List of Respondents Interviewing participants summary Interviewing participants list (Coded) Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming The Neighborhood Approach ANNEX 1 Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance U.S Agency for International Development Scope of Work Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming The Neighborhood Approach ANNEX Research methodology (complementary information) Table of Contents Research methodology (Complementary information) Evaluation Team Members IRB Exempt Review Process Neighborhood Approach - Project Interventions Indices Used in the Urban DRR Evaluation Indices Mapping BIOS Team Members Juan Pablo Sarmiento M.D. M.P.H. Dr. Juan Pablo Sarmiento is a Research Professor and Associate Director for Research at the Florida International University (FIU) Extreme Events Institute. He is also the Director of the Disaster Resilience in the Americas Program, funded by the U. S. Agency for International Development’s Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID/OFDA), Dr. Sarmiento is a Medical Doctor and Surgeon (Universidad del Rosario, Colombia) with a M.Sc. in Public Health, Specialty in Health Promotion and Social Development (Université de Bordeaux, France & Universidad Pública de Navarra, Spain); a M.A. in Project Management (UCI, Costa Rica). He has a Specialization Degree in Medical Education (Universidad de la Sabana, Colombia). Dr. Sarmiento has also post graduate studies in Disaster Management (Oxford, Great Britain); High Level Public Administration (Colombian Superior School of Public Administration), and a residence in Nutrition (Tufts University, U.S.A.). Suzanne Polak, Ph.D. M.P.H. Suzanne Polak is the Acting Lead Sector Advisor for Monitoring and Evaluation at USAID/OFDA. She holds an M.P.H. in International Health from the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences and a Ph.D. in Political History from Indiana University. Meenakshi Jerath, M.Sc. Meenakshi Jerath is Coordinator of Research Programs at the Extreme Events Institute at Florida International University. Meenakshi obtained her Master of Science in Environmental Studies (2012) from Florida International University (FIU) with specialization in Environmental Economics, Environmental Policy, Resource Management, and Geographic Information Systems. She has a M.Sc. and B.Sc. in Zoology, and a Bachelor’s in Science Education from the University of Delhi, India. Vicente Sandoval, Ph.D. Dr. Sandoval was recently appointed as Visiting Postdoctoral Research Scholar at the Florida International University's Extreme Events Institute (FIU EEI). Dr Sandoval obtained his Ph.D. in Development Planning at the University College London, a M.Sc. in Urban Management at the Technische Universität Berlin, and a B.A. in Design at the Universidad Católica de Temuco, Chile. Alejandro Arrieta Ph.D. Dr. Alejandro Arrieta is a health economist and faculty in the Department of Health Policy and Management at Florida International University (FIU). He holds a Ph.D. in Economics from Rutgers University, an M.A. in Finance from Universidad del Pacifico, and a B.A. in Economics from Universidad Catolica in Peru. Marije van Lidth de Jeude M.Sc. M.Sc. Marije van Lidth de Jeude is cofounding director of A 01 (A Company / A Foundation), a transdisciplinary office for innovative sustainable development. M.Sc. van Lidth de Jeude has a bachelor degree in commercial economy and a master degree in cultural anthropology, with a specialization in gender and development studies, from Utrecht University in the Netherlands. Oliver Schütte Dip.Ing. Oliver Schütte is co founding director of A 01. He got his master’s architecture degree from the University of Aachen, Germany. Erick Mazariegos M.Sc. Erick Mazariegos is associate consultant of A 01. He has a B.A. degree in Architecture from the University Istmo in Guatemala and a M.A. in design and sustainable development of the city, with a specialization in urban landscaping from the Technological Institute of Higher Studies in Monterrey, México. Erick Palacios Solano CE, CRCE Erick Palacios is associate consultant of A 01. He is a Civil Engineer from the University of Costa Rica. Paulo Ruiz Cubillo Ph.D. Paulo Ruiz is a faculty member of the University of Costa Rica’s Geology Department and he works also at the Management and Evaluation Unit of the National Road Network. He has a Ph.D. in Volcanology from Rutgers University; and a B.Sc. of Geology from the University of Costa Rica. Elías Rosales Escalante, Eng. MSc Civil Engineer from the Technological Institute and Higher Education of Monterrey (ITESM), Mexico, with M.Sc. in Sanitary Engineering from the International Institute of Hydraulic Engineering and Environmental, (IHE) of Delft, (Holland) The Netherlands. Omar Darío Cardona Ph.D. Dr. Cardona is a Civil Engineer of the National University of Colombia, Manizales, with a Ph.D. on Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics from the Technical University of Catalonia. He has graduate studies on Earthquake Engineering, Disaster Prevention and Risk Mitigation in the Institute of Earthquake Engineering and Engineering Seismology IZIIS, Macedonia 1985, Oxford Polytechnic 1991, and Colorado State University, in 1991, respectively. Office of Research Integrity Research Compliance, MARC 414 Dr. Juan-Pablo Sarmiento, Principal Investigator November 29, 2017 "USAID/OFDA Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming" IRB-17-0384 11/29/17 106303 As a requirement of IRB Exemption you are required to: Submit an Event Form and provide immediate or discontinued. Special Conditions: N/A For further information, you may visit the IRB website at http://research.fiu.edu/irb. Neighborhood Approach - Project Interventions Category Intervention Type A. Physical works 1. Engineering and physical interventions Water & Sanitation, drainage systems, retaining walls, retrofitting 2. Public space Access, connectivity, functionality, social interaction, entertainment, safety B. Social mobilization gains 3. Capacity building Build and enhance knowledge and skills, technical and non-training support 4. Community empowerment Facilitating community-led development and social progress C. Environmental improvements 5. Environmental resilience Forestation, re-forestation, watershed and coastline management, water resources D. Institutional arrangements 6. Governance Redefining government, civil society, and community roles. 7. Regulatory Framework Policies, laws, decrees. Land tenure, land use and zoning regulations, building and construction codes 8. GIS, information, and communication technologies Remote sensing, GIS, big data, mobile technologies E. Livelihoods and Financial Mechanisms 9. Markets and financing Market Mapping & Analysis, Household Economy Analysis, Financing 10. Rural approaches Food security, mitigation, agriculture, livestock, fishery, climate adaptation 11. Urban livelihoods Food security, construction and domestic workers, home-based producers, street vendors, transport workers and waste pickers. F. DRR Intervention 12. Early warning systems Hazard monitoring, alert systems, communications 13. Emergency and disaster management Preparedness, response, local and community disaster committees 14. Disaster Risk Reduction Prospective, corrective and compensatory risk reduction plans or programs (no regulations) A. Physical works - Design, construction, and maintenance of urban infrastructure at the neighborhood level. 1. Engineering and physical Infrastructure - Interventions geared to provide critical urban infrastructure and to reduce physical vulnerability. It involves settlement and housing approaches. WASH - Environmental Health, Hygiene Promotion, Sanitation, and Water Supply measures implemented in hazard prone and vulnerable urban areas. Retaining Wall - A structure that retains (holds back) any material (usually earth) and prevents it from sliding or eroding away. Drainage System - A system of watercourses or drains for carrying off excess water. Retrofitting - Modifications to the elements of a building to reduce or eliminate the risk of future damage. Structural retrofits are designed to protect elements such as foundations, load-bearing walls, beams, columns, building envelopes, windows, structural floors, roofs, and the connections between these elements. Non-structural retrofitting involves the modification of a -structural elements and may include bracing building contents to prevent earthquake damage or elevation of heating and ventilation systems to minimize or prevent flood damage. 2. Public space - Area or place that is open and accessible to all peoples, which facilitates their coexistence and represent their collectivity and common interest. Access Efficient and safe transportation, roads, trails, ramps, stairs to the neighborhood Connectivity It describes the extent to which urban forms permit (or restrict) movement of people or vehicles in different directions. Functionality - Public places play a vital role in the social and economic life, cultural expressions, and recreation according to community needs. Social interaction - Public spaces allow people to have a meaningful contact with one another within the context of the whole community. Entertainment - Place used or intended to be used for conducting public entertainment or public meetings Safety - Designated areas where people should gather after evacuating, avoiding expose evacuating personnel to additional hazards B. Social Mobilization It allows people to think and understand their situation and to organize and initiate action to address their priorities with their own initiative and creativity UN-Habitat). 3. Capacity building - Build and enhance knowledge and skills, technical and non-training support 4. Community empowerment - Facilitating community-led development and social progress C. Environmental Improvements Seek for conservation of natural resources, protection of habitats and control of hazards. 5. Environmental resilience - Strengthen the capacity of an ecosystem to respond to a perturbation or disturbance by resisting damage and recovering quickly. Forestation- The act of planting trees and other plants covering a large area. Re-forestation - Natural or intentional restocking of existing forests and woodlands that have been depleted, usually through deforestation. Watershed management - Practices to protect and improve the quality of the water and other natural resources within a watershed (DEEP). Coastline management - Practices geared toward nature conservation, recreational activity, habitat and species restoration, coastal defense particularly for protection from coastal erosion and flooding (ICZM). Water resources management - A process which promotes the coordinated development and management of water, land and related resources, in order to maximize the resultant economic and social welfare in an equitable manner without compromising the sustainability of vital ecosystems (GWP). D. Institutional arrangements - Policies, systems, and processes that organizations use to legislate, plan and manage their activities efficiently and to effectively coordinate with others in order to fulfill their mandate (UNDP). 6. Governance - The system of institutions, mechanisms, policy and other arrangements to guide, coordinate and oversee disaster risk reduction and related areas of policy (UN-ISDR). 7. Regulatory Framework 8. GIS, information, and communication technologies - Information systems that manage, manipulate and analyze spatial data using services and infrastructures which link computer and digital media equipment over telecommunications links. E. Livelihoods and Financial Mechanisms - Capabilities, assets (including both material and social resources) and activities required for a means of living. Livelihoods are formed within social, economic and political contexts (UNDP UN-ISDR). 9. Markets and financing, Household Economy Analysis, and Market Mapping & Analysis - Set of tools and guidance notes, designed to -security and their livelihoods. In post-disaster situations, to encourage and assist relief and recovery actors to better understand and make use of market-systems. 10. Rural approaches - Food security, mitigation, agriculture, livestock, fishery, climate adaptation 11. Urban livelihoods - Food security, construction and domestic workers, home-based producers, street vendors, transport workers and waste pickers. F. DRR Intervention - Action taken to identify, assess and reduce disaster risks by dealing with environmental, socio-natural and technological hazards, as well as reducing hazard exposure and socio-economic vulnerabilities. 12. Early warning systems - An integrated system of hazard monitoring, forecasting and prediction, disaster risk assessment, communication and preparedness activities systems and processes that enables individuals, communities, governments, businesses and others to take timely action to reduce disaster risks in advance of hazardous events (UNISDR). Involves Hazard monitoring, alert systems, communications. 13. Emergency and disaster management - Create and implement preparedness and other plans to decrease the impact of disasters 14. Disaster Risk Reduction - Measures aimed at preventing new and reducing existing disaster risk and managing residual risk, all of which contribute to strengthening resilience and therefore to the achievement of sustainable development (UNISDR). It includes Prospective, corrective and compensatory risk reduction plans or programs (no regulations) Indices Used in the Urban DRR Evaluation Infomalidad Urbana y Precariedad - Urban Informality and Precariousness Mide el nivel de informalidad y precariedad de una comunidad en su escala legal, física y social en conformidad con la definición de asentamientos informales de UN-Habitat. It measures the level of informality and precariousness of a community in its legal, physical and social scale in accordance with the definition of informal settlements of UN-Habitat. Resiliencia Comunitaria - Community Resilience Usamos la definición de resiliencia de USAID como la capacidad de las personas, los hogares y las comunidades para mitigar, adaptarse y recuperarse de los impactos y tensiones de una manera que reduce la vulnerabilidad crónica y facilita el crecimiento inclusivo. Su medición se logra al integrar tres índices: reducción del riesgo, cohesión social y gobernanza del riesgo a nivel comunitario. We apply the USAID definition of resilience as the ability of people, households, and communities to mitigate, adapt to, and recover from shocks and stresses in a way that reduces chronic vulnerability and facilitates inclusive growth. Its measurement is achieved by integrating three indices: Risk Reduction, Social Cohesion and Risk Governance at the community level. Reducción del Riesgo de Desastres / Disaster Risk Reduction Mide la percepción de la comunidad en relación a sus capacidades en gestión de riesgos y manejo de emergencias. It measures the perception of the community in relation to its capacities in risk management and emergency management. Cohesión social / Social Cohesion Mide la percepción de la comunidad en relación con la cohesión social (niveles de apoyo afectivo e instrumental), así como el sentido de pertenencia (el lugar emocional y político que ocupan dentro de la comunidad). La cohesión social y el sentido de pertenencia contribuyen a la resiliencia de la comunidad y son objetivos instrumentales para lograr el bienestar entre la comunidad. It measures the perception of the community in relation to social cohesion (levels of affective and instrumental support) as well as the sense of belonging (the emotional and political locus they occupy within the community). Social cohesion and sense of belonging contribute to community resilience and are instrumental goals to achieve well-being among community. Gobernanza del riesgo de desastres / Disaster Risk Governance Se refiere a las relaciones y los mecanismos de coordinación entre los actores gubernamentales y no gubernamentales, la sociedad civil y la comunidad para implementar efectivamente la gestión de riesgos y la gestión de emergencias. De manera práctica, en cierto territorio, es posible medirlo a través de la asociatividad, la participación de la comunidad y el involucramiento del gobierno local en un Proyecto de DRR en particular. It refers to the relations and mechanisms of coordination between governmental and non￾governmental actors, civil society and community to effectively implement risk management and emergency management. In a practical way, in a certain territory, it is possible to measure it through association, community participation and the involvement of the local government in a DRR Project in particular. Asociatividad / Associativity Llamada también membresía asociativa se refiere a la capacidad de generar vínculos duraderos, generación de redes o asociaciones, para actuar bajo objetivos o intereses comunes, principios de reciprocidad y confianza. Called also associative membership refers to the capacity to generate lasting bonds, generation of networks or associations, to act under common objectives or interests, principles of reciprocity and trust. Involucramiento comunitario / Community involvement Es el nivel de participación de los miembros de una comunidad en la planificación de una determinada actividad o iniciativa, asociado a la apropiación de recursos, el compromiso con el mantenimiento de logros y ganancias alcanzados y la capacidad de ejercer un nivel de control o auditoría sobre sus propios emprendimientos. It is the level of participation of the members of a community in the planning of a certain activity or initiative, associated with the allocation of resources, the commitment to maintain achievements and gains, and the ability to exercise a level of control or audit of their own ventures. Involucramiento del gobierno local / Local Government involvement Es el nivel de participación del gobierno local en la planificación de actividades o iniciativas dirigidas a una comunidad, asociado a la apropiación de recursos, el compromiso con el mantenimiento de logros alcanzados y la capacidad para establecer reglas, comunicarlas y hacerlas cumplir. It is the level of participation of the local government in the planning of activities or initiatives geared toward a community, associated with the allocation of resources, the commitment with the maintenance of achievements and gains, and the ability to establish rules, communicate and enforce them. Cumplimiento con la planificación y la zonificación urbana - Compliance with urban planning & Zoning En asentamientos informales, hace referencia a la funcionalidad en la ocupación del territorio, la interacción con el medio natural y construido, la aplicación de de las pautas o normas básicas de urbanismo así como su cumplimiento por la comunidad. In informal settlements, it refers to the functionality in the occupation of the territory, interaction with the natural and built environment, the application of the guidelines or basic rules of urbanism as well as its compliance by the community. a- Acceso y formas urbanas (físicamente evidentes) - Access and urban shapes (physically evidents) Patrones nucleados, donde las construcciones/viviendas se agrupan, generalmente alrededor de una intersección de caminos, el cruce de un río o arroyo, o entre áreas urbanas existentes; o lineal, cuando las construcciones tienen una forma lineal, generalmente a lo largo de carreteras, ferrocarriles, canales, diques, valles, piedemonte, pendientes y otros lugares con poco espacio para crecer de otra manera. En cualquier caso, las construcciones/viviendas están conectadas directamente con los espacios públicos y las vías de acceso/caminos del asentamiento. Nucleated patterns, where the constructions/dwellings are grouped, usually around an intersection of roads, the crossing of a river or stream, or between existing urban developed areas; or linear, when the constructions have a linear shape usually along roads, railways, canals, dikes, valleys, piedmonts, slopes, and other places with little space to grow in another spaces and access paths/roads. b-Respeto por la zonificación básica (zonificación verde, áreas propensas a peligros, uso de la tierra) - Respect for basic zoning (green zoning, hazard prone areas, land use) Cumplimiento de la comunidad sobre las restricciones de uso de la tierra asociadas con áreas verdes y propensas a amenazas dentro del territorio. Community compliance on land use restrictions associated with green and hazard prone areas within the territory. c-Aplicación de la planificación urbana - Urban planning enforcement Existencia de un conjunto de normas, reglas, acuerdos, prácticas o acciones de la autoridad local para ejercer control sobre el uso de la tierra en el territorio. Existence of a set of norms, rules, agreements, practices, or actions of the local authority aimed at exercising control over land use in the territory Informality Precariousness Index Legal Physical Social 0.3 0.4 0.3 La. Land use and land tenure Lb. Compliance urban planning Lc. Compliance building regulat. L1 Title L2 Cadastro b1 Access b2 Basic zoning b3 Planning enforcement L2 Building regulations 0.033 0.05 0.05 0.033 0.033 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Pa. Access to utilities Pb. Housing conditions Pc.Environment al conditions RV2_8 Roofing RV3_9 Walls RV4_7 Floor 0.1 0.1 0.1 Pd.Exposure to hazards 0.1 PS1 Water PS2 Sewage PS3 Energy 0.033 0.033 0.033 DE1_2 Families PE1_1 Garbage PE2_1 Raw sewage runoff PE3 Natural Hazards PE4 Human induce Hazards Sc.Violence and illegal activities 0.1 SV1 Violence SV2 Illegal act. Sb.Marginalization 0.1 SM1 Public Agencies SM2 Commercial Sa. Access to social infrast. 0.1 Education Cultural 0.025 Health SA1 Hospitals SA2 Health care Commercial SI1 Groceries SI2 Toiletries SI3 Other items SI4 School supplies 0.0125 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.00625 0.00625 0.00625 0.00625 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.025 SA4 Cultural 0.025 SA3 Education 0.0125 Community Resilience Index 0.33 0.33 0.33 R1 Community members trained in disaster management 0.055 SC3 Willingness to work together SC4 Helping each other during an emergency SC1 Belonging to this neighborhood SC2 Having a sense of community Local Gov. Involvement 0.11 Community Involvement 0.11 Involvement in planning Allocation of resources SC5 Associativity 0.11 0.025 SC5 0.025 Associativity 0.11 Involvement in maintenance Social Control (Social Audit) 0.025 0.025 Involvement in planning Allocation of resources 0.025 0.025 Involvement in maintenance Regulatory action 0.025 0.025 Social Cohesion Belonging 0.16 0.16 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 Disaster Risk Reduction Social Cohesion Disaster Risk Governance R2 Community support risk management activities R3 Community has a functional EWS, including drills R4 Community members involved in the emergency Planning R5 Community members involved in the maintenance of physical works R6 Vulnerable groups involved in the emergency activities 0.055 0.055 0.055 0.055 0.055 Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming The Neighborhood Approach ANNEX Main Findings and Survey Results Main Findings and Survey Results Formality Informality Relationship in Urban Settings Social Cohesion DRR Disaster Risk Governance Performance Evaluation: USAID LAC Urban DRR Programming 1 Formality 0 10 Informality Formality Informality Relationship in Urban Settings Legal Proper land titles Proper cadastral registration a. Land use and land tenure Land which occupants live in illegality, no cadastral records Compliance with planning & zoning a. Compliance with urban planning & Zoning Unplanned settlements Compliance with building regulations a. Compliance with building regulations Houses are not in compliance with building regulations Physical Complete Access to utilities a. Access to basic sanitary services (water, sewage, energy) Lack of access to basic sanitary conditions water & sanitation Sound houses, fulfilment of Int. housing standards a. Structural housing conditions Poor housing conditions Fulfilment of Int. environmental standards a. Environmental conditions Overcrowding, environmental degradation Low exposure to natural and human induce risks a. Exposure to natural and human induced hazards High exposure to natural and human induced hazards Social Access to social infrastructure a. Access to social infrastructure: health, education, cultural, commercial No access to social infrastructure Social inclusion a. Marginalization Social, economic, educational, and cultural marginalization Safe environment, law enforcement a. Violence and illegal activities Intra family violence, gangs, drugs, crime, no law enforcement Legal Haiti L Carabayllo L Independ. L Rimac Mixco Medellin Portmore Tegucigalpa a. Land use and land tenure 0.643 0.540 0.127 0.160 0.327 0.212 0.707 3.26 b. Compliance with urban planning & Zoning 0.889 0.444 0.333 0.444 0.222 0.222 0.556 0.111 c. Compliance with building regulations 0.700 0.861 0.651 0.725 0.053 0.378 0.691 6.59 Physical a. Access to water, sewage, energy 0.779 0.121 0.023 0.053 0.040 0.015 0.212 0.15 b. Structural housing conditions 0.078 0.129 0.053 0.061 0.206 0.318 0.008 0.08 c. Overcrowding, environmental degradation 0.481 0.485 0.409 0.545 0.508 0.364 0.411 5.61 d. Exposure to natural and human induced hazards 0.861 0.838 0.773 0.773 0.581 0.658 0.844 8.38 Social a. Access to social infrast.: health, education, cultural, commercial 0.468 0.327 0.278 0.264 0.327 0.23.4 0.207 3.85 b. Marginalization 0.117 0.011 0.091 0.068 0.048 0.068 0.045 0.45 c. Violence and illegal activities 0.226 0.153 0.168 0.295 0.055 0.241 0.278 1.97 Performance Evaluation: USAID LAC Urban DRR Programming 2 Haiti L Carabayllo L Independ. L Rimac Mixco Medellin Portmore Tegucigalpa Legal (0-30) 22.32 18.44 11.11 13.29 6.02 8.12 19.53 10.95 Physical (0-40) 21.98 15.72 12.58 14.32 13.35 13.55 14.75 14.21 Social (0-30) 8.12 4.91 5.38 6.27 4.30 5.43 5.31 6.27 Formality￾Informalit y Index (0-100) 52.41 39.08 29.07 33.88 23.67 27.09 39.59 31.43 Social Cohesion Haiti L Carabayllo L Independ. L Rimac Mixco Medellin Portmore Tegucigalpa 1 Strong sense of belonging to this neighborhood 54.8 93.2 86.4 90.9 82.9 90.9 88.1 100.0 Project contributed to it (Agree and strongly agree) 51.2 77.3 56.8 70.5 73.8 75.0 77.3 90.9 2 Living here give you a sense of community? 84.1 86.4 77.3 90.2 84.1 84.1 88.4 97.7 Project contributed to it (Agree and strongly agree) 58.1 68.2 56.8 59.1 78.6 68.2 79.5 86.4 3 Willingness to work together to improve your neighborhood 78.6 78.6 100.0 93.0 93.2 95.1 100.0 100.0 Project contributed to it (Agree and strongly agree) 74.4 86.4 65.9 75.0 83.3 79.5 90.9 88.6 4 Neighbors would help each other during an emergency 71.4 86.4 92.9 72.7 86.8 92.9 90.0 95.5 Project contributed to it (Agree and strongly agree) 65.1 72.7 65.9 54.5 71.4 84.1 70.5 88.6 Performance Evaluation: USAID LAC Urban DRR Programming 3 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0 Haiti L Carabayllo L Independencia L Rimac Mixco Medellin Portmore Tegucigalpa Social Cohesion Project contributed to it (Agree and strongly agree) Social Cohesion DRR Haiti L Carabayllo L Independ. L Rimac Mixco Medellin Portmore Tegucigalpa 1 Community has members trained in DRR 52.4 90.5 68.3 53.7 48.7 51.5 44.4 71.8 Project contributed to it (Agree and strongly agree) 51.2 77.3 52.3 34.1 42.9 40.9 36.4 59.1 2 Community has motivated members who support DRR 62.8 90.5 85.7 59.5 76.9 31 72.2 94.9 Project contributed to it (Agree and strongly agree) 62.8 81.8 61.4 50 64.3 61.4 56.8 79.5 3 Community have a functional EWS including drills 58.1 65.1 68.2 32.6 37.8 23.1 19.5 64.9 Project contributed to it (Agree and strongly agree) 51.2 61.4 59.1 27.3 31 18.2 18.2 50.0 4 Community involved in the emergency plan implementation 57.1 87.2 75.6 34.2 54.8 13 51.4 62.2 Project contributed to it (Agree and strongly agree) 55.8 70.5 52.3 20.5 38.1 25 40.9 45.5 5 Community involved in maintenance of projects' physical works 93 82.9 83.3 52.3 76.3 40 85 81.4 Project contributed to it (Agree and strongly agree) 90.7 70.5 70.5 43.2 64.3 86.4 68.2 70.5 6 Social Inclusion V+W 80.8 85.6 82.6 47.7 64.1 82.1 66.1 79.2 Project contributed to it (Agree and strongly agree) 75.6 76.1 71.6 39.8 54.8 65.9 52.3 68.2 Performance Evaluation: USAID LAC Urban DRR Programming 4 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 Haiti L Carabayllo L Independencia L Rimac Mixco Medellin Portmore 67.4 83.6 77.3 46.6 59.8 59.6 56.4 64.5 72.9 61.2 35.8 49.2 49.6 45.5 DRR Project contributed to it (Agree and strongly agree) DRR 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 Haiti L Carabayllo L Independencia L Rimac Mixco Medellin Portmore Tegucigalpa 26.2 29.6 25.0 38.6 17.1 20.5 22.7 11.4 40.0 55.0 57.5 52.5 67.5 64.5 42.5 70.0 25.5 62.5 42.5 42.5 67.0 69.5 39.5 68.5 Disaster Risk Governance c Local Government Involvement b Community involvement a Associativity Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming The Neighborhood Approach ANNEX Support Documents P Works Table of Contents Physical Works Lima – Carabayllo, Peru Lima - Independencia, Peru Lima - Rimac, Peru Medellin, Colombia Mixco, Guatemala Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur, Haiti Portmore, Jamaica Tegucigalpa, Honduras info@a-01.net 1 info@a-01.net 2 Not at all Effective Slightly Effective Moderately Effective Quite Effective Extremely Effective The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program Physical Works info@a-01.net 1 The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program Physical Works info@a-01.net 2 Not at all Effective Slightly Effective Moderately Effective Quite Effective Extremely Effective Not at all Effective Slightly Effective Moderately Effective Quite Effective Extremely Effective 3) 4) Q = (1/n) A R2/3 S1/2 = (1/0,03) 2,375 (0,54)2/3 (0,02)1/2 = 7,409 m3/s ’ : Not at all Effective Slightly Effective Moderately Effective Quite Effective Extremely Effective Not at all Sustainable Slightly Sustainable Moderately Sustainable Quite Sustainable Extremely Sustainable Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming The Neighborhood Approach ANNEX Support Documents Environmental Resi Table of Contents Environmental Resilience Lima – Carabayllo, Peru Lima - Independencia, Peru Lima - Rimac, Peru Medellin, Colombia Mixco, Guatemala Portmore, Jamaica Tegucigalpa, Honduras GIS map of the Transect Walk Group 1 GIS map of the Transect Walk Group 4 In how far is the (environmental) vulnerability reduced (e.g. actual reduction of the community disaster hazard risks)? In how far is the (environmental) vulnerability reduced (e.g. actual reduction of the community disaster hazard risks)? In how far is the (environmental) vulnerability reduced (e.g. actual reduction of the community disaster hazard risks)? In how far is the (environmental) vulnerability reduced (e.g. actual reduction of the community disaster hazard risks)? In how far is the (environmental) vulnerability reduced (e.g. actual reduction of the community disaster hazard risks)? In how far is the (environmental) vulnerability reduced (e.g. actual reduction of the community disaster hazard risks)? Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming The Neighborhood Approach ANNEX Support Documents Focus Groups Table of Contents Focus Groups Lima – Carabayllo, Peru Lima - Independencia, Peru Lima - Rimac, Peru Medellin, Colombia Mixco, Guatemala Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur, Haiti Portmore, Jamaica Tegucigalpa, Honduras 1 – 2 – 3 – Leaders’ capacity “Lamentablemente, las personas, antes de ” 4 – 5 – “No .” 6 – 1 Level of DRR Effectiveness – Medellin FGD Most effective aspects Least effective aspects Influencing factors The timeframe and budget of the project is not sufficient to fulfill all necessities the communities have. Not at all effective Slightly effective Moderately effective Quite effective Extremely effective X An accident with waste treatment triggered people to change things Many CM learned to recognize risks, how to reduce them, how to stay safe and understood that risk management is their responsibility The way GC approached the communities, defining interventions together Stairs, railings, pavements, evacuation routes, safe areas facilitate evacuation in case of an emergency Dynamic methodologies stimulate participation and sensitization High participation of all ages, sexes, professions Combining trainings and tools with PW strengthens knowledge and appropriation PW have reduced the risk of falling. Previously people died or got seriously injured. Less garbage in public areas due to awareness raising and waste separation. Trainings to stores improved hygiene and business Improved electricity network in shops reduced risk of fires Houses are safer due to trainings, manual and PW The manual empowers to train others and to recognize need of improvements Families know what to do in case of an emergency (plan prepared) According to DAGRD worker: risk of fire and landslides has reduced by 60%. Now there are only minor incidents. Improved lighting and related safety with solar lamps Focus on high risk zones was key to stimulate more entities to invest Houses for improvements were carefully selected, which resulted in CM accepting the selection. Due to lack of money and time not all interventions could be done Communities have basic rescue equipment Some key DRR interventions are still lacking Variety of vegetable gardens provide constant production for food & income, stimulate collaboration, education, tourism Some leaders favored specific CM Community Risk Map helped to recognize risks and develop plans Increased appropriation and collaboration reduces risks and improves potential emergency response GC used well prepared professionals with social sensitivity. The CM felt their necessities were taken into account People have less risk of their house collapsing or getting sick + they feel safer Linkages with many different stakeholders made it possible to do many different interventions The project could built upon many already existing interventions Any new technology should come with sufficient training to understand their functioning, possible use and how to maintain them. Some solar lights stopped working. CM don’t know how to repair them VG have reduced the risk of landslides 2 Community Ownership Sustainability – Medellin FGD Enabling factors GC taught them project formulation and management and gave them tools to get support (e.g. community map) Impeding factors Institutional Ownership Not at all sustainable Slightly sustainable Moderately sustainable Quite sustainable Extremely sustainable XX GC = Global Communities PW = Physical Works VG = Vegetable garden Due to lack of money it is difficult to give follow up with new interventions Green = positive aspects Red = negative aspects Yellow = neutral aspects or in some cases positive, in others negative Municipality is investing strongly in these communities Visually attractive and understandable manuals allow for training others and refreshing what was learned. Due to limited time and money not all interventions could be done, which puts in risk the sustainability of others. Shop owners provide information, training and can support during an emergency C8: People learned to separate garbage, so collectors don’t need to take all garbage out on the street in search for the recyclables Risk committee monitors risk cases and (landslide, fire) incidents Families have prepared their emergency plan DAGRD supports DRR activities CM learned their obligation and rights and demand actively support from government There is strong citizen monitoring. Community group monitors and maintains PW in alliance with institutions through a signed agreement Police is applying fines for littering Environmental community group learned to manage projects and got already more done FENALCO supports shops Vegetable gardens provide an income and food security, which makes people maintain them. Also because they have seeds nearby (nursery and sales) Many different CM participated and learned DRR, waste management and other topics Community committees were strengthened and are recognized by the Municipality. CM appropriated more the territory and collaborate, leading to improved caretaking of house and community Participatory budgeting helps to create continuity in interventions C1 is pioneer in applying for projects with participatory budgeting. They got already various PW Leaders would have liked to receive more trainings and tools to become better leaders Leaders, many women, have been empowered and learned to develop projects Well developed neighborhood plans offer a roadmap to CM for future steps Support from many different institutions augments possibility of continuing projects with some of them When implementing new technologies, they should be easy to maintain and repair by CM themselves as to not depend on the installer for their sustainability 9 10 11 12 1 Level of DRR Effectiveness – Portmore FGD Most effective aspects Least effective aspects Influencing factors Requiring people to work voluntarily. There is much need to generate an income. CM = Community Members CPR = Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation DRR = Disaster Risk Reduction GP = Gregory Park NH = Naggo Head Not at all effective Slightly effective Moderately effective Quite effective Extremely effective X Poverty: people should not be expected to work for free PW and sensitization on waste helped to reduce the risk of flooding as garbage used to block drainages, or float into the houses There is garbage recollection but not frequent enough. New risks are created with garbage accumulating around the receptacles. CM learned construction, DRR, CPR, WASH, waste and shelter management, map reading, enumeration, evacuation routes Garbage receptacles and clean up days: some areas are cleaner and better accessible now Building new and retrofitting houses led to safer and more comfortable living Land tenure was not taken into account from the beginning (thus some PW did not meet their goal). Now only those with property papers get retrofitted but these are not necessarily the houses with highest risk Land titling augmented willingness to make improvements and helps to attain wealth Complex structure of land tenure. Owners do not always want improvements as to not formalize the renter’s status. People get evicted. PW do not always reach their goal. Community Resource Center for projects Only NH gets a community resource center; more feel the need for it PWs like retrofitting and receptacles helped to reduce problems with heavy rains in 2017 Lack of land tenure and insecurity limit the level of participation (e.g. GP) Access to land titles augments level of participation ( NH) Construction of toilets improved hygiene Hygiene is still an issue. More PW and trainings are necessary Less people get sick due to improved hygiene and environmental protection Identifying the levels of risk helps to agree with beneficiary selection; some inconsistencies Voucher gave people ownership and made them invest more Some complained about the beneficiary selection for retrofitting CM would like to receive more certified trainings as these might help to get a job Many organizations have come without results. This demotivates people to participate. Construction skills training for youth (mostly men) with certification gave them (temporary) jobs Limited project period and budget can jeopardize overall effectiveness By identifying different levels of retrofitting more houses could be addressed, but not all risk has been reduced The urbanization model (plots with various families) makes it possible to install collective toilets thus being more efficient (it would not have been possible to finance individual toilets for every house) 2 Community Ownership Sustainability – Portmore FGD Enabling factors Impeding factors Institutional Ownership Not at all sustainable Slightly sustainable Moderately sustainable Quite sustainable Extremely sustainable X NL = Newland PW = Physical Works WASH = Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Green = positive aspects Red = negative aspects Yellow = neutral aspects or in some cases positive, in others negative Clarifying land tenure / property ownership stimulates investment and maintenance PW in private property augments possibility it will be maintained and monitored. There are institutions that provide training on DRR, emergency response and skills (Red Cross, HEART) There is garbage recollection and some help cleaning (Lion and other clubs, police, Municipality) Lack of land tenure or long-term lease contracts diminishes willingness to invest in or maintain PW Land agency works on land tenure Clarifying land tenure augments willingness to make future improvements, pay tax and demand public services Clearer land tenure secures municipal tax income Community members call when garbage needs to be recollected and some clean the area afterwards Lack of land tenure and insecurity limit the level of participation and subsequent ownership Communities are better organized and CM collaborate more, specifically women,. Community members apply what they learned but require more trainings, preferably with certification to get jobs There is no institution that provides free trainings with certification. Leaders say that government does not do anything to improve their communities Youth, mostly men, learned construction skills and got certified. They can replicate the learnings and have better job possibilities now The voucher system stimulates people to invest, creating more appropriation and caretaking A small group cleans and maintains the collective PW. Some CM participate less, or only in certain activities. This depends on the community 1 Level of DRR Effectiveness – Tegucigalpa FGD Most effective aspects Least effective aspects Influencing factors DRR PW Not at all effective Slightly effective Moderately effective Quite effective Extremely effective don’t have time to “El efecto que hizo en mi vida es aprender a vivir en una zona de riesgo y cómo afrontarlo.” pregoneras Score: 4,5 2 Community Ownership Sustainability – Tegucigalpa FGD Enabling factors Impeding factors Institutional Ownership Not at all sustainable Slightly sustainable Moderately sustainable Quite sustainable Extremely sustainable CM CSR EWS NP PW Green Red Yellow pregoneros Score: 4,5 Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming The Neighborhood Approach ANNEX Support Documents Interviews Interviews Lima Carabayllo, Peru Lima - Independencia, Peru Lima - Rimac, Peru Medellin, Colombia Mixco, Guatemala Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur, Haiti Portmore, Jamaica Tegucigalpa, Honduras Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming The Neighborhood Approach ANNEX Support Documents Table of Contents Hazard Assessments Mixco, Guatemala Lima - Independencia, Peru Tegucigalpa, Honduras Medellin, Colombia Síntesis de informes. Realizado por Dr. Paulo Ruiz Cubillo Para la Universidad Internacional de Florida Aspectos Geológicos Guatemala Zona 10 Mixco, Proyectos Vistas de la Comunidad y Cipresales Revisión de información previa y campo (documentos y trabajo de campo) La información previa en su mayoría es un compilado de informes de diferentes agencias. Incluye mapas, de tipo regional. Los mapas locales son muy generales y no cuentan con una topografía adecuada para hacer trabajo en detalle. Hay análisis geotécnicos (caracterización de suelos- Límites de Atterberg, ensayo de compactación, soporte California, análisis granulométrico, contenido de humedad, perfil estratigráfico, compresión triaxial, gravedad específica) y pruebas de infiltración. Los datos de usaron para diseño de muros de contención en cortes. Las bases de datos de lluvias y sismos de Ciudad de Guatemala (CG) no son muy completas y faltan datos, pero se podrían hacer interpolaciones para poder hacer modelaciones. Hay información de ubicación de fallas locales con potencial de generar sismos que disparen deslizamientos. Los meses entre mayo y noviembre son los que tienen mayor probabilidad de que ocurran deslizamientos disparados por lluvia, así como cuando hay huracanes u otros eventos atmosféricos. Objetivos 1.) Determinar, caracterizar y correlacionar los materiales geológicos que afloran en el sitio de los proyectos. 2.) Evaluar geológicamente las obras que se han construido en los proyectos. 3.) Revisar los estudios de caracterización geomecánica de los suelos y pruebas de infiltración del sitio para el entendimiento de su comportamiento ante ciertos eventos geológicos (sismos) y atmosféricos (lluvia). 4.) Analizar el uso de la tierra actual de los proyectos para la determinación de posibles problemas por riesgo de deslizamientos. Metodología Revisión bibliográfica de información previa incluyendo mapas regionales montados en SIG. Revisión de imágenes satelitales disponibles en Google Earth. Revisión de informes de los estudios de suelo y pruebas de infiltración. Visita de campo para caracterización geológica. Se visitaron las plantas de tratamiento y se observaron los muros de contención. En cada uno de los puntos visitados, se tomaron notas, así como fotografías. Finalmente se elaboró un reporte con nuevos insumos que podrían ser de utilidad para la toma de decisiones. Principales hallazgos Los proyectos se ubican en el valle fluvial del Río Molimo. La geología del sitio, corresponde con capas de tefra con pómez de color gris a blanco y ceniza gris a negra interestratificada con paleosuelos. Esta geología concuerda con lo descrito en el perfil estratigráfico de los ensayos geotécnicos. La ladera del valle fluvial presenta una pendiente de ~30° es tipo fuerte, donde los procesos denudacionales como deslizamientos podrían ser intensos, y además que existe un peligro extremo de erosión de suelos. Las estructuras que se han construido podrían sufrir impacto por procesos de escorrentía como el que ocurrió en el año 2016 con una sección de las escaleras que llevan hacia la planta de tratamiento de Vistas de la Comunidad. El proyecto está dentro de la zona de Falla Mixco y según los mapas de estructuras analizados hay una falla muy cerca del proyecto. No se observaron evidencias de esta en el campo. Los mapas de fallas y geológico presentados por PCI concuerdan con lo revisado en la bibliografía para la Ciudad de Guatemala. Existe potencial sísmico en la zona de estudio, ya han ocurrido sismos (1917, 1918, y 1976) en las cercanías. Los Terremotos de México del 2017 no son buenos parámetros para evaluar la resistencia de las obras construidas, debido a que estos generaron aceleraciones bajas en la CG. La susceptibilidad litológica de estos materiales a deslizarse es muy alta debido a que están muy meteorizados es fácilmente ripeable y con baja resistencia a la compresión simple. Basándose en los resultados de los análisis geotécnicos y lo observado en el campo, se puede determinar que por el tipo de suelo, la granulometría arenosa, el ángulo de fricción alto, por la poca cohesión que tienen y el contenido de humedad que presentan, las tefras del proyecto pueden resistir cortes casi verticales hasta de cierta altura, sin embargo cuando hay exceso de agua en esos materiales, esos cortes verticales tienden a colapsar con planos de falla casi rectos y verticales debido a la saturación y que están muy alejados del ángulo de estabilidad de esos materiales. También pueden generar sumideros en condiciones saturadas y de erosión hídrica En el proyecto Cipresal se ha dado un uso sistemático de vegetación autóctona (Isote) para mejorar las condiciones del terreno y reducir la inestabilidad de terreno. Resultados En el proyecto afloran depósitos volcánicos de caída que pueden correlacionarse con los mismo depósitos que de tefra que aparecen en el resto Ciudad de Guatemala. Los proyectos analizados en este trabajo podrían estar muy cerca de una de las estructuras secundarias que se han delimitado para la zona de falla de Mixco. Por las características geotécnicas de los materiales que se encuentran en este sitio, la lluvia y los sismos podrían ser disparadores de deslizamientos. Las obras que se han construido para disminuir la vulnerabilidad de los eventos de remoción de masa tienen una incidencia puntual. Esta zona tiene características muy similares otras donde han ocurrido eventos de tamaño considerable a pesar de tener estructuras como muros de contención. El manejo adecuado de las aguas de escorrentía es una de la mejores formas de prevenir este tipo de eventos. En el proyecto se han construido cunetas y se ha mejora en este aspecto. Se ha dado un cambio de uso de la tierra desde el año 2003 según lo observado en la imágenes de Google Earth, la construcción de obras podría haber facilidad la impermeabilización del suelo y favorecido la escorrentía y erosión. Conclusiones Las obras que se han construido en los proyectos como, planta de tratamiento, alamedas, pasa manos, escaleras y muros de contención (cuatro diferentes tipos), no parecen tener problemas geológicos puntuales que los puedan afectar directamente. El principal problema al que se podrían enfrentar estas obras es la escorrentía y erosión de materiales como el que sufrió las escaleras del proyecto Vista de la Comunidad que llevan a la planta de tratamiento en el año 2016. La planta de tratamiento de Cipresal no ha presentado ningún problema desde su construcción. Los sismos que tiene mayor potencial para disparar deslizamientos en territorios volcánicos son lo originados por fallas locales, con magnitudes superiores a 4.4 Mw y de profundidad < 10 km. El epicentro del evento debería de estar en un radio inferior a 25 km de distancia para que la energía no se disipe por la distancia. Esto porque las aceleraciones pico generadas por este tipo de sismos a esa distancia del epicentro serían suficientes para generar inestabilidad en los taludes de pendientes fuerte y muy fuerte. Por lo tanto en la zona de estudio las estructuras asociadas con la zona de falla Mixco podrían ser las que potencialmente puedan generar sismos que disparen deslizamientos. Se recomienda hacer un levantamiento de fotografías aéreas de alta resolución y bajo costo con un drone para generar un modelo de elevación digital. Con este modelo se pueden para trazar mejor las líneas de drenaje que se utilizan para manejar el aguas de escorrentía. Es recomendable instalar piezómetros en la zona de los proyectos para así tener un control sobre la influencia del agua subterránea en los movimientos de masa. Figura 1. Sección de material aflorando en nivel intermedio de Proyecto Vista de la Comunidad. Se observa una capa inferior de cenizas alteradas (de al menos 170 cm de espesor) sobre la que se va a construir la estructura. Sobre esta capa se observan tefras de caída con un espesor de hasta 340 cm, con pómez blanca y varios niveles ricos en óxidos de hierro y magnetita. Sobre esta capa hay materiales de relleno y una capa de suelo orgánico de unos 20 cm. Aspectos Geológicos Lima Perú Distrito de Independencia, Proyectos El Volante II y III Revisión de información previa y campo (documentos y trabajo de campo) La información previa que se revisó son informes elaborados por el Centro Peruano de Investigaciones Sísmicas y Mitigación de Desastres (CISMID), la Facultad de Ingeniería Civil (FIC), la Universidad Nacional de Ingeniería (UNI), - PREDES sobre peligros múltiples y vulnerabilidad a nivel de distrito, eje zonal y barrio. Además de la revisión de los mapas generados para cada uno de los informes. Objetivos 1.)Revisar los estudios geológicos y de parámetros geotécnicos, geofísicos de los suelos así como pruebas que se realizaron para el entendimiento de su comportamiento ante ciertos eventos geológicos y atmosféricos. 2.)Visitar el proyecto habitacional El Volante II y III para la observación y caracterización de campo de los materiales geológicos que afloran en el sitio . 3.)Hacer una evaluación geológica de las obras que se han construido en los proyectos para disminuir la vulnerabilidad. 4.)Analizar el uso de la tierra actual que se le está dando a los sitios de los proyectos para la determinación de posibles problemas por riesgo de caía de rocas y guaycos o flujos de roca. Metodología Revisión de los informes, mapas e imágenes de Google Earth (peligros geológicos, caracterización geotécnica, peligro sísmico y caracterización dinámica del suelo) del distrito de Independencia. Visita de campo al proyecto acompañado por líderes comunales y el Geól. Juvenal Medina, donde se observaron las rocas que afloran. así como las obras que se construyeron para disminuir la amenaza de flujos de detritos, las obras de reforestación y riego de los árboles. Se tomaron notas, y fotografías. Elaboración de informe con nuevos insumos que podrían ser de utilidad para la toma de decisiones. Principales hallazgos en revisión de informes La geología observada en el campo corresponde con lo descrito en el Apéndice A y el mapa de la Geol. Local. Son rocas sedimentarias (areniscas, cuarcitas y lutitas) intruidas por rocas plutónicas con metamorfismo de contacto y zonas puntuales con alteración hidrotermal. También hay depósitos inconsolidados y aluviales En las zonas altas del proyecto afloran las rocas intrusivas (gabros, granodioritas y dioritas) y sus relaciones hidrotermalizadas. En general están sanas y fracturadas. En Apéndice A, se hizo un análisis desde la perspectiva de peligros originados por procesos de dinámica externa (pendientes, caída de rocas, flujos de detritos y suelos inestables) y dinámica interna (Sismo). Se hace una clasificación de pendientes en 3 grupos, pendientes <12 % peligro bajo, entre 12- 20 % peligro moderado y >35 % peligro alto. Por si solos los % de pendientes no dan suficiente información sobre el peligro para caída de bloques. Un análisis más completo debería incluir: 1.) Tipo de litología presente junto con el grado de meteorización. 2.) Dirección y ángulo de buzamiento (rocas sedimentarias) o dirección de las discontinuidades (rocas intrusivas). Estos datos no fueron identificados en el informe por lo que no se pueden hacer estas correlaciones. Esas relaciones podrían indicar si hay zonas con mayor peligro que otras aun con los mismos % de pendientes. Como disparador para la caída de rocas en el informe se menciona un sismo de magnitud 8.8 Mw en la zona de Lima. Sería bueno determinar cuál es la aceleración mínima y no la generada por un sismo tan grande que podría tener potencial para generar caída de bloques en la zona y usar ese evento como disparador. Los sismos de magnitudes inferiores tienen menor tiempo de recurrencia que los sismos grandes. Se hizo un análisis de los flujos de detrito con el método racional definido para un periodo de retorno de 100 años. Sería bueno considerar el cambio climático y modelar eventos más pequeños e intensos y con frecuencias más cortas. En el Apéndice A, los suelos inestables están bien caracterizados y hay ejemplos claros de impactos negativos en las viviendas cuando se construyen sobre ellos. Las medidas correctivas (construcción de diques y reforestación) para la mitigación del riesgo de desastres parecen adecuadas pero pueden mejorarse. Los muros de contención que se plantean para mitigar los suelos inestables, son una medida adecuada para los espesores y tipos de suelos presentes en la zona. Sin embargo la construcción de viviendas al pie de estos diques representa un peligro muy alto. Los árboles sembrados (una vez maduros) podrían detener bloques pequeños que caigan desde zonas más altas. El principal aporte de la zona reforestada sería la barrera nuevas colonizaciones. El Informe Apéndice C define en base a estudios previos cuatro categorías de suelo según sus características para hacer cimentaciones de casas de habitación. I. Gravas, las cuales presentan las mejores características para cimentaciones de las construcciones. II Arenas, también favorables para que sobre ellas se hagan las cimentaciones de las construcciones. IV Zonas con pendiente fuerte donde afloran rocas intrusivas, que clasifican como no aptas para la construcción debido a la alta pendiente. Finalmente la zona llamada V. y que fue catalogada como materiales transportados de relleno no controlado y desmonte, que no es apta para cimentaciones. Se concuerda con las categorías I, II y V. sin embargo, para la categoría IV, las razones de clasificarla como no apta para la construcción de cimentaciones es la fuerte pendiente y no la calidad de los materiales. No se comparte esta clasificación debido a que usan las pendientes del sitio y que no un criterio geotécnico propio de los materiales que hay en esa zona para determinar su no aptitud. La caracterización dinámica de suelos (Apéndice D) se hizo a partir de estudios previos de microzonificación sísmica y medición de microtremores en forma puntual para estimar el periodo de vibración del suelo. Se definieron 3 zonas. Zona I Periodo < 0.2 s con V de corte entre 200-600 m/s (suelos rígidos) Zona II Periodos 0.2 s y <0.3 s con V de corte entre 200-500 m (suelos medianamente rígidos). Zona III Periodos 0.3 s y < 0.4 (suelos flexibles). Como es un estudio de suelos no se hicieron pruebas sobre los afloramientos rocosos en la zonas altas. Sin embargo, para un gabro la V de una onda sísmica sería de entre 6700-7300 m/s muy superior de lo que presentan las Zonas I y II implicando menores vibraciones. Resultados de observaciones de campo De lo observado en el campo se determinó que los eventos de remoción de masa que podrían generarse en el sitio son: caída de rocas, volcamiento de bloques, deslizamientos planares en cuña, compuestos y avalanchas de roca. Sobre el poco espesor de suelo y/o depósitos coluviales se podrían dar deslizamientos planares. Los flujos de detritos con poca cantidad de agua (huaycos) son posibles. La construcción de diques de forma artesanal con los mismos materiales que afloran en el sitio, parece una medida adecuada para detener la velocidad y alcance de ese tipo de eventos, sin embargo las casas al pie de los muros implica otro peligro ya que podrían ser impactadas por los bloques que superen el muro.. En el proyecto se ha colocado pasa manos. Estás estructuras se construyen con troncos de árboles de eucalipto. Las uniones son de cuerda. Podrían utilizar otros materiales. Las zonas donde se está haciendo la siembra de árboles y vivero son de alta pendiente esto se está utilizando a favor para hacer el riego por goteo. Conclusiones Las obras que se han construido en los proyectos como, muros de contención, campo de reforestación, pasamanos no parecen tener problemas geológicos puntuales que los puedan afectar directamente. Se recomienda hacer estudios detallados sobre sismicidad local que tenga potencial de generar eventos que puedan disparar caída de bloques en la zona. Estudios pensando en el cambio climático y un régimen de mayor cantidad de lluvias en la zona. Figura 2. En la fotografía se muestran las relaciones que existen entre pendientes fuertes de la zona alta y los sitios donde afloran las rocas intrusivas fracturadas. Además se muestran los sitios donde se ubican los muros de contención de cemento y roca. La línea azul muestra por donde podría bajar el agua en caso de precipitaciones Video con un ejemplo de un Guayco en una zona similar a la estudiada. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIY0OK5yuWQ Aspectos Geológicos Tegucigalpa Honduras, Proyectos Fallas La Ulloa, José A. Duarte, Nueva Providencia y La Berlín Revisión de información previa y campo (documentos y trabajo de campo) La información previa corresponde con informes nuevos realizados por GeoConsult S.A. por solicitud de GOAL Honduras. Incluye, informes geológico-geotécnico, una base topográfica a partir de datos LiDAR con ortofografías de alta resolución. Fotos de los procesos constructivos de las obras. Perforaciones con recuperación y descripción de núcleos. Bases de datos de las modelaciones de inundación para diseño de cunetas y deslizamientos. Datos de lluvia de estaciones locales desde el 2016 e información de Radar. Objetivos Los principales objetivos de este trabajo son: 1.)Revisar los estudios geológicos￾geotécnicos previos. 2.) Determinar, caracterizar y correlacionar en campo los materiales geológicos que afloran en el sitio de los proyectos con lo que se menciona en los informes. 3.)Hacer una evaluación geológica de las obras que se han construido en los proyectos para disminuir la vulnerabilidad. Metodología Revisión de los informes previos, datos LiDAR, geológicos y modelaciones de deslizamiento e inundaciones para los 4 sitios intervenidos (Fallas La Ulloa José A. Duarte, Nueva Providencia y La Berlín). Visita de campo al proyecto acompañado por líderes comunales y personal de GOAL Honduras, donde se observaron las rocas que afloran. así como las obras que se construyeron para disminuir la vulnerabilidad de deslizamientos, estaciones de monitoreo de lluvia y geotécnicas. Sitio de construcción de casas nuevas alejadas de influencia de deslizamiento. Se tomaron notas, y fotografías. Elaboración de informe con nuevos insumos que podrían ser de utilidad para la toma de decisiones. Principales hallazgos La geología planteada en el informe geotécnico corresponde con: Depósito coluviales cuaternarios, Basaltos cuaternarios y una toba arenosa amarilla Terciaria, hay rellenos y niveles freáticos muy superficiales. En la zona de Ulloa ya habían sido identificados previamente deslizamientos en otros trabajos geológicos. Tras el Huracán Según el mismo informe, la lluvia en la estación húmeda y el cambio de uso del suelo en sitios de alta susceptibilidad son los disparadores de los deslizamientos. Los sismos podrían disparar deslizamientos en la zona, sin embargo el potencial de un evento importante no es tan alto. Las características geológicas en el Residencial Ciudad del Ángel (proyecto habitacional con casas de clase media-alta que se deslizaron en flujos de lodo) son las mismas que las de Colonia La Ulloa. Actualmente en esta colonia, existe un deslizamiento activo que está afectando diferentes puntos de las comunidades visitadas, así como la carretera principal del Anillo Periférico 3 (AP3). Las evidencias de este deslizamiento son grietas en caminos, cunetas y edificaciones y un desnivel en la carretera del AP3. Las comunidades junto con Goal han construido obras dentro de la zona de influencia de este deslizamiento para tratar de disminuir su impacto. Se está trabajando en reubicar a familias que se encontraban en las zonas más vulnerables. Se construyeron cunetas (de concreto reforzado y mampostería) donde su profundidad responde al resultado de análisis de la topografía LiDAR y modelaciones hidrogeológicas. Transportan agua de lluvia y aguas grises. Algunas de las cunetas construidas han sido afectadas por el deslizamiento y están fracturadas. Los vecinos tienen la percepción de que la construcción de las cunetas ha disminuido la tasa de movimiento del deslizamiento, especialmente durante la estación lluviosa. En una zona que era un botadero de basura dentro del área afectada por el deslizamiento, se hicieron estudios geotécnicos, luego en el 2015 se dio la construcción de un muro de llantas y se construyó un parque comunitario, ahora es un punto de encuentro. La comunidad ha copiado y experimentado con otras técnicas la construcción de muros de llantas. Algunos combinan muros convencionales y muros de llantas. También en algunas casas se práctica la siembra de lluvia. Hay pluviómetros comunitarios que dan datos dos veces al día. Hay un monitoreo geotécnico sistemático que incluye, 10 fisiómetros instalados en casas ubicadas en la zona del deslizamiento, inclinómetros y piezómetros. Las estaciones (16 en total) transmiten datos en tiempo real. Hay estructuras que se siguen utilizando pese a estar fuertemente afectadas por el deslizamiento (e.g, la Iglesia cerca del parque comunitario). Otras se han reparado hasta 3 veces pese a que se siguen agrietando esto atenta contra la integridad de las personas. En la Escuela del sector de Nueva Providencia, se han hecho varias mejoras, tiene un tanque de cosecha de agua de lluvia y se ha visto favorecida por pasa manos y cunetas, sin embargo en el sector trasero de las aulas más cercanas a la alameda se observaron grietas y evidencias de movimientos por el deslizamiento. En la Berlín se están construyendo las casas nuevas donde se van a reubicar a las familias movilizadas de las zonas más vulnerables al deslizamiento. Hay un manejo sistemáticos de aguas residuales en cada (tanque biodigestor). Se están construyendo sobre lavas (basaltos) sanas con un espesor de suelo con bloques de unos cuantos cm. Los bloques de lava han sido utilizados para construir un muro de gaviones. En este muro también se utilizaron tobas y brechas que son más fáciles de meteorizar por lo que se podrían generar vacios y espacios con los años, además los cortes angulares de los basaltos generan también espacios vacios entre las rocas. El análisis de estabilidad de taludes se hizo con SLIDE 5 y un Factor de Seguridad (FS) de 1.4 en condiciones de lluvia extrema, secas y con sismo. Con planos de falla circulares, planares y combinadas. Resultados Hay modelaciones de hidrogeológicas para el manejo de aguas con cunetas y modelaciones geotécnicas para los deslizamientos. Los resultados de estas modelaciones dieron FS por debajo de 1.4 para distintos escenarios. La implementación de la tecnología LiDAR fue esencial para poder llegar a estos resultados en la escala en que se hizo. La construcción de la cunetas y muros de llantas ha creado la percepción en la gente de que el deslizamiento se ha detenido, sin embargo eso solo sería en sitios muy puntuales y no podría afirmar que ha ocurrido en toda la zona afectada. Los datos de monitoreo geotécnico podrían evidenciar o debatir esa percepción. Las casas que se están construyendo en La Berlín no parecen tener ningún problema geológico que las pueda afectar directamente. Conclusiones Los datos LiDAR junto con la información geológica (mapas y perfiles) y geotécnica (caracterización) de este proyecto fueron un gran insumo para poder hacer los distintos tipos de modelaciones (análisis de estabilidad de taludes). Todos los proyectos deberían de contar con este tipo de información para trabajar y resolver problemas a escala local. Según los resultados de las modelaciones, se concluye que las condiciones generales de estabilidad son marginales con algunos escenarios más peligrosos que otros como una falla traslacional en La Ulloa. El manejo de las aguas superficiales con las obras que se han construido ha sido importante y podría tener influencia local en el deslizamiento. La información de los pluviómetros locales así como el monitoreo geotécnico en tiempo real de las diferentes estaciones en el proyecto podría ser clave para salvar vidas en caso de un movimiento de masas disparado por lluvias. Las casas de La Berlín no parecen tener ningún problema geológico que las pueda afectar directamente. Figura 3. En la fotografía se muestra una de las cunetas que se han construido para mejorar el manejo de aguas superficiales. Con esto se ha mejorado la preservación de las calzadas y disminución de infiltración. Aspectos Geológicos Medellín Colombia, Proyectos Comuna Santo Domingo, El Comprosimo, Comuna 8 Barrio Llanaditas y El Pinal Revisión de información previa y campo (documentos y trabajo de campo) El documento consultado corresponde con Revisión y Ajuste al Plan de Ordenamiento Territorial - Medellín, 2014. Realizado por el Departamento Administrativo de Planeación. Se consultaron otros documentos y mapas geológicos de Aptitud Geológica de Medellín. La empresa Global fue la encargada de la ejecución de varias de las obras. Objetivos Los principales objetivos de este trabajo son: 1.)Revisar los estudios previos y su componente de geología y geotecnia. 2.) Determinar, caracterizar y correlacionar en campo los materiales geológicos del sitio menciona en los informes. 3.)Hacer una evaluación geológica de las obras que se han construido en los proyectos para disminuir la vulnerabilidad. Metodología Revisión de los informes previos. Visita de campo al proyecto con líderes comunales y el Ing. Carlos Gómez Global Colombia, donde se observaron los suelos y rocas que afloran. así como las obras que se construyeron para disminuir la vulnerabilidad. Se tomaron notas, y fotografías. Elaboración de informe con nuevos insumos que podrían ser de utilidad para la toma de decisiones. Principales hallazgos El informe de Ordenamiento Territorial de Medellín (OTM) define una zonificación de amenazas por movimientos en masa, inundaciones y avenidas torrenciales en suelos urbano y rural. Hace una clasificación mediante 4 categorías (Muy Baja, Baja, Media y Alta) Los proyectos visitados corresponden con zonas que entran dentro de la categoría media y alta vulnerabilidad. Hay una zonificación de amenaza de detalle como resultado de estudios geotécnicos y de estabilidad de laderas para barrios y sectores de borde de las cuencas. Están caracterizadas como criticidad 3,4 y 5 del modelo probabilístico de la Universidad Nacional de Colombia, el resultado final aplicado es de tipo heurístico cualitativo. Hay un mapa de amenazas de inundación que se hizo con el método geomorfológico físico, identificando los cambios morfológicos y sedimentológicos que permitieron apreciar las áreas que se han inundado recientemente. Por la ubicación (zonas altas de la cuenca donde hay procesos de erosión y no depositación) de los proyectos visitados no se verían afectados inundaciones. En la web se consultó el trabajo de zonificación de la aptitud geológica que clasifica las áreas según su uso y restricción. Los proyectos visitados estarían en Zonas de alto riesgo no recuperables y zonas de riesgo recuperables. En el informe OTM se trabaja con unidades geomorfológicas, niveles de erosión y pendientes de las laderas. Existen datos geológicos del área en otras fuentes consultadas (Mapa Geológico Generalizado de la Dunita de Medellín - INGEOMINAS). Las rocas del área de Medellín corresponden con dunitas metamórficas y anfibolitas. Las condiciones de alta humedad en la época lluviosa y cambios de temperatura han propiciado la degradación de las rocas, formación suelos residuales y arcillas, por la alta pendiente en las laderas de la montañas y el alto contenido de humedad hacen de estos sitios muy susceptibles a la generación de deslizamientos. Los pocos sitios con afloramientos de roca, están muy fracturados y pueden generar caída de bloques. Históricamente los sismos en Antioquia no ha sido afectado severamente a Medellín, debido a su distancia de las fuentes sísmicas. Sin embargo existe una alta vulnerabilidad debido a la gran cantidad de construcciones que no son sismoresistentes. El 17 y 18 de octubre de 1992 hubo un sismo que generó muchos daños la aceleración máxima en Medellín fue de 0,03 g, el código dice que para esa zona debería construirse para resistir 0,25 g. En la zona de Medellín se encuentran las Fallas Medellín y Santa Rita. Resultados En Santo Domingo, los materiales que se pudieron observar son principalmente suelos residuales originados por la meteorización de las rocas del área. Los dos sitios donde se construyeron obras (escaleras y huerta) fueron elegidos por la comunidad debido a que ahí ocurrieron incidentes con afectación directa a la población. Las escaleras llevan al centro de salud y la estación de policía, hay un mural (funciona como punto de encuentro). No presentan algún problema geológico. Se hizo un trabajo para mejorar el manejo de la basura que fue uno de los problemas (variable antrópica en la generación de deslizamientos) identificados por la población. Creación de mesas ambientales mayor educación a la población. Se realizaron otras actividades que integraron más a la comunidad, trabajos con adultos mayores, jóvenes y niños. Se generó la historia del Barrio. Una zona de alta susceptibilidad al deslizamiento, se ha trabajado y convertido en una zona de cultivos con sistema de huertas en terrazas. Hay un vivero en condiciones intermedias. Este espacio se recupera ya que era utilizado por grupos al margen de la ley (las madres de los integrantes de esos grupos siembran ahí), se siembra lechuga, pepino, culantro perejil y otros, estos se le venden a un dueño de un restaurante. Las terrazas son pequeñas, < 2 m son sostenidas con tablas de madera. Proyecto 2 (El Compromiso). Aquí lo más importante es que la comunidad aprendió a gestionar otras ayudas (surgen nueva generación de líderes comunales). En el proyecto original se hicieron pasamanos, escaleras, muros, rutas de evacuación. A nivel puntual las obras construidas no tienen problemas geológicos, a nivel macro siguen estando en zonas de alta vulnerabilidad por las condiciones del sitio. En el proyecto Comuna 8 Barrio Llanaditas, se observó una segunda huerta con un vivero en mejores condiciones, hay escaleras de madera. No se puede sembrar en el suelo porque ese sitio era un botadero, se siembra en estañones plásticos cortados a la mitad. El grupo se ha consolidado más en esta huerta que en la de Santo Domingo. Los productos son vendidos en mercado de campesinos. Se han utilizado estacas y tablas de madera para construir las terrazas. Se han sembrado algunos árboles. Este sistema de terrazas ayuda a detener la escorrentía y procesos de erosión que se daban en este botadero. También se construyeron pasamanos Se construyó un muro de contención pero las personas han utilizado ese muro como basamento para construir casas sobre él. Las casas construidas sobre ese muro son vulnerables a un sismo. Barrio el Pinal, en este sitio se han construido diferentes cercas para las 25 huertas que manejan unas 52 familias. Las cercas se encuentran en buenas condiciones. El principal problema que enfrentan en este barrio, es la colocación en el mercado de los productos que se generan en la huerta. En todas las huertas visitadas hay un problema con una mariposa blanca que se está comiendo los productos. No se ha podido encontrar un producto orgánico efectivo que las controle. Conclusiones Las obras que se construyeron en los proyectos no presentan ningún problema geológico puntual que las pueda afectar directamente. Sin embargo, están ubicadas en zonas de alta vulnerabilidad. El éxito del proyecto en Colombia es social. Hay una mayor integración de las comunidades. Estas aprendieron a organizarse, surgieron nuevos líderes comunales que han gestionado otras ayudas y se han podido solucionar otros problemas. El proyecto de las huertas parece funcionar a nivel social (recuperando zonas con problemas sociales y generando una fuente de ingresos), hay que mejorar la colocación en el mercado de los productos. Geológicamente han contribuido a un mejor manejo de aguas de escorrentía y que no se utilicen zonas de alta vulnerabilidad como botaderos de escombros y basura. Se han utilizado insumos como mapas de amenazas y aptitud geológica para ir cambiando en uso del suelo en diferentes sitios de los proyecto y así disminuir la exposición de poblados en zonas de alta riesgo. Figura 4. En la fotografía se muestra la huerta de la Comuna 8 Barrio Llanaditas. Este sitio era un lugar donde se depositaban escombros y basura, de alta pendiente. Con el sistema de terrazas se ha podido disminuir la escorrentía y erosión en el sitio. Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming The Neighborhood Approach ANNEX Support Documents Disaster Risk Assessment Modeling Table of Contents Disaster Risk Assessment—Modeling Deliverable 1 - Seismic Risk Assessment for the eight projects (AAL & PML) Deliverable 2 - Hurricane Risk for Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur (Haiti) Landslide Risk for Independencia (Perú), Medellín (Colombia), Mixco (Guatemala) and Tegucigalpa (Honduras) (AAL & PML) Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) Consulting Agreement No.800006973-07 Deliverable 1 Prepared for: February 2018 Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) i Introduction Risk identification is the first step on a comprehensive disaster risk management scheme. Catastrophic risk due to natural hazards should be considered in a prospective way quantifying the damages and losses before the real event occurs and for that task it is necessary to consider events that have not yet occurred. Since there are uncertainties related to when and where the next hazardous event will happen, how severe will it be and how can its physical effects affect the exposed assets, it is important to adopt a probabilistic approach that consider those uncertainties and propagate them through the damage and loss calculation process following a rigorous methodology. With few exceptions, only limited information is available about catastrophic events that occurred in the past. Even less is known about events that will occur in the future. When considering the possibility of highly destructive events occurring in the future, any risk analysis should use probabilistic analytical models that allow for available historical information to be used in predicting potential catastrophic consequences. The risk evaluation of extreme events should follow a prospective focus, thus anticipating the rates of occurrences of events of different magnitudes, and the consequences that will be associated with each event. Such an evaluation must consider the uncertainties that arise when estimating the severity and frequency of these events. This report summarizes the results obtained for earthquake risk at the 8 projects considered for disaster risk assessment. It is worth noting that this is an ongoing work, which means that the results here contained are not only partial, but the first step on the diagnosis. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) 1 1 Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur, Haití 1.1 Location The city of Port-de-Paix is located on the north coast of Haiti on the Atlantic Ocean, in front of Tortue island and belongs to the Northwest department of the country. For this city, three neighborhoods were selected: Ti Port-de-Paix, Djerilon and Démélus, the first two located on the coast. The city of Anse-à-Foleur also belongs to the Northwest department of the country and is located on the coast, east from Port-de-Paix. FIGURE 1. LOCATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN PORT-DE-PAIX AND ANSE-À-FOLEUR 1.2 Seismic Hazard Seismic hazard curves were obtained for each neighborhood in the cities of Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur based on the probabilistic seismic hazard assessment from the Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2015. The curves are presented in terms of the return period as a function of the peak ground acceleration, PGA. Given the proximity of the neighborhoods no substantial difference is observed in the hazard curves shown in Figure 2, where the acceleration for the three neighborhoods in Port-de-Paix is 116 cm/s² and 119 cm/s² in Anse-à-Foleur, for a 1500-year return period. According to these numbers, both cities have the lowest seismic hazard from all the 8 projects. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 2. SEISMIC HAZARD CURVES FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN PORT-DE-PAIX 1.3 Exposure To perform a probabilistic risk analysis, it is required to identify and characterize the exposed assets susceptible to suffer damage and losses due to the considered natural hazards. In this case the assets refer to the residential buildings susceptible to suffer damage due to possible earthquakes. Based on the information received a procedure to determine the inventory of exposed elements was developed and is further explained on Annex 1. Inventory of Exposed Elements The total constructed area was computed for each neighborhood from the plant area obtained from satellite imagery and from the average number of stories of buildings determined with information from the 2003 General Population Census1 which reports that most of the dwellings . The economic replacement value for each constructed square meter was established as the official minimum monthly wage for 2018 which is USD $114.34 in Haiti2 using the dollar exchange rate as of February 7, 2018. The following table summarizes the data obtained for Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur. 1 http://www.ihsi.ht/rgph_resultat_ensemble_b.htm 2 Average from the lowest income groups (Article 3 and 4) http://www.sgcm.gouv.ht/wp￾content/uploads/2017/03/Moniteur-28-juillet-2017-Salaire-minimum.pdf 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 Return period [years] Anse-à-Foleur Démélus Djerilon Ti Port-de-Paix Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) TABLE 1. GENERAL EXPOSURE DATA FOR PORT-DE-PAIX AND ANSE-À-FOLEUR The construction classes assigned are unreinforced concrete block masonry and mud walls. The information from the Population Census was also used which reports that the most common material used on the walls on urban areas such as Port-de-Paix is cement or block masonry and on rural areas such as Anse-à-Foleur earth has a participation of 30%. In the case of Anse-à-Foleur 30% of the dwellings were modelled as mud walls and the other 70% as unreinforced masonry. 1.4 Risk Assessment The Table 2 summarizes the results of the seismic risk assessment. The studied neighborhoods in Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur have an average annual loss of 8,900 Million US Dollar which corresponds to a relative loss of 0.55 TABLE 2. SEISMIC RISK RESULTS FOR PORT-DE-PAIX AND ANSE-À-FOLEUR The Loss Exceedance Curve and Probable Maximum Loss Curve and the Loss Exceedance Probability Curve for different exposure timeframes are presented below. Exposed Value USD Million 16,169,433.00 USD Million 8,900.93 0.55 Return Period years USD Million % 20 $19,220.17 0.12 50 $57,131.68 0.35 100 $121,041.42 0.75 250 $276,131.54 1.71 500 $465,902.63 2.88 1000 $756,996.13 4.68 1500 $1,014,633.93 6.28 Risk Results Average Anual Loss PML Loss Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 3. LOSS EXCEEDANCE CURVE FOR PORT-DE-PAIX AND ANSE-À-FOLEUR FIGURE 4. PROBABLE MAXIMUM LOSS CURVE FOR PORT-DE-PAIX AND ANSE-À-FOLEUR TR 20 PML(0.2%) TR 50 PML(0.4%) TR 100 PML(0.8%) TR250 PML(1.8%) TR500 PML(2.9%) TR1000 PML(4.7%) TR1500 PML(6.3%) 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 Loss [USD Million] TR 20 PML(0.2%) TR 50 PML(0.4%) TR 100 PML(0.8%) TR250 PML(1.8%) TR500 PML(2.9%) TR1000 PML(4.7%) TR1500 PML(6.3%) 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 Return period [years] Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 5. LOSS EXCEEDANCE PROBABILITY CURVE FOR DIFFERENT EXPOSURE TIMEFRAMES FOR PORT-DE-PAIX AND ANSE-À-FOLEUR 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 Loss [USD Million] Exposure 50 Exposure 100 Exposure 200 Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) 2 Independencia, Perú 2.1 Location The District of Independencia corresponds to one of the 43 districts that are part of the Lima Province in Perú. It is located in the northern area of Metropolitan Lima and is bounded on the north by the District of Comas, on the east by the District of San Juan de Lurigancho, on the south by the District of Rímac and the District of San Martín de Porres and on the west by the District of Los Olivos. For this District, two neighborhoods were selected, Villa El Ángel and Volante II & III. FIGURE 6. LOCATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN INDEPENDENCIA 2.2 Seismic Hazard Seismic hazard curves were obtained for each neighborhood in the District of Independencia based on the probabilistic seismic hazard assessment from the Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2015. The curves are presented in terms of the return period as a function of the peak ground acceleration, PGA. Given the proximity of the neighborhoods no substantial difference is observed in the hazard curves shown in Figure 7, where the acceleration for the two neighborhoods in Independencia is 252 cm/s² for a 1500-year return period. According to these numbers, the three cities from Peru have the third highest seismic hazard from all the 8 projects. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 7. SEISMIC HAZARD CURVES FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN INDEPENDENCIA 2.3 Exposure To perform a probabilistic risk analysis, it is required to identify and characterize the exposed assets susceptible to suffer damage and losses due to the considered natural hazards. In this case the assets refer to the residential buildings susceptible to suffer damage due to possible earthquakes. Based on the information received a procedure to determine the inventory of exposed elements was developed and is further explained on Annex 1. Inventory of Exposed Elements The total constructed area was computed for each neighborhood from the plant area obtained from satellite imagery and from the average number of stories of buildings determined with information from online available images and from the Google Street View tool. The economic replacement value for each constructed square meter was established as the official minimum monthly wage for 2018 which is USD $262.35 in Perú3 using the dollar exchange rate as of February 7, 2018. The following table summarizes the data obtained for Independencia. 3 https://www.gob.pe/476-valor-remuneracion-minima-vital 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 Return period [years] Villa El Ángel Volante II & III Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) TABLE 3. GENERAL EXPOSURE DATA FOR INDEPENDENCIA In this case one construction class was assigned to all the dwellings on the neighborhoods since it was determined from online available images and the Google Street View tool that the most common system used is unreinforced concrete block masonry. 2.4 Risk Assessment The Table 4 summarizes the results of the seismic risk assessment. The studied neighborhoods in Independencia have an average annual loss of 26,825 Million US Dollar which corresponds to a relative loss of 1.26 TABLE 4. SEISMIC RISK RESULTS FOR INDEPENDENCIA The Loss Exceedance Curve and Probable Maximum Loss Curve and the Loss Exceedance Probability Curve for different exposure timeframes are presented below. Exposed Value USD Million 21,214,537.00 USD Million 26,824.53 1.26 Return Period years USD Million % 20 $29,675.10 0.14 50 $90,978.59 0.43 100 $211,815.27 1.00 250 $708,331.41 3.34 500 $1,747,933.37 8.24 1000 $3,895,816.22 18.36 1500 $5,719,570.99 26.96 Risk Results Average Anual Loss PML Loss Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 8. LOSS EXCEEDANCE CURVE FOR INDEPENDENCIA FIGURE 9. PROBABLE MAXIMUM LOSS CURVE FOR INDEPENDENCIA TR 20 PML(0.2%) TR 50 PML(0.5%) TR 100 PML(1%) TR250 PML(3.4%) TR500 PML(8.3%) TR1000 PML(18.4%) TR1500 PML(27%) 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 02468 Loss [USD Million] TR 20 PML(0.2%) TR 50 PML(0.5%) TR 100 PML(1%) TR250 PML(3.4%) TR500 PML(8.3%) TR1000 PML(18.4%) TR1500 PML(27%) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 Return period [years] Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 10. LOSS EXCEEDANCE PROBABILITY CURVE FOR DIFFERENT EXPOSURE TIMEFRAMES FOR INDEPENDENCIA 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0 5 10 15 Loss [USD Million] Exposure 50 Exposure 100 Exposure 200 Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) 3 Carabayllo, Perú 3.1 Location The District of Carabayllo corresponds to one of the 43 districts that are part of the Lima Province in Perú. It is located in the Cono Norte area of the province. It borders to the north and east with the Canta Province in the Lima Region, the south with the Comas district and the San Juan de Lurigancho district, and to the west with the Puente Piedra and Ancón districts. For this district, the neighborhood selected corresponds to El Progreso. FIGURE 11. LOCATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN CARABAYLLO 3.2 Seismic Hazard Seismic hazard curves were obtained for each neighborhood in the city of Carabayllo based on the probabilistic seismic hazard assessment from the Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2015. The curves are presented in terms of the return period as a function of the peak ground acceleration, PGA. Given the proximity of the neighborhoods no substantial difference is observed in the hazard curves shown in Figure 12, where the acceleration for the six groups of El Progreso neighborhood in Carabayllo is 252 cm/s² for a 1500-year return period. According to these numbers, the three cities from Peru have the third highest seismic hazard from all the 8 projects. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 12. SEISMIC HAZARD CURVES FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN CARABAYLLO 3.3 Exposure To perform a probabilistic risk analysis, it is required to identify and characterize the exposed assets susceptible to suffer damage and losses due to the considered natural hazards. In this case the assets refer to the residential buildings susceptible to suffer damage due to possible earthquakes. Based on the information received a procedure to determine the inventory of exposed elements was developed and is further explained on Annex 1. Inventory of Exposed Elements The total constructed area was computed for each neighborhood from the plant area obtained from satellite imagery and from the average number of stories of buildings determined with information from online available images and from the Google Street View tool. The economic replacement value for each constructed square meter was established as the official minimum monthly wage for 2018 which is USD $262.35 in Perú4 using the dollar exchange rate as of February 7, 2018. The following table summarizes the data obtained for Carabayllo. 4 https://www.gob.pe/476-valor-remuneracion-minima-vital 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 Return period [years] El Progreso Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) TABLE 5. GENERAL EXPOSURE DATA FOR CARABAYLLO In this case one construction class was assigned to all the dwellings on the neighborhoods since it was determined from online available images and the Google Street View tool that the most common system used is unreinforced concrete block masonry. 3.4 Risk Assessment The Table 6 summarizes the results of the seismic risk assessment. The studied neighborhoods in Carabayllo have an average annual loss of 126,147 Million US Dollar which corresponds to a TABLE 6. SEISMIC RISK RESULTS FOR CARABAYLLO The Loss Exceedance Curve and Probable Maximum Loss Curve and the Loss Exceedance Probability Curve for different exposure timeframes are presented below. Exposed Value USD Million 111,664,636.00 USD Million 126,146.57 1.13 Return Period years USD Million % 20 $168,165.97 0.15 50 $482,227.63 0.43 100 $1,124,926.65 1.01 250 $3,666,040.88 3.28 500 $8,075,573.82 7.23 1000 $15,877,702.39 14.22 1500 $22,167,957.55 19.85 Risk Results Average Anual Loss PML Loss Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 13. LOSS EXCEEDANCE CURVE FOR CARABAYLLO FIGURE 14. PROBABLE MAXIMUM LOSS CURVE FOR CARABAYLLO TR 20 PML(0.2%) TR 50 PML(0.5%) TR 100 PML(1.1%) TR250 PML(3.3%) TR500 PML(7.3%) TR1000 PML(14.3%) TR1500 PML(19.9%) 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 0 5 10 15 20 25 Loss [USD Million] TR 20 PML(0.2%) TR 50 PML(0.5%) TR 100 PML(1.1%) TR250 PML(3.3%) TR500 PML(7.3%) TR1000 PML(14.3%) TR1500 PML(19.9%) 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 Return period [years] Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 15. LOSS EXCEEDANCE PROBABILITY CURVE FOR DIFFERENT EXPOSURE TIMEFRAMES FOR CARABAYLLO 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0 5 10 15 20 25 Loss [USD Million] Exposure 50 Exposure 100 Exposure 200 Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) 4 Rimac, Perú 4.1 Location The District of Rimac corresponds to one of the 43 districts that are part of the Lima Province in Perú. It is located in the north of downtown Lima and bordered on the north by the district of Independencia, on the east by the district of San Juan de Lurigancho, on the south by the Cercado de Lima and on the west by the district of San Martín de Porres. For this District, two neighborhoods were selected, Flor de Amancaes and Leticia. FIGURE 16. LOCATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN RIMAC 4.2 Seismic Hazard Seismic hazard curves were obtained for each neighborhood in the city of Rimac based on the probabilistic seismic hazard assessment from the Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2015. The curves are presented in terms of the return period as a function of the peak ground acceleration, PGA. Given the proximity of the neighborhoods no substantial difference is observed in the hazard curves shown in Figure 17, where the acceleration for the two neighborhoods in Rimac is 252 cm/s² for a 1500-year return period. According to these numbers, the three cities from Peru have the third highest seismic hazard from all the 8 projects. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 17. SEISMIC HAZARD CURVES FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN RIMAC 4.3 Exposure To perform a probabilistic risk analysis, it is required to identify and characterize the exposed assets susceptible to suffer damage and losses due to the considered natural hazards. In this case the assets refer to the residential buildings susceptible to suffer damage due to possible earthquakes. Based on the information received a procedure to determine the inventory of exposed elements was developed and is further explained on Annex 1. Inventory of Exposed Elements The total constructed area was computed for each neighborhood from the plant area obtained from satellite imagery and from the average number of stories of buildings determined with information from online available images and from the Google Street View tool. The economic replacement value for each constructed square meter was established as the official minimum monthly wage for 2018 which is USD $262.35 in Perú5 using the dollar exchange rate as of February 7, 2018. The following table summarizes the data obtained for Rimac. 5 https://www.gob.pe/476-valor-remuneracion-minima-vital 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 Return period [years] Leticia Flor de Amancaes Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) TABLE 7. GENERAL EXPOSURE DATA FOR RIMAC In this case one construction class was assigned to all the dwellings on the neighborhoods since it was determined from online available images and the Google Street View tool that the most common system used is unreinforced concrete block masonry. 4.4 Risk Assessment The Table 8 summarizes the results of the seismic risk assessment. The studied neighborhoods in Rimac have an average annual loss of 148,977 Million US Dollar which corresponds to a relative TABLE 8. SEISMIC RISK RESULTS FOR RIMAC The Loss Exceedance Curve and Probable Maximum Loss Curve and the Loss Exceedance Probability Curve for different exposure timeframes are presented below. Exposed Value USD Million 117,469,758.00 USD Million 148,977.18 1.27 Return Period years USD Million % 20 $170,802.09 0.15 50 $518,913.38 0.44 100 $1,215,604.77 1.03 250 $4,073,400.73 3.47 500 $9,909,870.48 8.44 1000 $21,438,072.79 18.25 1500 $31,010,634.81 26.40 Risk Results Average Anual Loss PML Loss Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 18. LOSS EXCEEDANCE CURVE FOR RIMAC FIGURE 19. PROBABLE MAXIMUM LOSS CURVE FOR RIMAC TR 20 PML(0.2%) TR 50 PML(0.5%) TR 100 PML(1.1%) TR250 PML(3.5%) TR500 PML(8.5%) TR1000 PML(18.3%) TR1500 PML(26.4%) 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 0 10 20 30 40 Loss [USD Million] TR 20 PML(0.2%) TR 50 PML(0.5%) TR 100 PML(1.1%) TR250 PML(3.5%) TR500 PML(8.5%) TR1000 PML(18.3%) TR1500 PML(26.4%) 0 10 20 30 40 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Return period [years] Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 20. LOSS EXCEEDANCE PROBABILITY CURVE FOR DIFFERENT EXPOSURE TIMEFRAMES FOR RIMAC 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0 20 40 60 80 Loss [USD Million] Exposure 50 Exposure 100 Exposure 200 Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) 5 Mixco, Guatemala 5.1 Location Mixco is a city located in the Guatemala department, in the west end of the capital city with which a direct commercial activity is developed. It limits to the north with San Pedro Ayampuc, San Juan Sacatepéquez and Chinautla; to the south with Villa Nueva; to the east with the city of Guatemala; and to the west with the department of Sacatepéquez. For this city, two neighborhoods were selected, Vistas de la Comunidad and Cipresales. FIGURE 21. LOCATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN MIXCO 5.2 Seismic Hazard Seismic hazard curves were obtained for each neighborhood in the city of Mixco based on the probabilistic seismic hazard assessment from the Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2015. The curves are presented in terms of the return period as a function of the peak ground acceleration, PGA. Given the proximity of the neighborhoods no substantial difference is observed in the hazard curves shown in Figure 17, where the acceleration for the two neighborhoods in Mixco is 415 cm/s² for a 1500-year return period. According to these numbers, the city has the highest seismic hazard from all the 8 projects. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 22. SEISMIC HAZARD CURVES FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN MIXCO 5.3 Exposure To perform a probabilistic risk analysis, it is required to identify and characterize the exposed assets susceptible to suffer damage and losses due to the considered natural hazards. In this case the assets refer to the residential buildings susceptible to suffer damage due to possible earthquakes. Based on the information received a procedure to determine the inventory of exposed elements was developed and is further explained on Annex 1. Inventory of Exposed Elements The total constructed area was computed for each neighborhood from the plant area obtained from satellite imagery and from the average number of stories of buildings determined with information from online available images. The economic replacement value for each constructed square meter was established as the official minimum monthly wage for 2018 which is USD $357.18 in Guatemala6 using the dollar exchange rate as of February 7, 2018. The following table summarizes the data obtained for Mixco. 6 Average from the values available at http://mintrabajo.gob.gt/index.php/salariominimo.html 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 Return period [years] Cipresales Vistas de la Comunidad Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) TABLE 9. GENERAL EXPOSURE DATA FOR MIXCO In this case one construction class was assigned to all the dwellings on the neighborhoods since it was determined from online available images that the most common system used is unreinforced concrete block masonry. 5.4 Risk Assessment The Table 10 summarizes the results of the seismic risk assessment. The studied neighborhoods in Mixco have an average annual loss of 61,122 Million US Dollar which corresponds to a relative loss of 3.57 . TABLE 10. SEISMIC RISK RESULTS FOR MIXCO The Loss Exceedance Curve and Probable Maximum Loss Curve and the Loss Exceedance Probability Curve for different exposure timeframes are presented below. Exposed Value USD Million 17,102,603.00 USD Million 61,121.89 3.57 Return Period years USD Million % 20 $66,840.42 0.39 50 $225,361.82 1.32 100 $636,897.29 3.72 250 $2,590,000.00 15.14 500 $5,730,932.00 33.51 1000 $8,891,225.95 51.99 1500 $10,560,676.84 61.75 Risk Results Average Anual Loss PML Loss Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 23. LOSS EXCEEDANCE CURVE FOR MIXCO FIGURE 24. PROBABLE MAXIMUM LOSS CURVE FOR MIXCO TR 20 PML(0.4%) TR 50 PML(1.4%) TR 100 PML(3.8%) TR250 PML(15.2%) TR500 PML(33.6%) TR1000 PML(52%) TR1500 PML(61.8%) 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Loss [USD Million] TR 20 PML(0.4%) TR 50 PML(1.4%) TR 100 PML(3.8%) TR250 PML(15.2%) TR500 PML(33.6%) TR1000 PML(52%) TR1500 PML(61.8%) 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 0 500 1000 1500 Return period [years] Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 25. LOSS EXCEEDANCE PROBABILITY CURVE FOR DIFFERENT EXPOSURE TIMEFRAMES FOR MIXCO 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 Loss [USD Million] Exposure 50 Exposure 100 Exposure 200 Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) 6 Medellín, Colombia 6.1 Location Medellín is one of the main cities in Colombia and the capital of the department of Antioquia, it is located in the central region of the Andes Mountains in South America. Their metropolitan area is the second-largest urban agglomeration in Colombia in terms of population and economy. For this city, four neighborhoods were selected, Santo Domingo Savio, El Compromiso, Llanaditas and El Pinal. FIGURE 26. LOCATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN MEDELLIN 6.2 Seismic Hazard Seismic hazard curves were obtained for each neighborhood in the city of Medellin based on the probabilistic seismic hazard assessment from the Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2015. The curves are presented in terms of the return period as a function of the peak ground acceleration, PGA. There is a difference observed in the hazard curves shown in Figure 17 because of the location of the neighborhoods, where the acceleration for three of the neighborhoods in Medellin is 363 cm/s² and for the neighborhood of El Pinal is lower at 249 cm/s² for a 1500-year return period. According to these numbers, the neighborhoods of Llanaditas, Santo Domingo Savio and El Compromiso have the second highest seismic hazard from all the 8 projects. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 27. SEISMIC HAZARD CURVES FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN MEDELLIN 6.3 Exposure To perform a probabilistic risk analysis, it is required to identify and characterize the exposed assets susceptible to suffer damage and losses due to the considered natural hazards. In this case the assets refer to the residential buildings susceptible to suffer damage due to possible earthquakes. Based on the information received a procedure to determine the inventory of exposed elements was developed and is further explained on Annex 1. Inventory of Exposed Elements The total constructed area was computed for each neighborhood from the plant area obtained from satellite imagery and from the average number of stories of buildings determined with information from online available images and from the Google Street View tool. The economic replacement value for each constructed square meter was established as the official minimum monthly wage for 2018 which is USD $308 in Colombia using the dollar exchange rate as of February 7, 2018. The following table summarizes the data obtained for Medellin. TABLE 11. GENERAL EXPOSURE DATA FOR MEDELLIN 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 Return period [years] Llanaditas Santo Domingo Savio El Compromiso El Pinal Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) In this case one construction class was assigned to all the dwellings on the neighborhoods since it was determined from online available images and the Google Street View tool that the most common system used is unreinforced concrete block masonry. 6.4 Risk Assessment The Table 12 summarizes the results of the seismic risk assessment. The studied neighborhoods in Medellin have an average annual loss of 557,896 Million US Dollar which corresponds to a relative loss of 1.38 TABLE 12. SEISMIC RISK RESULTS FOR MEDELLIN The Loss Exceedance Curve and Probable Maximum Loss Curve and the Loss Exceedance Probability Curve for different exposure timeframes are presented below. Exposed Value USD Million 403,425,000.00 USD Million 557,895.62 1.38 Return Period years USD Million % 20 $467,595.07 0.12 50 $1,604,255.21 0.40 100 $4,461,897.86 1.11 250 $17,977,699.81 4.46 500 $48,830,259.85 12.10 1000 $103,206,661.13 25.58 1500 $138,942,544.28 34.44 Risk Results Average Anual Loss PML Loss Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 28. LOSS EXCEEDANCE CURVE FOR MEDELLIN FIGURE 29. PROBABLE MAXIMUM LOSS CURVE FOR MEDELLIN TR 20 PML(0.2%) TR 50 PML(0.4%) TR 100 PML(1.2%) TR250 PML(4.5%) TR500 PML(12.2%) TR1000 PML(25.6%) TR1500 PML(34.5%) 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 0 50 100 150 200 Loss [USD Million] TR 20 PML(0.2%) TR 50 PML(0.4%) TR 100 PML(1.2%) TR250 PML(4.5%) TR500 PML(12.2%) TR1000 PML(25.6%) TR1500 PML(34.5%) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 Return period [years] Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 30. LOSS EXCEEDANCE PROBABILITY CURVE FOR DIFFERENT EXPOSURE TIMEFRAMES FOR MEDELLIN 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0 100 200 300 Loss [USD Million] Exposure 50 Exposure 100 Exposure 200 Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) 7 Portmore, Jamaica 7.1 Location Portmore is a large coastal town in southern Jamaica, corresponds to one of the island's most densely populated zones. For this town, three neighborhoods were selected, Gregory Park, New Land and Naggo Head. FIGURE 31. LOCATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN PORTMORE 7.2 Seismic Hazard Seismic hazard curves were obtained for each neighborhood in the city of Portmore based on the probabilistic seismic hazard assessment from the Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2015. The curves are presented in terms of the return period as a function of the peak ground acceleration, PGA. Given the proximity of the neighborhoods no substantial difference is observed in the hazard curves shown in Figure 32, where the acceleration for all studied neighborhoods in Portmore is 116 cm/s², for a 1500-year return period. According to these numbers, the city has the fourth lowest seismic hazard from all the 8 projects. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 32. SEISMIC HAZARD CURVES FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN PORTMORE 7.3 Exposure To perform a probabilistic risk analysis, it is required to identify and characterize the exposed assets susceptible to suffer damage and losses due to the considered natural hazards. In this case the assets refer to the residential buildings susceptible to suffer damage due to possible earthquakes. Based on the information received a procedure to determine the inventory of exposed elements was developed and is further explained on Annex 1. Inventory of Exposed Elements The total constructed area was computed for each neighborhood from the plant area obtained from satellite imagery and from the average number of stories of buildings determined with information from online available images. The economic replacement value for each constructed square meter was established as the official minimum monthly wage for 2018 which is USD $198.37 in Jamaica 7 using the dollar exchange rate as of February 7, 2018. The following table summarizes the data obtained for Portmore. 7 http://jis.gov.jm/minimum-wage-rates-effective-march-1/ 0 50 100 150 200 250 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 Return period [years] New Land Naggo Head Gregory Park Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) TABLE 13. GENERAL EXPOSURE DATA FOR PORTMORE The construction classes assigned are unreinforced concrete block masonry and wood. The information from the 2011 Census of Population and Housing8 reports that the most common material used on the outer walls on the parish of St. Catherine where the city is located is concrete and blocks followed by wood. In the case of Portmore 30% of the dwellings were modelled as wood and the other 70% as unreinforced masonry. 7.4 Risk Assessment The Table 14 summarizes the results of the seismic risk assessment. The studied neighborhoods in Portmore have an average annual loss of 65,985 Million US Dollar which corresponds to a TABLE 14. SEISMIC RISK RESULTS FOR PORTMORE The Loss Exceedance Curve and Probable Maximum Loss Curve and the Loss Exceedance Probability Curve for different exposure timeframes are presented below. 8 http://statinja.gov.jm/Census/PopCensus/2011%20Census%20of%20Population%20and%20Housing%20D.pdf Exposed Value USD Million 206,865,560.00 USD Million 65,984.86 0.32 Return Period years USD Million % 20 $51,246.23 0.02 50 $135,512.84 0.07 100 $412,202.69 0.20 250 $2,000,906.93 0.97 500 $5,926,964.45 2.87 1000 $13,425,338.57 6.49 1500 $19,746,010.98 9.55 Risk Results Average Anual Loss PML Loss Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 33. LOSS EXCEEDANCE CURVE FOR PORTMORE FIGURE 34. PROBABLE MAXIMUM LOSS CURVE FOR PORTMORE TR 20 PML(0.1%) TR 50 PML(0.1%) TR 100 PML(0.2%) TR250 PML(1%) TR500 PML(2.9%) TR1000 PML(6.5%) TR1500 PML(9.6%) 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 0 5 10 15 20 25 Loss [USD Million] TR 20 PML(0.1%) TR 50 PML(0.1%) TR 100 PML(0.2%) TR250 PML(1%) TR500 PML(2.9%) TR1000 PML(6.5%) TR1500 PML(9.6%) 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 0 500 1000 1500 Return period [years] Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 35. LOSS EXCEEDANCE PROBABILITY CURVE FOR DIFFERENT EXPOSURE TIMEFRAMES FOR PORTMORE 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 Loss [USD Million] Exposure 50 Exposure 100 Exposure 200 Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) 8 Tegucigalpa, Honduras 8.1 Location Tegucigalpa is the capital and largest city of Honduras, the metropolitan area of Tegucigalpa and its twin city Comayagüela are located in a valley surrounded by mountains in the central south mountainous region of Honduras. For this city, three neighborhoods were selected, José Ángel Ulloa, José Arturo Duarte y Nueva Providencia. FIGURE 36. LOCATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN TEGUCIGALPA 8.2 Seismic Hazard Seismic hazard curves were obtained for each neighborhood in the city of Tegucigalpa based on the probabilistic seismic hazard assessment from the Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2015. The curves are presented in terms of the return period as a function of the peak ground acceleration, PGA. There is a difference observed in the hazard curves shown in Figure 37, where the acceleration for two of the neighborhoods in Tegucigalpa is 210 cm/s² and for the neighborhood of Nueva Providencia is lower at 159 cm/s² for a 1500-year return period. According to these numbers, this last neighborhood has the third lowest seismic hazard from all the 8 projects. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 37. SEISMIC HAZARD CURVES FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN TEGUCIGALPA 8.3 Exposure To perform a probabilistic risk analysis, it is required to identify and characterize the exposed assets susceptible to suffer damage and losses due to the considered natural hazards. In this case the assets refer to the residential buildings susceptible to suffer damage due to possible earthquakes. Based on the information received a procedure to determine the inventory of exposed elements was developed and is further explained on Annex 1. Inventory of Exposed Elements The total constructed area was computed for each neighborhood from the plant area obtained from satellite imagery and from the average number of stories of buildings determined with information from online available images. The economic replacement value for each constructed square meter was established as the official minimum monthly wage for 2018 which is USD $395.48 in Honduras9 using the dollar exchange rate as of February 7, 2018. The following table summarizes the data obtained for Tegucigalpa. 9 Average from the construction and m industry salaries http://www.trabajo.gob.hn/tabla-de-salario￾minimo-2018/ 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 Return period [years] José Angel Ulloa José Arturo Duarte Nueva Providencia Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) TABLE 15. GENERAL EXPOSURE DATA FOR TEGUCIGALPA In this case one construction class was assigned to all the dwellings on the neighborhoods since it was determined from online available images that the most common system used is unreinforced concrete block masonry. 8.4 Risk Assessment The Table 16 summarizes the results of the seismic risk assessment. The studied neighborhoods in Tegucigalpa have an average annual loss of 174,245 Million US Dollar which corresponds to a relative loss of 0.82 TABLE 16. SEISMIC RISK RESULTS FOR TEGUCIGALPA The Loss Exceedance Curve and Probable Maximum Loss Curve and the Loss Exceedance Probability Curve for different exposure timeframes are presented below. Exposed Value USD Million 211,353,121.00 USD Million 174,245.39 0.82 Return Period years USD Million % 20 $150,843.37 0.07 50 $319,524.48 0.15 100 $668,329.12 0.32 250 $1,753,251.96 0.83 500 $3,923,921.75 1.86 1000 $9,159,625.75 4.33 1500 $15,126,271.17 7.16 Risk Results Average Anual Loss PML Loss Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 38. LOSS EXCEEDANCE CURVE FOR TEGUCIGALPA FIGURE 39. PROBABLE MAXIMUM LOSS CURVE FOR TEGUCIGALPA TR 20 PML(0.1%) TR 50 PML(0.2%) TR 100 PML(0.4%) TR250 PML(0.9%) TR500 PML(1.9%) TR1000 PML(4.4%) TR1500 PML(7.2%) 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 0 5 10 15 20 Loss [USD Million] TR 20 PML(0.1%) TR 50 PML(0.2%) TR 100 PML(0.4%) TR250 PML(0.9%) TR500 PML(1.9%) TR1000 PML(4.4%) TR1500 PML(7.2%) 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 0 500 1000 1500 Return period [years] Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 40. LOSS EXCEEDANCE PROBABILITY CURVE FOR DIFFERENT EXPOSURE TIMEFRAMES FOR TEGUCIGALPA 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 Loss [USD Million] Exposure 50 Exposure 100 Exposure 200 Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) Annex 1. Inventory of Exposed Elements The exposed elements are essential in risk assessment, because they are the objects on which losses are evaluated, i.e., are the source of potential losses due to being exposed to a hazard and be susceptible of suffering damage. In mathematical terms, the exposed elements provide the maximum possible absolute value of the loss at their geographical location, as well as the summands of the probability density function of the loss of a hazard scenario. That is, they are the integrating element of hazard and vulnerability at each of their locations, and the integrator elements of the total losses for a given scenario. Its proper characterization is of great importance for the correct estimation of losses and once each element is characterized it needs to be appraised in economic terms (usually in monetary units). Also, the assignation of a vulnerability function is required. The database must include information related to the following topics: Location in terms of geographical coordinates Geometrical characterization of the asset through a shapefile (points, polylines or polygons). This information is mainly used for the data and results display. Replacement value of each asset Parameters that allows capturing the vulnerability characteristics that is specified through a vulnerability function. The vulnerability must consider the expected physical damage (direct losses) and/or in terms human impact as a function of the selected intensity for each considered hazard. Since it was not possible to obtain detailed cadastral register information for the neighborhoods, a survey was made of the inventory of exposed assets based on observations from satellite images and their interpretation. For each neighborhood an estimate of constructed plant area was obtained from polygons constructed over the satellite images. Figure 41 presents an image of the constructed city polygons, digitalized using the tool available on Google Earth. Each polygon is then subjected to a construction density also identified from the satellite images to account for roads, parks, and other areas that cannot be considered as constructed buildings. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 41. CONSTRUCTED PLANT AREA ON TEGUCIGALPA S NEIGHBORHOODS Furthermore, there is no information related to number of stories, construction systems, areas of construction, exposed values, construction dates or other data which are useful in determining economic, and structural exposure and vulnerability. To stablish the number of stories and construction classes on the neighborhoods the use of available images and the Google Street View tool was necessary complemented by population statistics, official indicators and other online information. Given the lack of individual information for each register, the assumption of the same number of stories and same construction type for the neighborhood was made with the exception in those cases where different information was available. This information, like any other approximated model of information, is open to improvement, and can be updated and cleaned up using intense fieldwork, or by having detailed property register information available. The quality and resolution of information in an exposure survey defines the reliability and resolution of the results of the risk analysis. With this information, the total constructed area was determined. Official information and published indicators allowed approximate economic values to be established, which in this case correspond to the official monthly minimum wage per constructed square meter. This value has been accepted as the replacement value for a constructed square meter in residential uses with a poor socioeconomic development, where usually no further information is available. Therefore, we proceeded to form a database for exposure of buildings, based on the procedures explained above. To summarize, for each project the total constructed area in the neighborhoods was determined (from the plant area, constructed density and number of stories), the total economic replacement value (from the price per square meter and the total constructed area) and lastly, a construction class that represents most of the buildings present. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) Consulting Agreement No.800006973-07 Deliverable 2 Prepared for: March 2018 Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) i Introduction Risk identification is the first step to a comprehensive disaster risk management scheme. Catastrophic risk due to natural hazards should be considered in a prospective way quantifying the damages and losses before the real event occurs and for that task it is necessary to consider events that have not yet occurred. Since there are uncertainties related to when and where the next hazardous event will happen, how severe will it be and how can its physical effects affect the exposed assets, it is important to adopt a probabilistic approach that consider those uncertainties and propagate them through the damage and loss calculation process following a rigorous methodology. With few exceptions, only limited information is available about catastrophic events that occurred in the past. Even less is known about events that will occur in the future. When considering the possibility of highly destructive events occurring in the future, any risk analysis should use probabilistic analytical models that allow for available historical information to be used in predicting potential catastrophic consequences. The risk evaluation of extreme events should follow a prospective approach, thus anticipating the rates of occurrences of events of different magnitudes, and the consequences that will be associated with each event. Such an evaluation must consider the uncertainties that arise when estimating the severity and frequency of these events. This report summarizes the results obtained for hurricane risk at Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur (Haití), and landslide risk at Independencia (Perú), Medellín (Colombia), Mixco (Guatemala) and Tegucigalpa (Honduras). It is worth noting that this is an ongoing work, which means that the results here contained are part of the final diagnosis. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) 1 1 Tropical Cyclone Risk Assessment 1.1 Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur, Haití 1.1.1 Location Being Costal cities in the Caribbean, Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur are susceptible to hurricanes. FIGURE 1. LOCATION OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN PORT-DE-PAIX AND ANSE-À-FOLEUR 1.1.2 Tropical Cyclone Wind Hazard Wind hazard curves were obtained for each neighborhood in the cities of Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur based on the probabilistic tropical cyclones wind hazard assessment from the Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction 2015. The curves are presented in terms of the wind speed for every return period. Given the proximity of the neighborhoods no substantial difference is observed in the hazard curves shown in Figure 2 for the three neighborhoods in Port-de-Paix where the expected wind speed is 179 km/h and lower in Anse-à-Foleur, where it is expected to be 167 km/h for a 250- year return period. The methodology used in tropical cyclone hazard modelling is further explained in Annex 1. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 2. WIND HAZARD CURVES FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN PORT-DE-PAIX 1.1.3 Exposure To perform a probabilistic risk analysis, it is required to identify and characterize the exposed assets susceptible to suffer damage and losses due to the considered natural hazards. In this case the assets refer to the residential buildings susceptible to suffer damage due to possible hurricanes. Based on the information received a procedure to determine the inventory of exposed elements was developed and is further explained on Annex 3. Inventory of Exposed Elements. The total constructed area was computed for each neighborhood from the plant area obtained from satellite imagery and from the average number of stories of buildings determined with information from the 2003 General Population Census1 which reports that most of the dwellings . The economic replacement value for each constructed square meter was established as the official minimum monthly wage for 2018 which is USD $114.34 in Haiti2 using the dollar exchange rate as of February 7, 2018. The following table summarizes the data obtained for Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur. 1 http://www.ihsi.ht/rgph_resultat_ensemble_b.htm 2 Average from the lowest income groups (Article 3 and 4) http://www.sgcm.gouv.ht/wp￾content/uploads/2017/03/Moniteur-28-juillet-2017-Salaire-minimum.pdf 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Return period [years] Anse-à-Foleur Démélus Djerilon Ti Port-de-Paix Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) TABLE 1. GENERAL EXPOSURE DATA FOR PORT-DE-PAIX AND ANSE-À-FOLEUR The construction classes assigned are unreinforced concrete block masonry and mud walls. The information from the Population Census was also used which reports that the most common material used on the walls on urban areas such as Port-de-Paix is cement or block masonry and on rural areas such as Anse-à-Foleur earth has a participation of 30%. In the case of Anse-à￾Foleur 30% of the dwellings were modelled as mud walls and the other 70% as unreinforced masonry. 1.1.4 Risk Assessment The Table 2 summarizes the results of the hurricane risk assessment. The studied neighborhoods in Port-de-Paix and Anse-à-Foleur have an average annual loss of 39,000 Million US Dollar which corresponds to a relative loss of 2.41 due to strong winds. TABLE 2. TROPICAL CYCLONE RISK RESULTS FOR PORT-DE-PAIX AND ANSE-À-FOLEUR The Loss Exceedance Curve and Probable Maximum Loss Curve and the Loss Exceedance Probability Curve for different exposure timeframes are presented below. Exposed Value USD Million 16,169,433.00 USD Million 39,042.38 2.41 Return Period years USD Million % 20 $115,604.00 0.71 50 $283,052.20 1.75 100 $1,073,073.35 6.64 250 $2,298,531.30 14.22 500 $3,299,242.25 20.40 1000 $4,275,657.79 26.44 1500 $4,577,036.35 28.31 Risk Results Average Anual Loss PML Loss Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 3. LOSS EXCEEDANCE CURVE FOR PORT-DE-PAIX AND ANSE-À-FOLEUR FIGURE 4. PROBABLE MAXIMUM LOSS CURVE FOR PORT-DE-PAIX AND ANSE-À-FOLEUR TR 20 PML(0.8%) TR 50 PML(1.8%) TR 100 PML(6.7%) TR250 PML(14.3%) TR500 PML(20.5%) TR1000 PML(26.5%) TR1500 PML(28.4%) 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 02468 Loss [USD Million] TR 20 PML(0.8%) TR 50 PML(1.8%) TR 100 PML(6.7%) TR250 PML(14.3%) TR500 PML(20.5%) TR1000 PML(26.5%) TR1500 PML(28.4%) 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 Return period [years] Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 5. LOSS EXCEEDANCE PROBABILITY CURVE FOR DIFFERENT EXPOSURE TIMEFRAMES FOR PORT-DE-PAIX AND ANSE-À-FOLEUR 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 Loss [USD Million] Exposure 50 Exposure 100 Exposure 200 Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) 2 Landslides Risk Assessment Landslides are one of the most recurrent natural hazards in several parts of the world. Even though the expected loss associated to the occurrence of a landslide is relatively small, compared to those expected for hazards of larger consequences such as earthquakes or hurricanes, their high recurrence makes them of great importance when managing risk, especially at regional or local scales. In this section we present the landslide hazard risk results for the neighborhoods studied in Independencia (Perú), Mixo (Guatemala), Medellin (Colombia) and Tegucigalpa (Honduras). 2.1 Independencia, Perú 2.1.1 Landslide Hazard The susceptibility map presented on the report sismo y lluvias intensas de los barrios El Volante II, El Volante III y Villa El Ángel del distrito de by CISMID, and received from FIU for this consultancy project, was used as an input to compute the landslide hazard of the area. For each susceptibility class a probability of occurrence of a landslide was assigned to later compute hazard with the use of different triggering factors. More on the methodology used is presented in Annex 2. Landslides Probabilistic Risk Assessment. The neighborhoods Volante II and III are located on areas with high and very high susceptibility of landslide occurrence, and Villa El Ángel is located mostly on areas with very high susceptibility but also on areas with high and moderate susceptibility of landslides. Figure 6 shows the susceptibility map. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 6. LANDSLIDE SUSCEPTIBILITY MAP FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN INDEPENDENCIA 2.1.2 Exposure To perform a probabilistic risk analysis, it is required to identify and characterize the exposed assets susceptible to suffer damage and losses due to the considered natural hazards. In this case the assets refer to the residential buildings susceptible to suffer damage due to possible landslides. Based on the information received a procedure to determine the inventory of exposed elements was developed and is further explained on Annex 3. Inventory of Exposed Elements. The total constructed area was computed for each neighborhood from the plant area obtained from satellite imagery and from the average number of stories of buildings determined with information from online available images and from the Google Street View tool. The economic replacement value for each constructed square meter was established as the official minimum monthly wage for 2018 which is USD $262.35 in Perú3 using the dollar exchange rate as of February 7, 2018. The following table summarizes the data obtained for Independencia. 3 https://www.gob.pe/476-valor-remuneracion-minima-vital Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) TABLE 3. GENERAL EXPOSURE DATA FOR INDEPENDENCIA For this report on landslide risk assessment additional steps were made to increase the detail of the exposed elements. A simulation of buildings around the neighborhoods was made to better model the impact suffered by landslides since this type of hazard given its nature is not homogeneous along the neighborhoods. In this case one construction class was assigned to all the dwellings on the neighborhoods since it was determined from online available images and the Google Street View tool that the most common system used is unreinforced concrete block masonry. 2.1.3 Risk Assessment The Table 4 summarizes the results of the landslide risk assessment. The studied neighborhoods in Independencia have an average annual loss of 21,639 Million US Dollar which corresponds to a relative loss of 1.02 TABLE 4. LANDSLIDE RISK RESULTS FOR INDEPENDENCIA The Loss Exceedance Curve and Probable Maximum Loss Curve and the Loss Exceedance Probability Curve for different exposure timeframes are presented below. Exposed Value USD Million 21,214,537.39 USD Million 21,638.83 1.02 Return Period years USD Million % 20 $253,958.33 1.20 50 $419,583.33 1.98 100 $525,583.33 2.48 250 $591,833.33 2.79 500 $613,916.67 2.89 1000 $624,958.33 2.95 1500 $628,138.33 2.96 Risk Results Average Anual Loss PML Loss Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 7. LOSS EXCEEDANCE CURVE FOR INDEPENDENCIA FIGURE 8. PROBABLE MAXIMUM LOSS CURVE FOR INDEPENDENCIA TR 20 PML(1.2%) TR 50 PML(2%) TR 100 PML(2.5%) TR250 PML(2.8%) TR500 PML(2.9%) TR1000 PML(3%) TR1500 PML(3%) 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 Loss [USD Million] TR 20 PML(1.2%) TR 50 PML(2%) TR 100 PML(2.5%) TR250 PML(2.8%) TR500 PML(2.9%) TR1000 PML(3%) TR1500 PML(3%) 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 Return period [years] Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 9. LOSS EXCEEDANCE PROBABILITY CURVE FOR DIFFERENT EXPOSURE TIMEFRAMES FOR INDEPENDENCIA 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 Loss [USD Million] Exposure 50 Exposure 100 Exposure 200 Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) 2.2 Mixco, Guatemala 2.2.1 Landslide Hazard Since there was not a susceptibility map available from the information received for this and adapted for landslides hazard purposes4. For each susceptibility class a probability of occurrence of a landslide was assigned to later compute hazard with the use of different triggering factors. More on the methodology used is presented in Annex 2. Landslides Probabilistic Risk Assessment. The neighborhoods Vistas de la Comunidad and Cripresales are located mostly on areas with moderate susceptibility of landslides although there are small areas with very high susceptibility present. Figure 10 shows the susceptibility map. FIGURE 10. LANDSLIDE SUSCEPTIBILITY MAP FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN MIXCO 2.2.2 Exposure To perform a probabilistic risk analysis, it is required to identify and characterize the exposed assets susceptible to suffer damage and losses due to the considered natural hazards. In this case the assets refer to the residential buildings susceptible to suffer damage due to possible landslides. 4 https://www.munimixco.gob.gt/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/ZONA-10.pdf Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) Based on the information received a procedure to determine the inventory of exposed elements was developed and is further explained on Annex 3. Inventory of Exposed Elements. The total constructed area was computed for each neighborhood from the plant area obtained from satellite imagery and from the average number of stories of buildings determined with information from online available images. The economic replacement value for each constructed square meter was established as the official minimum monthly wage for 2018 which is USD $357.18 in Guatemala5 using the dollar exchange rate as of February 7, 2018. The following table summarizes the data obtained for Mixco. TABLE 5. GENERAL EXPOSURE DATA FOR MIXCO For this report on landslide risk assessment additional steps were made to increase the detail of the exposed elements. A simulation of buildings around the neighborhoods was made to better model the impact suffered by landslides since this type of hazard given its nature is not homogeneous along the neighborhoods. In this case one construction class was assigned to all the dwellings on the neighborhoods since it was determined from online available images that the most common system used is unreinforced concrete block masonry. 2.2.3 Risk Assessment The Table 6 summarizes the results of the landslide risk assessment. The studied neighborhoods in Mixco have an average annual loss of 91,800 Million US Dollar which corresponds to a relative loss of 5.37 5 Average from the values available at http://mintrabajo.gob.gt/index.php/salariominimo.html Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) TABLE 6. LANDSLIDE RISK RESULTS FOR MIXCO The Loss Exceedance Curve and Probable Maximum Loss Curve and the Loss Exceedance Probability Curve for different exposure timeframes are presented below. FIGURE 11. LOSS EXCEEDANCE CURVE FOR MIXCO Exposed Value USD Million 17,102,602.67 USD Million 91,820.13 5.37 Return Period years USD Million % 20 $662,434.96 3.87 50 $1,060,894.64 6.20 100 $1,310,566.04 7.66 250 $1,659,159.28 9.70 500 $2,256,488.31 13.19 1000 $2,516,999.36 14.72 1500 $2,777,510.42 16.24 Risk Results Average Anual Loss PML Loss TR 20 PML(3.9%) TR 50 PML(6.3%) TR 100 PML(7.7%) TR250 PML(9.8%) TR500 PML(13.2%) TR1000 PML(14.8%) TR1500 PML(16.3%) 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 Loss [USD Million] Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 12. PROBABLE MAXIMUM LOSS CURVE FOR MIXCO FIGURE 13. LOSS EXCEEDANCE PROBABILITY CURVE FOR DIFFERENT EXPOSURE TIMEFRAMES FOR MIXCO TR 20 PML(3.9%) TR 50 PML(6.3%) TR 100 PML(7.7%) TR250 PML(9.8%) TR500 PML(13.2%) TR1000 PML(14.8%) TR1500 PML(16.3%) 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Return period [years] 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 Loss [USD Million] Exposure 50 Exposure 100 Exposure 200 Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) 2.3 Medellín, Colombia 2.3.1 Landslide Hazard The susceptibility map presented on the Revisión y Ajuste al Plan de Ordenamiento Territorial Medellín, 2014 by Departamento Administrativo de Planeación, and received from FIU for this consultancy project, was used as an input to compute the landslide hazard of the area. For each susceptibility class a probability of occurrence of a landslide was assigned to later compute hazard with the use of different triggering factors. More on the methodology used is presented in Annex 2. Landslides Probabilistic Risk Assessment. The neighborhoods Santo Domingo Savio and El Compromiso are located on areas with high, moderate and low susceptibility of landslide occurrence, and El Pinal and Llanaditas are located mostly on areas with moderate and low susceptibility and less on areas with high susceptibility of landslides. Figure 14 shows the susceptibility map. FIGURE 14. LANDSLIDE SUSCEPTIBILITY MAP FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN MEDELLIN 2.3.2 Exposure To perform a probabilistic risk analysis, it is required to identify and characterize the exposed assets susceptible to suffer damage and losses due to the considered natural hazards. In this case the assets refer to the residential buildings susceptible to suffer damage due to possible landslides. Based on the information received a procedure to determine the inventory of exposed elements was developed and is further explained on Annex 3. Inventory of Exposed Elements. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) The total constructed area was computed for each neighborhood from the plant area obtained from satellite imagery and from the average number of stories of buildings determined with information from online available images and from the Google Street View tool. The economic replacement value for each constructed square meter was established as the official minimum monthly wage for 2018 which is USD $308 in Colombia using the dollar exchange rate as of February 7, 2018. The following table summarizes the data obtained for Medellin. TABLE 7. GENERAL EXPOSURE DATA FOR MEDELLIN For this report on landslide risk assessment additional steps were made to increase the detail of the exposed elements. A simulation of buildings around the neighborhoods was made to better model the impact suffered by landslides since this type of hazard given its nature is not homogeneous along the neighborhoods. In this case one construction class was assigned to all the dwellings on the neighborhoods since it was determined from online available images and the Google Street View tool that the most common system used is unreinforced concrete block masonry. 2.3.3 Risk Assessment The Table 8 summarizes the results of the landslide risk assessment. The studied neighborhoods in Medellin have an average annual loss of 511,350 Million US Dollar which corresponds to a relative loss of 1.27 Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) TABLE 8. LANDSLIDE RISK RESULTS FOR MEDELLIN The Loss Exceedance Curve and Probable Maximum Loss Curve and the Loss Exceedance Probability Curve for different exposure timeframes are presented below. FIGURE 15. LOSS EXCEEDANCE CURVE FOR MEDELLIN Exposed Value USD Million 403,427,349.12 USD Million 511,357.88 1.27 Return Period years USD Million % 25 $4,803,519.91 1.19 50 $9,828,171.66 2.44 100 $13,920,908.37 3.45 250 $20,889,225.80 5.18 500 $26,312,861.50 6.52 1000 $38,305,219.33 9.49 1500 $46,010,244.67 11.40 Risk Results Average Anual Loss PML Loss TR 25 PML(1.2%) TR 50 PML(2.5%) TR 100 PML(3.5%) TR250 PML(5.2%) TR500 PML(6.6%) TR1000 PML(9.5%) TR1500 PML(11.5%) 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 0 20 40 60 80 100 Loss [USD Million] Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 16. PROBABLE MAXIMUM LOSS CURVE FOR MEDELLIN FIGURE 17. LOSS EXCEEDANCE PROBABILITY CURVE FOR DIFFERENT EXPOSURE TIMEFRAMES FOR MEDELLIN TR 25 PML(1.2%) TR 50 PML(2.5%) TR 100 PML(3.5%) TR250 PML(5.2%) TR500 PML(6.6%) TR1000 PML(9.5%) TR1500 PML(11.5%) 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Return period [years] 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 Loss [USD Million] Exposure 50 Exposure 100 Exposure 200 Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) 2.4 Tegucigalpa, Honduras 2.4.1 Landslide Hazard The susceptibility map presented on the report Geológico del Deslizamiento La Ulloa Caracterización de la susceptibilidad frente a movimientos de laderas by Instituto Hondureño de Ciencias de la Tierra, and received from FIU for this consultancy project, was used as an input to compute the landslide hazard of the area. For each susceptibility class a probability of occurrence of a landslide was assigned to later compute hazard with the use of different triggering factors. More on the methodology used is presented in Annex 2 Landslides Probabilistic Risk Assessment. The neighborhood Jose Angel Ulloa is located on areas ranging from low to very high susceptibility of landslides occurrence, Jose Arturo Duarte is located on areas ranging from very low to very high susceptibility whereas Nueva Providencia is mostly on areas with high susceptibility. Figure 18 shows the susceptibility map. FIGURE 18. LANDSLIDE SUSCEPTIBILITY MAP FOR THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN TEGUCIGALPA 2.4.2 Exposure To perform a probabilistic risk analysis, it is required to identify and characterize the exposed assets susceptible to suffer damage and losses due to the considered natural hazards. In this case the assets refer to the residential buildings susceptible to suffer damage due to possible landslides. Based on the information received a procedure to determine the inventory of exposed elements was developed and is further explained on Annex 3. Inventory of Exposed Elements. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) The total constructed area was computed for each neighborhood from the plant area obtained from satellite imagery and from the average number of stories of buildings determined with information from online available images. The economic replacement value for each constructed square meter was established as the official minimum monthly wage for 2018 which is USD $395.48 in Honduras6 using the dollar exchange rate as of February 7, 2018. The following table summarizes the data obtained for Tegucigalpa. TABLE 9. GENERAL EXPOSURE DATA FOR TEGUCIGALPA For this report on landslide risk assessment additional steps were made to increase the detail of the exposed elements. A simulation of buildings around the neighborhoods was made to better model the impact suffered by landslides since this type of hazard given its nature is not homogeneous along the neighborhoods. In this case one construction class was assigned to all the dwellings on the neighborhoods since it was determined from online available images that the most common system used is unreinforced concrete block masonry. 2.4.3 Risk Assessment The Table 10 summarizes the results of the landslide risk assessment. The studied neighborhoods in Tegucigalpa have an average annual loss of 196,000 Million US Dollar which corresponds to a relative loss of 0.93 6 Average from the construction and m http://www.trabajo.gob.hn/tabla-de-salario￾minimo-2018/ Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) TABLE 10. LANDSLIDE RISK RESULTS FOR TEGUCIGALPA The Loss Exceedance Curve and Probable Maximum Loss Curve and the Loss Exceedance Probability Curve for different exposure timeframes are presented below. FIGURE 19. LOSS EXCEEDANCE CURVE FOR TEGUCIGALPA Exposed Value USD Million 211,353,115.66 USD Million 196,000.00 0.93 Return Period years USD Million % 50 $4,809,031.29 2.28 100 $7,768,616.11 3.68 250 $11,195,058.95 5.30 500 $14,776,272.61 6.99 1000 $17,659,421.13 8.36 1500 $18,536,184.15 8.77 Risk Results Average Anual Loss PML Loss TR 50 PML(2.3%) TR 100 PML(3.7%) TR250 PML(5.3%) TR500 PML(7%) TR1000 PML(8.4%) TR1500 PML(8.8%) 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 0 5 10 15 20 25 Loss [USD Million] Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 20. PROBABLE MAXIMUM LOSS CURVE FOR TEGUCIGALPA FIGURE 21. LOSS EXCEEDANCE PROBABILITY CURVE FOR DIFFERENT EXPOSURE TIMEFRAMES FOR TEGUCIGALPA 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 Loss [USD Million] Exposure 50 Exposure 100 Exposure 200 Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) Annex 1. Probabilistic Hurricane Hazard Assessment This annex presents the probabilistic wind hazard assessment methodology for the Global Risk (GAR15). Methodological Approach Tropical cyclones are characterized as highly destructive disasters, with high frequencies of occurrence. The hazard modeling for tropical cyclones considers the effects related to the speed of the wind and rainfall intensity. The hazard model used here represents the maximum intensities associated with potential occurrence and pace of a tropical cyclone in a territory, using a statistical procedure known as disturbance, which allows us to create random trajectories that maintain the main characteristics of the previous trajectories. The hazard is thus represented as a set of stochastic events with average intensities and frequencies of occurrence compatible with the historical information available. The mathematical procedure for calculating wind speed is described below. Cyclone Tracks Perturbation For each historical cyclone, a set of one-hundred children tracks was generated following a bi￾dimensional Wiener process in which the historical track is artificially disturbed to create a new child track. The disturbing process is presented in Equation 3 for the longitude (X) coordinate of the track points. (EQ. 1) Where X(tk) is the longitude coordinate of a track point at instant tk, X(tk+1) is the longitude coordinate of a the next track point recorded at instant tk+1, Xk,k+1 is the known longitude delta between instant k and k+1, and e is random variable following a normal distribution with =0.0 and =0.5. An equivalent process must be performed simultaneously for the latitude (Y) coordinate. which means that each child track point will have the same central pressure and sustained wind speed as the original. Figure 22 shows the result of applying this perturbation process to the track of 1961 hurricane Hattie. The red thick line is the original track of Hattie, and the gray thin lines are 10 simulations of Hattie obtained by applying the bi-dimensional Wiener process. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 22. TRACK PERTURBATION PROCESS APPLIED TO HURRICANE HATTIE. Wind Hazard Modelling For each one of the children tracks, the wind field is calculated over a grid of variable resolution. As summarized by Vickery et al., (2009a), wind field modelling is a three-step process: 1. Given cyclone characteristics such as central pressure and radius to maximum wind (RMW), wind speed at gradient height is calculated. Gradient height is the altitude at which wind speed is completely unaffected by surface conditions. It is usually assumed to be equivalent to a mean wind speed. 2. From the wind speed at gradient height, a mean surface speed is calculated by applying an atmospheric boundary layer (BL) model. 3. Finally, the mean surface speed is modified by site-specific conditions, such as topographic amplification and surface roughness, and set to an averaging time using gust factors. There have been enormous advances in wind field modelling since the early 1970s when the first studies took place. There are several proposals in the literature to account for each one of the steps presented above. A complete description of the state of the art in wind field modelling can be found in Vickery et al. (2009a). Gradient Wind Field The gradient wind speed (VG) is calculated using the representation introduced by Holland (1980), in which VG is given as Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) (EQ. 2) where r is the observation distance (i.e. the distance from the calculation site to the center of the storm), B is the Holland parameter, P is the pressure gradient ( P = Pn-P0, where Pn is a nominal atmospheric pressure set to 100.5 KPa), is the density of the air, and f is the Coriolis force parameter, defined as (EQ. 3) where is the angular rotation speed of The Earth, and pressure P0, (EQ. 4) B parameter could be modeled as a function of a non-dimensional parameter, A, defined as (EQ. 5) (EQ. 6) where Rd is the air gas constant and Ts is the surface temperature of the sea (given in °K). Surface Wind Speed The wind speed at gradient height (VG) is modified to obtain the speed at surface level (10 meters above water or ground, v10) by means of an atmospheric boundary layer model. Vickery et al. (2009b) modeled the variation of the mean wind speed, u(z) with height z, in the cyclone boundary layer as (EQ. 7) where k is the von-Karman coefficient (k=0.4), u* us the friction velocity, z0 is the aerodynamic roughness length, and H* is the boundary layer height. Vickery et.al. (2009b) modeled H* as (EQ. 8) Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) where I is the inertial instability, defined by Kepert (2001) as (EQ. 9) When applying this model, the term G/ r is neglected. The friction velocity, u*, is defined as (EQ. 10) where is the surface wind shear stress, defined as (EQ. 11) where Cd is the drag coefficient, and u is the surface wind speed. Site-specific Modifiers of the Wind Speed Local conditions modify the final value of the wind speed at each geographical location. Within our wind model, the surface roughness and the topographic effect are considered as the main modifiers of the wind speed at local level. Surface Roughness Surface roughness is directly considered in the calculation of surface wind speed, by means of parameters z0 (aerodynamic roughness length) and Cd (drag coefficient). These parameters depend on the type of terrain over which wind speed is calculated. For our model, we use the central value of the ranges proposed by the WMO (WMO, 2010), for seven general classes of terrain (see Table 11). TABLE 11. TERRAIN CLASSES AND RANGES FOR PARAMETERS Z0 AND CD PROPOSED BY WMO. Terrain Class Terrain Description Roughness Lenght z (m) Surface Drag Coefficient C10 Sea Open sea conditions for all winds speeds, exposed tidal flats, featureless desrt, and tarmac. 0.0002-0.005 0.001-0.003 Smooth Featureless land with negligible vegetation such as wide beaches and cays, exposed reefs. 0.005-0.03 0.003-0.005 Open Nearshore water for winds >30m/s, level country with low grass, some isolated trees, airport surrounds. 0.03-0.10 0.005-0.008 Roughly Open Low crops, few trees, ocassional bushes. 0.10-0.25 0.008-0.012 Rough Lightly wooded country, high crops, centres of small towns. 0.25-0.5 0.012-0.019 Very Rough Mangrove forests, palm plantations, metropolitan areas. 0.5-1.0 0.019-0.032 Closed Mature regular rainforests, inner city buildings (CBD). 1.0-2.0 0.032-0.065 Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) Terrain Class Terrain Description Roughness Lenght z (m) Surface Drag Coefficient C10 Skimming Mixture of large high and low-rise buildings, irregular large forests with many clearings. >2.0 >0.065 Topographic effect The topographic effect is assessed by identifying wind exposed and protected areas on a Digital Elevation Model (DEM). The topographic effect factor (FT) is defined by the site topographic exposure, as: Low exposure. Corresponds to topographic depressions (i.e. protected site). FT = 0.8. Normal exposure. Corresponds to a flat site. FT = 1.0. High exposure. Corresponds to the top of hills (i.e. exposed site). FT = 1.2. For each node in the DEM, given its geographical location (X,Y), its exposure is quantified by searching all four cardinal directions (north, south, east, west). This search is bounded by setting the following limits: Nmax: Maximum horizontal distance at which the exposure will be evaluated with respect to a fixed location. m: Reference topographic slope, used to assess the site exposure with respect to the surrounding terrain. Then, for each site (X,Y) in the DEM, we seek for a site (K,L) until the following condition fails: (EQ. 12) where ZLim: is the height difference required between sites (X,Y) and (K,L) to obtain a slope m. If the site (K,L) exists, then the site (X,Y) is classified as of low exposure. This corresponds to a topographic depression (see Figure 23). If this condition is not fulfilled, then the mean topographic slope (mT) between site (X,Y) and site (K,L) is calculated as (EQ. 13) where D is the distance between site (X,Y) and site (K,L). If |mT| m, then site (X,Y) is classified as of normal exposure (see Figure 24). Finally, if |mT| >m then site (X,Y) is classified as of high topographic exposure (see Figure 25). Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 23. SCHEME OF A TOPOGRAPHIC PROFILE WITH SITES (X,Y) AND (K,L). SITE (X,Y) CLASSIFIED AS OF LOW TOPOGRAPHIC EXPOSURE. FIGURE 24. SCHEME OF A TOPOGRAPHIC PROFILE WITH SITES (X,Y) AND (K,L). SITE (X,Y) CLASSIFIED AS OF NORMAL TOPOGRAPHIC EXPOSURE. FIGURE 25. SCHEME OF A TOPOGRAPHIC PROFILE WITH SITES (X,Y) AND (K,L). SITE (X,Y) CLASSIFIED AS OF HIGH TOPOGRAPHIC EXPOSURE. D < Nmax Zlim K,L X,Y D < Nmax Zlim K,L X,Y D < Nmax Zlim K,L X,Y Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) Gust Factor The vulnerability models used in the risk calculation for GAR correlate loss to the wind speed for 3-seconds gusts. This means that we need to determine the speed for a different averaging time than the one produced by the basic wind field model. The gust factor formulation proposed in ESDU (1983) is used, given that, although it has been developed for extra-tropical storms, several authors conclude that there is no evidence to suggest that gust factors associated with tropical cyclones are different than those associated with extra-tropical storms (Sparks and Huang, 1999; Vickery and Skerlj, 2005). The gust factor K is defined in ESDU (1983) as (EQ. 14) where g is the peak factor and Iu is the turbulence intensity. The peak factor g is modeled as (EQ. 15) where is the target gust duration (3 seconds) and Tu = 3.13z0.2. The turbulence intensity Iu is calculated as (EQ. 16) where (EQ. 17) Finally, the mean wind speed at 10 meters above the water or ground is calculated as (EQ. 18) Wind fields are given in terms of the geographical distribution of v10.Therefore, for each historical cyclone one-hundred wind fields are calculated each corresponding to a simulation of the historical track. From the set of wind fields, the expected value and variance of the wind speed is calculated at each grid location, which respectively represent the first natural moment and second central moment of a Gamma probability distribution that defines the random nature of v10. Therefore, there is one probabilistic hazard scenario calculation for each historical cyclone. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) Annex 2. Landslides Probabilistic Risk Assessment A methodological approach for the probabilistic assessment of landslide risk is presented here. In this approach, landslide risk is computed rigorously in a manner that is consistent with nowadays risk assessment methodologies and allows the incorporation of landslide risk in multi hazard risk assessments, giving risk in the same probabilistic terms as for other natural hazards. Methodological Approach First, landslide hazard must be defined in probabilistic terms. Landslide hazard may be divided into two main components: landslide susceptibility and triggering factors. Landslide susceptibility measures the probability of occurrence of a landslide in a given location, based on the site intrinsic characteristics such as slope, soil conditions, vegetation coverage, and others. It d to an external action over the static conditions of the site. Triggering factors are usually measured as the minimum required seismic acceleration or accumulated rainfall necessary to create the sufficient instability for the site to slide. Landslide Hazard Landslide hazard is defined as the occurrence or not of a landslide in a particular location. In a numerical domain, landslide occurrence is classified as 1 and non-occurrence as 0. Following this definition, landslide hazard may be defined, in probabilistic terms, as a random variable having a Bernoulli distribution. Landslide susceptibility also follows the Bernoulli distribution. Susceptibility may be interpreted as the probability of occurrence, in static conditions, of a landslide. Given that it is a probabilistic landslides at a particular location, but only its probability of occurrence. Susceptibility depends on a great number of variables that may change from case to case, given some important particularities of each study region. This annex general approach to assess susceptibility. In order to use the proposed approach for risk assessment, susceptibility may be assessed in any way and following expert criteria; the only requirement is that it is expressed as a probability of occurrence given all the intrinsic parameters that may be considered as relevant for each case. Therefore, landslide susceptibility for any region corresponds to the spatial probability of landslide occurrence. For this case in particular, a set of susceptibility maps were available for each one of the projects. The maps classify every neighborhood in classes or areas according to the potential occurrence of mass movements. To each class a range of probability of occurrence was given and these values are shown in Table 12. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) TABLE 12. SPATIAL PROBABILITY OF OCCURRENCE FROM SUSCEPTIBILITY MAPS Susceptibility class Probability of occurrence [%] Very Low 0 10 Low 10 30 Moderate 30 60 High 60 90 Very High 90 100 The triggering factor also may be defined probabilistically. Both spatial and temporal probabilities are inherent to triggering factors. In this approach, triggering factors are considered as external hazards that influence the occurrence of landslides at each analysis location. The triggering hazards here considered are earthquakes and rainfall only. External hazards are here modeled as a set of stochastic events, each characterized by an annual occurrence frequency, that provide the spatial distribution of the statistical moments of the triggering intensity. Therefore, each triggering hazard event as the geographical distribution of the probability density functions of the hazard intensity. These are continuous probability distributions. Finally, a threshold intensity value must be defined for each location in order to establish the level of intensity that may cause landslides. Mathematically, the probability of occurrence of a landslide ( ) in a particular site is given by, (EQ. 19) where is the susceptibility of landslide occurrence and is the probability that the triggering intensity exceeds the threshold intensity . Given that triggering hazards are modeled as a set of stochastic events, then the landslide probability of occurrence may be computed for each of those events, having each result the same temporal probability or annual occurrence frequency as the triggering event. Therefore, a set of landslide hazard scenarios is constructed where each scenario has the same annual occurrence frequency as the triggering scenario and is defined by two statistical moments: mean and variance. Assuming a Bernoulli distribution, mean and variance are defined as: (EQ. 20) (EQ. 21) The total hazard probability may be computed as the sum, for each landslide scenario, of the landslide probability, multiplied by the scenario annual occurrence frequency. This given an Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) annual probability of landslide occurrence at each analysis location, usually referred to as annual occurrence rate ( L). (EQ. 22) This provides a probabilistic representation of landslide hazard in terms of occurrence rates. Return period may be computed for each site as the inverse of the annual occurrence rate. Earthquake as Triggering Factor The methodology selected for the landlside hazard analysis in this project is one of the most common methods used by engineering and geotechnics in slope stability analysis. This methodology, which is used to obtain the factor of safety, is typically used to take decisions on a specific area of study, that is, a slope. The CAPRA methodology integrates the use of traditional slope analysis methods with SIG technology and the adequate use of statistics in the landslides probabilistic analysis. Figure 26 presents a summary of the suggested methodology. FIGURE 26. SUMMARY OF THE METHODOLOGY Infinite Slope Stability Analysis This methodology is based on the fact that in many cases of high magnitude landslides the mass movement is produced by a layer of low resistance material which moves approximately parallel to the surface of the slope. This mechanism, in which the mass movement occurs on relatively plane single surface, is common on rock masses affected by discontinuities such as bedding planes, cooling joints, tectonic origin fractures, and schistosity among others. It is called the infinite slope method precisely because the failure is presented parallel to the surface at a shallow depth and the length of the failure is much larger than its depth (infinitely long). Due to these conditions the edge effects are negligible, and the factor of safety can be obtained based on the Mohr-Coulomb criteria. First the relation between the forces resisting movement and the forces driving movement along the plane of failure must be computed including the cohesive and frictional force, which depend on effective shear strength cohesion) and (effective friction angle), the pore water force and the weight of the soil section. 1. Determining soil parameters: C, , 2. Determining topographic factors: Soil depth and terrain slope 3. Applying infinite slope stability analysis: Plane failure 4. Computaion of critical acceleration: Accel. threshold that triggers landslides 5. Probabilistic Analysis: Probability of exceeding critical acceleration Factor of Safety Critical Acceleration Probabilistic Risk Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) (EQ. 23) Where m is the relation z/h, is the effective cohesion, h is the thickness of the layer, z is the depth of the water table, is the specific weight, is , is the inclination angle of the fault plane, and is the effective friction angle. Critical Acceleration Computation The methodology proposed by Newmark (1995) has been used as an approximation to determine the hazard of landslides triggered by earthquakes. It uses a parameter known as critical acceleration, which is defined as the minimum acceleration that would potentially trigger a landslide, and it depends on the factor of safety as shown in the next equation: (EQ. 24) Where is the static factor of safety and is the angle from the horizontal plane to the center of mass of the potential landslide, which is approximately the angle of the slope of the terrain. Therefore, the critical acceleration map is a measure of the intrinsic properties of the slope aside from any seismic scenario, meaning that it is the seismic susceptibility to landslides. Rainfall as Triggering Factor The rainfall-landslide thresholds play a fundamental role in the hazard and risk modelling due to mass wasting phenomena because they determine the influence associated to the occurrence of rainfall as the triggering factor of landslides. Modelling the landslide hazard triggered by rainfall requires specific information that characterizes the climate conditions of the basin in terms of precipitation depending on its magnitude (total daily precipitation), intensity and temporary distribution. Precipitation events used to trigger shallow landslides in the study area are the result of a stochastic methodology to generate correlated series of daily precipitation derived from historic records. Due to the lack of data recorded at weather stations in the area, a satellite-based dataset was used to characterize the precipitation regime in the area. CHIRPS (Climate Hazards Group InfraRed Precipitation with Station data) database has global information (50°S-50°N for all longitudes) for more than 30 years of precipitation records, since 1981 (Funk et al., 2015). This database combines satellite information (with a 0.5-degree resolution) with data recorded at weather stations to generate time series for trend analysis. The global daily data for the second version of the dataset can be freely downloaded from ftp://ftp.chg.ucsb.edu/pub/org/chg/products/CHIRPS-2.0. The data is available in raster format (tiff file format) and the 0.5-degree resolution is the most up-to-date7. CHIRPS dataset provides complete daily precipitation data for the total study area for 30 consecutive years, from 1981 to 2010. 7 February 2017. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) Data from grid points (90.75W, 14.75N) and (90.75W, 14.25N) was used to interpolate precipitation series for the study location in Mixco, Guatemala. And Data from grid points (87.25W, 13.75N) and (87.25W, 14.25N) was used to interpolate precipitation series for the study location in Tegucigalpa, Honduras. A total of 30-years of historic records was used to generate 1000-years of stochastic rainfall series by fitting probability distributions for each day of the year. The resulting average precipitation in the area represents the historic records (monthly and annual values) but generates daily events above the historic mean, which have not happened yet. Then, extreme rainfall scenarios can be considered for landslides triggered by rain. From the CHIRPS dataset, the average precipitation in Guatemala City is 1140 mm/year; the monthly distribution of the rainfall is shown in Figure 27. And also, from the CHIRPS dataset, the average precipitation in Tegucigalpa is 1410 mm/year; the monthly distribution of the rainfall is shown in Figure 28. FIGURE 27. MONTHLY DISTRIBUTION OF PRECIPITATION IN GUATEMALA CITY ACCORDING TO STOCHASTIC MODELING OF RAINFALL. FIGURE 28. MONTHLY DISTRIBUTION OF PRECIPITATION IN TEGUCIGALPA ACCORDING TO STOCHASTIC MODELING OF RAINFALL. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) The methodology used in this study also considers the daily distribution of rain. Historic data was not available in weather stations or in the CHIRPS database (only daily records). In this case, a more detailed dataset was used. The Terrestrial Hydrology Research Group at Princeton University published the Global Meteorological Forcing Dataset for land surface modeling, which provides near-surface meteorological data for multiple models. It blends reanalysis data with observations at weather stations and disaggregates it in time and space. The dataset is available in multiple spatial (1.0, 0.5 and 0.25 degree) and temporal scales (monthly, daily, 3- hourly) for 1948-2010; moreover, it is freely available at http://hydrology.princeton.edu/data.pgf.php (Sheffield, Goteti, & Wood, 2006). The 0.25 degree and 3-hourly dataset was used to obtain daily distributions of rain for the study locations. The Figure 29 and Figure 30 show the daily distribution of rainfall in Guatemala City and Tegucigalpa, as a fraction of the total rainfall. Each line in the graph represents a daily distribution of rain, there are 365 lines. FIGURE 29. DAILY DISTRIBUTION OF PRECIPITATION IN GUATEMALA CITY ACCORDING TO PRINCETON DATASET. THE FIGURE SHOWS DISTRIBUTION OF DAILY RAIN FOR A COMPLETE YEAR (365 DAYS). FIGURE 30. DAILY DISTRIBUTION OF PRECIPITATION IN TEGUCIGALPA ACCORDING TO PRINCETON DATASET. THE FIGURE SHOWS DISTRIBUTION OF DAILY RAIN FOR A COMPLETE YEAR (365 DAYS). Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) Landslide risk Landslide risk is computed here based on a simple but important assumption: the vulnerability of any infrastructure element exposed to landslide hazard is total. In other words, when a landslide occurs at the location of an exposed asset, all its replacement value is lost independently of the type, magnitude, volume or speed of the landslide, and also independently of the type of exposed infrastructure. Based on this assumption, which is not far from reality, landslide risk may be expressed in probabilistic terms, for each scenario. The statistical moments of the total loss for each landslide scenario may be computed by applying its definition: (EQ. 25) (EQ. 26) where is the exposed value of each asset, is the landslide probability of occurrence at the exposed asset location and is the number of exposed assets. In risk assessment, loss is usually modeled using a Beta probability distribution. For this particular case, a Beta distribution may be used to define loss in probabilistic terms only when the expected value of the losses for each scenario are considerably lower (at least two order of magnitudes) than the total exposed value. This condition should be fulfilled for most practical cases, so we are confident on modeling loss as a random variable with a Beta probability distribution. Given that loss is defined probabilistically for each landslide scenario, risk may be integrated in order to derive in as loss exceedance curve, and from it in all kinds of risk metrics, such as PML, AAL or bankruptcy probability, that are used in risk assessment for other kinds of natural hazards. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) Annex 3. Inventory of Exposed Elements The exposed elements are essential in risk assessment, because they are the objects on which losses are evaluated, i.e., are the source of potential losses due to being exposed to a hazard and be susceptible of suffering damage. In mathematical terms, the exposed elements provide the maximum possible absolute value of the loss at their geographical location, as well as the summands of the probability density function of the loss of a hazard scenario. That is, they are the integrating element of hazard and vulnerability at each of their locations, and the integrator elements of the total losses for a given scenario. Its proper characterization is of great importance for the correct estimation of losses and once each element is characterized it needs to be appraised in economic terms (usually in monetary units). Also, the assignation of a vulnerability function is required. The database must include information related to the following topics: Location in terms of geographical coordinates Geometrical characterization of the asset through a shapefile (points, polylines or polygons). This information is mainly used for the data and results display. Replacement value of each asset Parameters that allows capturing the vulnerability characteristics that is specified through a vulnerability function. The vulnerability must consider the expected physical damage (direct losses) and/or in terms human impact as a function of the selected intensity for each considered hazard. Since it was not possible to obtain detailed cadastral register information for the neighborhoods, a survey was made of the inventory of exposed assets based on observations from satellite images and their interpretation. For each neighborhood an estimate of constructed plant area was obtained from polygons constructed over the satellite images. Figure 31 presents an image of the constructed city polygons, digitalized using the tool available on Google Earth. Each polygon is then subjected to a construction density also identified from the satellite images to account for roads, parks, and other areas that cannot be considered as constructed buildings. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) FIGURE 31. CONSTRUCTED PLANT AREA ON TEGUCIGALPA S NEIGHBORHOODS Furthermore, there is no information related to number of stories, construction systems, areas of construction, exposed values, construction dates or other data which are useful in determining economic, and structural exposure and vulnerability. To stablish the number of stories and construction classes on the neighborhoods the use of available images and the Google Street View tool was necessary complemented by population statistics, official indicators and other online information. Given the lack of individual information for each register, the assumption of the same number of stories and same construction type for the neighborhood was made with the exception in those cases where different information was available. This information, like any other approximated model of information, is open to improvement, and can be updated and cleaned up using intense fieldwork, or by having detailed property register information available. The quality and resolution of information in an exposure survey defines the reliability and resolution of the results of the risk analysis. With this information, the total constructed area was determined. Official information and published indicators allowed approximate economic values to be established, which in this case correspond to the official monthly minimum wage per constructed square meter. This value has been accepted as the replacement value for a constructed square meter in residential uses with a poor socioeconomic development, where usually no further information is available. Therefore, we proceeded to form a database for exposure of buildings, based on the procedures explained above. To summarize, for each project the total constructed area in the neighborhoods was determined (from the plant area, constructed density and number of stories), the total economic replacement value (from the price per square meter and the total constructed area) and lastly, a construction class that represents most of the buildings present. Omar Darío Cardona A. Disaster Risk Consulting The Disaster Resilience and Climate in the Americas Program (DRCAP) For this report on landslide risk assessment and due to the characteristics of the landslide hazard additional steps were necessary to detail the resolution of the exposure model. Therefore, we proceeded to form a database for exposure of buildings based on the identification of blocks with homogeneous exposure on Google Earth satellite images, that is, blocks which can be identified to have similar conditions of use or levels of occupation, cost and densities of construction. Each block is then classified in terms of percentages identified for each type of construction, in relation to observations identified. These homogeneous blocks were then split up, to simulate properties around the city. This process of splitting up consists of making a random allocation of points in each homogeneous block, assigning to each point a cost and occupation consisting of values identified in the block, and a type of construction as a function of the percentages previously defined. The total number of properties located per block is consistent with the density of construction identified and the total exposed value is also consistent with the values determined for previous hazard assessments. FIGURE 32. DETAILED EXPOSURE MODEL FOR LANDSLIDE RISK ASSESSMENT Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming The Neighborhood Approach ANNEX Support Documents Cost-Benefit Analysis Table of Contents Cost-Benefit Analysis Intervention: Access Path Intervention: Drainage canal in Port de Paix (PdP), Haiti Impact Without Access Path With Access Path + Training Benefit Data values and Assumptions Benefit Calculation Human Fatalities in houses due to structural collapse No change Benefits not quantified Fatalities because of ineffective evacuation (in addition, people with disabilities are excluded from evacuation) Reduced loss of life : •Access paths allow effective and speedy evacuation from neighborhood houses to safe location. •People with disabilities and the elderly can evacuate (handrails and safer footpaths aid in this process). •People know how to react in case of emergency (because of training and awareness components of the project) Annual benefit from reduced fatalities during evacuations = Number of evacuations per year* Value of Statistical Life (VSL)* Number of lives saved because of access paths during evacuation VSL = Value of Statistical Life Lives considered: People with disabilities /Elderly /Pregnant women Following assumptions are made: 1. 0.5 evacuations per year (to keep the estimate conservative). 2. VSL: The vaue for VSL ($107,000) is used (Viscusi & Masterman, 2017. ) 3. We assume that 0.005% of the population ( Medellin Population = 115,999; Rimac: 20,987 ) lives are saved each year because of the access paths during evacuation. This population comprises the vulnerable: the elderly, people with disabilities, pregnant women. 3. We assume that the vulnerable population is able to escape death because of safe access pathways during the evacautions. Without the access paths these people were trapped in their homes despite the hazard warning to evacuate as the original paths were unsafe, tortuous, slippery and thus inaccessible. The redesigned paths have handrails which further assists safe passage of the vulnerable individuals. Annual benefit (Medellin) = 0.5*107,000*(0.005*115,999) = $310,297 Annual benefit (Rimac) = 0.5*107,000*(0.005*20,987) = $56,140 Injuries during evacuation Reduced injuries because of efficient and safer path for evacuation Annual benefit from reduced cost to state for treatment of minor injuries suffered during evacuations = 10% of Population *Hospital Cost per Outpatient visit per year * Number of estimated evacuations per year Number of estimated evacuations per year = 0.5 Medellin Population = 115,999 Hospital Cost per Outpatient Visit (Medellin) = $7.50 (2015 USD) (http://www.who.int/choice/country/col/cost/en/) Rimac Population = 20,987 Hospital Cost per Outpatient Visit (Rimac) = $8.46 (2017 USD) (http://www.who.int/choice/country/per/cost/en/) Assumptions: 1. We assume 10% of the population suffer minor injuries during evacuation, for conservative measure. These are the injuries that could be avoided. Kumar & Bose (2000) indicate that during an earthquake, 20% people suffer injuries from escape from collapsed houses. We assume that out of 20% who are able to escape, half of them (10%) suffer minor injuries that do not require hospitalization, only outpatient care. 2. The hospital outpatient visit costs are taken from WHO site: http://www.who.int/choice/country/ These are costs incurred by the state/public system. Annual Benefit from avoided injuries (Medellin)= (10%*115,999)*$7.50*0.5 = $43,499.63 Annual Benefit from avoided injuries (Rimac)= (10%*20,987)*$8.46*0.5 = $8,877.50 Physical Houses are destroyed No change Benefits not quantified Loss of all household possessions Household possessions may be recovered Benefits not quantified Time saved bMake extensive detours to reach destination Non Work Time Savings Ease of access from community to public service areas, markets and goods. Increased mobility for vulnerable population: people with disabilities, the elderly, pregnant women, children. All these factors save time for community members in tehir daily life, which can be valued as their non working time savings. Non Working Travel Time savings: 0.3 * household income per head per hour Assumptions: 1. The formula for travel time savings is sourced from Gwilliams, 1997. Gwilliams suggests that the World Bank use values of 30 percent of household income per hour for adults and 15 percent for children. 2. Focus group clearly indicates that residents prefer the redesigned footpaths and say that it increases connectivity and improves times . 3. Household income for Medellin is estimated based on the household surveys conducted by FIU. Monthly household income per head = $311.43 (2015 USD) Value of Non Working Time Savings by the Medellin neighborhood = 0.3* $1.80 = 0.54/hour Value of Non Working Time Savings by the Rimac neighborhood = 0.3* $2.31 = 0.69/hour Costs: The costs of construction and labor of the access paths in Medellin: $20,980 (2015 USD) ; Rimac: $8,424 (2017 USD) Results: Medellin Access Path project: BCR (with VSL) = 98.90, BCR (without using VSL) = 12.16 Rimac Access Path project: BCR (with VSL) = 47.43, BCR (without using VSL) = 6.48 The benefits from Value of Non Work Travel Time savings are not included in the BCR. Notes: The sum of the annual benefits from reduced fatalities during evacuation and from reduced cost to the government from avoided injuries are used as the annual benefits for the Cost benefit Analysis. We assume that the life of the access paths will be 10 years after construction. The Discount Rate used for the analysis is 10%. Definition: A safe urban footpath that runs through the informal settlement, usually built on slopes, with or without stairs, and with or without handrails for support. The Neighborhood Approach: From the DRR perspective, the footpath provides a safe and efficient evacuation route toward a safer location following a hazard warning. In their daily routine, residents use the access path to/from their houses for efficient access to/from the community center or other public services/areas. The redesign of the formerly organic, meandering pathways in the informal settlement was done to ensure the best, safest, shortest and most efficient footpaths to connect the houses with public services/areas. The redesign benefits maximum number of people in the neighborhood besides improving connectivity. The footpaths are used by the residents in their daily routine but are primarily built for safe and quick evacuation following a hazard warning. They are especially useful during the rainy season (which extends for approximately 5 months per year), as the original paths on the natural slopes became muddy and slippery, causing inconvenience and often injuries to residents. People with disabilities, the elderly, and children had limited mobility with the original pathways. The safely constructed footpaths, especially with handrails, aid safe and easy access to all categories of population, including the vulnerable, especially for the purpose of evacuation. DRR INTERVENTION: ACCESS PATHS DRR scenario: Hazard/Earthquake/Landslide Normal Routine DRR INTERVENTION: Drainage canal in Port de Paix (PdP), Haiti Impact Without Canal With Canal Benefit Data Values and Assumptions Benefit calculation Physical Flooding is caused during rainy season (5 months a year), heavy rain events, and during the passage of hurricanes. The runoff causes significant flooding leading to permanent damage to household possessions in the community. The time for recuperation from flooding events is long. Extensive damage to household possessions is reported by residents. Based on surveys and focus group results we estimate that every year, 80% of household goods are damaged. Surveys and focus group reveal that since the building of the canal, the loss of household possessions during extensive rain events has been avoided in the past three years. This includes Hurricane Irma which did not result in major damage; the flooding was effectively absorbed by the drainage canal in time, allowing the families to recover soon after. Surveys reveal that Hurricane Jeanne in 2004 was similar in character to Irma but the impacts were in stark contrast. The neighborhood had suffered major losses in household possessions post Hurricane Jeanne. Avoided loss of household assets 1. PdP population is estimated as follows: a. house surface area = 76,605 sqm (exposure data, Risk modeling report) b. House surface area = 337.14 sqm (survey) c. Number of houses = 227 (survey) d. Number of people per house = 6.63 (survey) e. Estimated population in PdP = (76,605/337.14)*1/2*6.63 = 753 2. Total Exposed value of dwellings in PdP = $8,759,304.53 (Exposed assets, Risk modeling report) 3. We assume household assets are 10% of the value of the household dwelling. 4. We assume that 80% of the household goods are damaged and lost (based on survey responses) Benefit from avoided loss of household assets and possessions = 80%*(10% *$8,759,304.53) = $700,744 Economic Interruption of markets and commercial activity due to area flooding Survey reveals that loss in business activity is reduced to 5 days of flooding. The majority of families in PdP are part of the informal business sector. Increased business activity from avoided flooding 1. Official minimum monthly wage = $108.71 (USD 2014) (http://www.sgcm.gouv.ht/wp content/uploads/2017/03/Moniteur 28 juillet 2017 Salaire minimum.pdf) 2. Daily earnings =$5.02 (USD 2014) 3. Number of PdP people in informal business that area affected = 107 (World Bank Group Report) 4. Number of business days of recovered business activities because of canal (4 weeks)= 23 days Increased earnings from recovered business days = 23 days * $ 5.02/day * 107 = $11,777 per year Economic Focus group study reveals that several school days (4 weeks) are lost because of flooding Loss of school days reduced to 3 5 days (focus group responses) Increased school attendance during flooding times 1. Number of children in PdP (assumed) = 227 2. Average daily wage rate= $5.02 3. Number of school days total = 200 4. Number of school days missed = 20 Without Canal = 227 children * 20 days lost* $5.02/day = $22,790.80 With Canal= 227 children * 5 days lost * $5.02/day = $5,697.70 Increased school attendance benefit = $17,093.10 per year A drainage canal was built in Port de Paix to drain/channelize the excess surface water from the area following high rainfall events. The rainy season last five months in Haiti, and along with frequent hurricane impacts, causes area flooding that leads to damage of household goods and impedes livelihoods. The drainage canal runs through the entire neighborhood and keeping it free of flooded waters. Costs: The cost for constructing the drainage canal in the Port de Paix communities was $340,000 (2014 USD) Results: The Benefit Cost Ratio of the drainage canal project in PdP 13.19 Notes: The sum of the annual benefits from avoided loss of household assets an possessions, increased earnings form recovered business days and increased school attendance are used as the annual benefits for the Benefit Cost Analysis. We assume that the life of the drainage canal will be 10 years . The Discount Rate used for the analysis is 10%. Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming The Neighborhood Approach ANNEX Support Documents Life Satisfaction Survey Table of Contents Life Satisfaction Survey Life-Satisfaction Approach Life Satisfaction Approach Alejandro Arrieta, PhD Florida International University April 10, 2018 A major challenge in assessing the value of the USAID/OFDA Neighborhood Approach (NA) is capturing the multidimensional benefits of the program. The NA is characterized by multiple interventions and activities that produce benefits beyond the DRR goals. In this report, we use a comprehensive quantitative approach to assess the value of the Neighborhood Approach based on its impact on life satisfaction understood as Life Satisfaction Approach (LSA). A life satisfaction assessment is combined with income information to convert the effect of the intervention into a monetary figure (Fujiwara and Campbell, 2011). In general, the LSA assesses the marginal willingness-to-pay associated with an intervention, and it captures a broad spectrum of benefits through subjective wellbeing reported in life satisfaction levels (Frey, Luechinger et al., 2010). Recent applications have included valuations of natural disasters like droughts (Carroll, Frijters et al., 2009) and flooding (Luechinger and Raschky, 2009), and the valuation of several nonmarket activities. Methods Our approach used field surveys that assessed the life satisfaction of 349 individuals (i) with residence in eight urban settlements benefitted by USAID/OFDA NA projects. The neighborhoods were located in small towns in Haiti, Guatemala, Peru, Colombia, Jamaica, and Honduras, with direct beneficiaries that ranged from 750 to 120,000 residents. Each NA project consisted of up to 14 interventions Ij (j=1,...,14). Life satisfaction (LSi) was obtained from the survey for each beneficiary i who resides in the neighborhood, based answer ranged from 1 (not at all satisfied) to 4 (very satisfied). Impact of interventions on life satisfaction We first use multivariate ordinal regression analysis to evaluate the association between each of the 14 NA interventions on life satisfaction (Ij ). In particular, we will estimate the following regression models to capture the effect of individual interventions: Where ln(Y) is the logarithm of family income, X a set of variables that controlled for gender, age, income and wealth, assessed by the possession of household assets (computer, washer machine, phone, car, bathroom) and home ownership. The term represents the estimation error. The parameter captures the gains in life satisfaction associated with the intervention j (j=1,...,14), and therefore, it is a measure of the intervention effectiveness. The result of this analysis will help us identify the interventions with the highest impact on life satisfaction improvement. The dollar value of interventions Our second step is to assign a dollar value to the gains in life satisfaction using the LSA. To achieve that, we used our previous analysis to find the additional family income that makes the life satisfaction without intervention j equal to the life satisfaction with intervention j, that is = . This is equivalent to the compensating surplus, or the increase in income necessary to keep the individual without the NA intervention at the same utility level: From the regression model, the compensating surplus can be computed as follows: Note that is equivalent to the individual i -to-pay to keep intervention j. Therefore, the average over all individuals, , is the dollar value per-beneficiary of the gain in life satisfaction associated with intervention j. Cost-benefit analysis The Incremental Cost-Benefit Ratio (ICBRj ) represents the average dollar benefit per 1 US 2017 dollar invested in intervention j. It is defined as: Where Cj is the investment cost in intervention j. An ICBR>1 means that benefits are larger than costs, and consequently, that intervention j is acceptable. Cost information is provided by the USAID/OFDA NA project, and an ICBR is calculated when this information is available. Results Figure 1 presents the results of our estimation for all interventions grouped by categories. The categories with the highest impact on life satisfaction improvement are physical works and social mobilization gains. For example, neighborhoods that received a community empowerment intervention (social mobilization category) increased their life satisfaction by 0.65 points. Considering that on average, the life satisfaction of all neighborhoods in the study was 2.46, the community empowerment intervention produced an increase in life satisfaction of nearly 27%. Figure 1. Impact of interventions on life satisfaction Other categories with interventions that had a significant impact on life satisfaction are livelihoods and financial mechanisms (rural approaches intervention and markets and financing), and institutional arrangements (GIS, information and communication technologies intervention). While in most cases the interventions were implemented in several neighborhoods, the rural approach case with the positive impact corresponds only to the Medellin neighborhood so, a generalization of this case should be taken with caution. Other interventions such as capacity building, governance, regulatory framework, urban livelihoods, early warning systems, emergency/disaster management and disaster risk reduction were not statistically associated to changes in life satisfaction. Environmental resilience was not evaluated. In our approach, life satisfaction changes are obtained by comparing neighborhoods with and without individual interventions. Environmental resilience could not be compared because this intervention was performed on all neighborhoods. Table 1 presents the dollar value of those interventions that had a statistically significant impact on life satisfaction. The valuation per direct beneficiary ranges from 128 to 323 dollars, and it correlates to the magnitude of the impact of the intervention on life satisfaction. Using the estimated number of direct beneficiaries in all neighborhoods that received the corresponding intervention, the last column of table 1 presents the dollar value of the total gain in life satisfaction in the community. Physical works (public space and engineering and physical interventions) produced the largest gain in value, totaling more than 70.3 million dollars. Social mobilization gains (community empowerment) was the second most important intervention, producing a value gain of 52.2 million dollars. Table 1. The dollar value of effective interventions Intervention category Valuation in 2017 US$ Per beneficiary Direct beneficiaries Total Value Engineering and physical interventions $127.5 166,199 $21,186,771 Public space $305.6 160,858 $49,156,593 Community empowerment $322.6 162,038 $52,267,203 GIS, information, and comm. technologies $193.0 133,499 $25,769,901 Markets and financing $182.9 154,518 $28,257,791 Rural approaches $267.0 15,530 $4,147,197 Cost information was limited in most categories for most neighborhoods, except in engineering and physical interventions. Data provided by the USAID/OFDA NA project, suggests that the total investment cost of engineering and physical interventions in all neighborhoods was 1.2 million dollars. With this information, we calculated the ICBR at 17.9, indicating a benefit of 17.9 dollars for every dollar invested in engineering and physical interventions. While cost information is not available for all other interventions, our results suggest that the ICBR could be even bigger for the rest of intervention categories. Conclusions We use a life satisfaction approach to recognize the multidimensional benefits of the USAID/OFDA NA projects. Our results suggest that the interventions produced benefits beyond the DRR goals, with broader impacts on the community well-being. In particular, we found that the categories with the highest impact on life satisfaction improvement were physical works (public space and engineering and physical interventions) and social mobilization gains (community empowerment). The dollar value of the gains in life satisfaction ranged from $128 to 323 dollars per direct beneficiary. Overall, physical works produced the largest gain in value, totalizing more than 49.1 million dollars for public spaces, and 21.2 dollars for engineering and physical interventions. Community empowerment produced the largest benefit at 52.3 million dollars. While cost information was not available for all interventions and neighborhoods, our results suggest that the USAID/OFDA NA projects where cost-beneficial for the communities. For engineering and physical interventions, the category with most available data, we calculated an incremental cost-benefit ratio of 17.9, which means that for every dollar invested in engineering and physical interventions the neighborhoods improved their well-being in a magnitude equivalent to 17.9 dollars. References Carroll, Nick, Paul Frijters, and Michael A. Shields. "Quantifying the costs of drought: new evidence from life satisfaction data." Journal of Population Economics 22.2 (2009): 445-461. Luechinger, Simon, and Paul A. Raschky. "Valuing flood disasters using the life satisfaction approach." Journal of Public Economics 93.3 (2009): 620-633. Frey, Bruno S., Simon Luechinger, and Alois Stutzer. The life satisfaction approach to environmental valuation (2010). Fujiwara, Daniel, and Ross Campbell. Valuation techniques for social cost-benefit analysis: stated preference, revealed preference and subjective well-being approaches: a discussion of the current issues. HM Treasury (2011). Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming The Neighborhood Approach ANNEX 9 Supporting Documents New DRR Strategies Table of Contents New DRR Strategies 1. Land Tenure Mapping and Regularization 2. Analysis of the Resilience of Communities to Disasters (ARC-D) 3. Resilience Analysis for Social Systems (R4S) 4. Basic Basket Market System 5. Provision and Maintenance of Drainage Systems New DRR Strategies: 1. Land Tenure Mapping and Regularization Title: Land Tenure Mapping and Regularization (Habitat for Humanity) Description: A land tenure initiative is being implemented in the Naggo Head community by Habitat for Humanity as a pilot activity in collaboration with Jamaica’s Land Administration and Management Program (LAMP). The initiative helps communities exposed to disaster risk acquire a registered title. Empirically, there is a positive link between land registration and access to credit, housing improvement, and risk reduction. Although there is no clear evidence that property titles alone can guarantee access to credit or even reduce risk (Domeher & Abdulai, 2011), land tenure issues and natural hazards exposure may result in exclusion from aid distribution and post-disaster reconstruction programs, making communities more vulnerable to future disasters. Secure land tenure is critical to assure restoration of shelter of shelter and livelihoods and reduce risks of precariousness in communities (Caron et al., 2015). Location: Naggo Head, Portmore, Jamaica Process: The process for obtaining a registered title is explained below. Step 1: The person applying for the title, The Claimant engages a Commissioned Land Surveyor to prepare Survey Diagram, that is, a plan of the land being claimed. Survey Diagram is submitted to the National land Agency (Survey Department) for pre-checking. This takes 12-16 weeks. Claimant gives the Approved Survey Diagram and Proof of Ownership Documents to LAMP or private attorney. Private attorney sends the Application to Tax Administration Jamaica for an assessment and payment of Stamp Duty on the application and Transfer Tax if the owner is appointed a joint owner or a person other than himself to take the title. Due to duty waivers under the SPA LAMP is not required to assess or settle Stamp Duty and Transfer Tax. This takes 45 weeks. Stamp Duty is 1.33%, and Transfer Tax is 5% of the value of the land being registered. Step 2: LAMP or Private attorney submits Approved Survey Diagram and Application with proof of payment of Stamp Duty and Transfer Tax to the Registrar of Titles, Office of the National Land Agency. Steps 3 & 4: Application is reviewed by Registrar and if found satisfactory Diagram resent to Survey Department for rechecking. Verified Survey diagram returned to Registrar. This takes 4-5 weeks. Step 5 & 6: Application sent to Referee of Titles for Approval, Referee’s Provisional approval, denial of the application, request for additional information or referral to an Adjudication Committee sent to the Registrar of Titles. This takes 3-4 weeks. Step 7: If the application is provisionally approved, Registrar sends Notice of Provisional Approval to LAMP or Private Attorney and to Government Gazette for publication. Step 8: LAMP or Private Attorney Publishes Notice and returns proof of publication to the Registrar (Notice period 6 weeks after publication) Step 9: Registrar prepares and issues Certificate of Title (4 weeks) Average System time is 40 weeks for perfect applications, matters referred to Adjudication committee or for additional information would rejoin the process at Step 5. Costs: The costs are largely ad valorem and could range between JA$ 235,000 to JA$475,000 (US$1,800 to US$3,800) for a ¼ acre of land valued at JA$1,000,000 or USD 8, 000. Activity Cost (JA$) $US equivalent Surveyor’s Cost of Survey Diagram 40,000 320.00 Stamp Duty 15,000 120.00 Transfer Tax (in case of nominee other than applicant for title) 37,000 296.00 Registration Fee 10,000 80.00 Final Title Fees 10,000 80.00 Publication Cost (legal notice) 15,000 120.00 Assurance Fund 55,000 440.00 Attorney’s Cost 100,000 800.00 Additional Costs: If Claiming through the estate of a deceased person Transfer Tax on Estate 15,000 120.00 Stamp Duty on Estate 10,000 80.00 Attorneys legal fees on Probate or Letters of Administration 150,000 1,200.00 Subdivision Plan 65,000 520.00 Comments: The land tenure initiative began in April 2017 and as of now all 30 applications filed are in process and have not yet been finalized. New DRR Strategies: 2. Analysis of the Resilience of Communities to Disasters (ARC D) Title: Analysis of the Resilience of Communities to Disasters (ARC-D) Toolkit Description: As lives and livelihoods of vulnerable populations are constantly threatened and affected by natural hazards, and stresses like climate change impacts and population growth are expected to change the intensity and impact of these hazards, it becomes necessary that disaster resilience of communities be measured. The ARC-D Toolkit informs the transition of humanitarian interventions to longer term development programming and to build back better in the recovery stage. It can facilitate the adoption of a systems approach to resilience building by providing a snapshot of 30 resilience components related to eight critical systems. It informs decision makers in humanitarian and development programs to do no harm to existing disaster resilience capacities at community level. Location: Tegucigalpa, Honduras Process: The ARC-D includes a two-part disaster resilience survey, accompanied by a user guidance manual and software. The process includes: a. A training workshop for a team of facilitators for the application of the toolkit b. Socialization with community leaders and/or local leaders of the scope of the tool c. Consensus process and call for participants prior to the application d. Investigation of secondary sources e. Interviews with key actors f. Focus group discussion g. Digitization of information h. Building a community resilience report, and i. Presentation of results. Costs: The costs of the process in a NA project per community is $3,169. Comments: The tool is a practical way to measure the disaster resilience at the community level using minimal resources for implementation. It is flexible and adaptable and can be applied in rural, urban and per-urban contexts, in both development and emergency situations. It increases the capacity of communities and the field staff in understanding resilience and taking actions to improve it. New DRR Strategies: 3. Resilience Analysis for Social Systems (R4S) Title: Resilience Analysis for Social Systems (R4S) Description: The R4S includes analysis of context and selection of target population, analysis and selection of critical socioeconomic systems that contribute to the resilience of the target population, application of qualitative and quantitative information gathering techniques, field tours, system mapping, analysis of actors, analysis of risk scenarios, resilience analysis of systems based on determining factors for resilience, development of system maps and risk scenarios, validation workshops and / or presentation of results. Location: Tegucigalpa, Honduras Process: The R4S process includes: a. Design and planning: This phase includes defining the target population, analyzing its context and selecting the critical socioeconomic system. It also includes the design, validation of the consultation instruments (be it a guide of questions for interviews, questionnaires, etc.) and the logistical preparation prior to the work in the field. b. Field work: includes the field tours and quality control of the application of the different instruments to the key actors identified for the selected system. c. Digitization and analysis of results d. Preparation and delivery of reports: In addition to the report, this stage also includes the preparation of the final versions of all the maps of the system generated by the R4S (current system map, stakeholder participation map, risk scenario analysis map, ideal system map), the development of work days to validate the results with partners or participants in the research. e. Presentation of the results: in an event or in workshops with the different participants in the research. Costs: The costs of the process in a NA project per community is $37,964. Comments: The R4S is an instrument developed by GOAL that is still in the validation process, so all the information provided is subject to adaptations and times have been estimated according to the limited experience of its application. In addition, the application time will depend firstly on the quantity and quality of the available information as well as the complexity or number of systems being investigated and secondly, the amount of resources available for its development. New DRR Strategies: 4. Basic Basket Market System Title: Basic Basket Market System Description: This market system intervention model developed in Tegulcigalpa is designed to increase the resilience of livelihoods in neighborhoods with high disaster risks. Through the Pulpería-to-Pulpería intervention model (pulperías are grocery or convenience stores), a process was developed to strengthen the commercialization of the basic basket, since its supply of products and services are initial needs in the emergency response. Strengthening neighborhood stores reduces dependency on large markets and increases resilience to continue supplying basic foods locally, during an emergency. The pulperías are key actors in the social cohesion at the level of the neighborhoods and have the potential to provide the service of information. For purposes of replication, it is expected to convert the experience of the pulpería-to-pulpería intervention model into a tool that will serve the technicians of business development centers, municipalities, academies, economic development associations and municipalities to promote disaster preparedness, response and recovery in communities through increased resilience of livelihoods. Location: Tegucigalpa, Honduras Process: The intervention model comprised the following steps: a. Analysis of the market system of the basic basket b. Identification of pulperías c. Organization of the pulperías network d. Discussion of joint problems and opportunities e. Strengthening of capacities f. Security plan g. Small works of risk reduction to disaster h. Seed capital i. Preparation of sustainable business plan j. Business diversification k. Training and conformation of community savings and credit Costs: The intervention model cost was $49,926. Comments: The success of this model depends heavily on co-operation between pulperia owners in a particular neighborhood. New DRR Strategies: 5. Provision and Maintenance of Drainage Systems Title: Provision and Maintenance of Drainage Systems Description: This intervention provided the essential process to promote institutional and local participation for the adequate provision and maintenance of drainage systems as a measure of risk reduction to disasters in developing neighborhoods. This was accomplished through a Technical Study of the hazard, execution of risk reduction works, and the strengthening of Water Management Boards. Location: Tegucigalpa, Honduras Process: The intervention followed two main phases: 1. Drainage works with the methodology of Projects Executed by the Community (PEC) involved: a. Technical studies that included a topographical study (LiDAR) study, geological survey. Hydrological study, and geophysical study b. Community training in PEC Methodology included: Project Execution Committee, Committee of Social Comptrollership, and Committee of Maintenance Works c. Explanation of the technical studies at the community level d. Design of Works and Budgets e. Construction of Works via implementation of Pec Methodology 2. Process of Strengthening a Business Model for the Water Management Boards. This included: a. Institutional Links b. Diagnoses of Water Management Boards c. Plan for the strengthening of Water Management Boards d. Implementation of Water Boosts Strengthening Plan e. Implementation of a Business Model f. Review of a plan for the implementation of the a business model g. Follow-up to drain cleaning and maintenance plan Costs: The cost of the drainage systems built in Berlin, the area where 40 families were relocated was $110,528. Comments: The Project Executing Committee (PEC) is in charge of the selection of labor, material selection, warehouse control, and socialization with the community. The Committee of the Social Comptroller is in charge of supervising the project, and keeping track of project logs. The Committee of the Cleaning and Maintenance Works ensures that the neighbors and the community use them well and routinely maintain each of the infrastructure works executed within the communities. Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming The Neighborhood Approach ANNEX Tools Table of Contents Tools Survey (Questionaire) Interview Guide for Government Officials Focus Group Guide Informed Consent Interview Guide for Government Officials (local or national) 1) Introduction by the research team 2) Explain the purpose of this interview and its content 3) Ask for the general data of the person interviewed: Organization Name of person interviewed: Position Date & Start & end of interview: Names of Interviewers: Place: 1) Effectiveness: Level of Community Disaster Hazard Risk reduction a. To what extent has the project contributed to reducing community disaster hazard risks in targeted urban communities? E.g., what changed and how? Ask for changes regarding vulnerability (social, economic, physical, environmental, political, etc.) and per category of intervention: Physical Works Maintenance; Social Mobilization Gains; Environmental improvements; Institutional Arrangements; Livelihoods and Financial Mechanisms; DRR intervention. Most and least effective aspects: Comparison to traditional DRR approache: Influencing factors: Other questions on effectiveness b. To what extent did X or Y intervention in the NA influence a change in the relationship between the community and the municipality / institution? 2) Sustainability: Will the interventions implemented by the project be maintained over time once the project is completed? Institutional ownership Enabling and impeding factors of success Other questions on sustainability How did you continue after the project ended? Which interventions continued, which did not and why? 3) Lessons learned and recommendations a. What have been the main successes / best practices in the project? (in general and per category of intervention) b. And the main challenges? (in general and per category of intervention) c. What areas need improvement / adaptation? (in general and per category of intervention) d. If you could do the project over again, what would you do differently? What would you do exactly the same? (in general and per category of intervention) e. What other methods or strategies would you propose to achieve more or better results? Wrap up: Thank the respondent and inform him/her about possible feedback of results / follow up steps. Observations from the interviewer: Please fill in below any observations you have regarding the development of this interview, which might have influenced the responses of the respondent(s). Please note down which answers you think might be less valid because of this and why. Focus Group Relevant changes (Effectiveness and Sustainability) By conducting a focus group, it would be possible to understand relevant changes in participants’ quality of life, their vulnerabilities (social, economic, environmental, physical, and political, among others), level of knowledge and awareness on urban risks and DRR, and the impacts of projects/interventions on targeted communities. Procedure: 1. Participants are asked to use cards to write down what changes they have noted resulting from the project/interventions, in terms of: a. Acquired knowledge, capacities, empowerment development (e.g., what they have learnt) b. Vulnerability: asking specifically on house/plot conditions, income sources, access to healthy food c. At the community level: have you noted any reduction of risks or noted that your community is safer with respect to natural hazards? 2. Together in group and using a sheet of flipchart paper, the cards are revised and displayed according to similar topics/areas. This is a participatory process, so cards and topics can be discussed. 3. In group some questions are posed: a. How have you utilized what have you learnt (from the project)? b. How do you think we can keep (or even improve) the project’s benefits/results? c. What are the main difficulties to maintain such results? (sustainability) d. What aspects of the project did not succeed? What went wrong? Give reasons. Matrix/layout generated during the group session: Possible changes following the project/intervention EFFECTIVENESS SUSTAINABILITY Level / Area Explanation on the detected change or the lack of it: how it was achieved or why it did not work Has the change been maintained in time? Why? What factors have influenced this? Individual level Material/physical aspects, works/improvements at home (housing retrofitting, latrines/sewage, water) Capacity building and strengthening Role/position within the community, empowerment Access to market and income sources Other issues/needs at personal/family levels Community level Material/physical aspects at the community public space (WASH, drainage, retaining walls, among others) Community organization and relation/position to municipal authorities Participation of men and women, youth, vulnerable social groups Environmental aspects (e.g. garbage disposal, toxic activities) Emergency plans and preparedness (Early Warning Systems) Other issues/needs of the community Remarking questions: 1) What capacities/skills and resources are needed to maintain or improve the detected practices in the future? Not only financial but training, knowledge, willingness, planning, among others. 2) If you could do things different, what would you change? Why? Or formulated in other words: If other community/neighborhood would like to replicate your experience here, what would you recommend them to do and what would you recommend to avoid/change? And why? 1 INFORMED CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE IN A RESEARCH STUDY USAID/OFDA Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming Good morning, my name is Juan Pablo Sarmiento, and I am the Principal Investigator of the study on USAID/OFDA Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming. The co-investigators of this study are Vicente Sandoval and Marije van Lidth de Jeude. You have been selected to participate in a research study on Urban DRR Programming. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and sustainability of eight disaster risk reduction (DRR) interventions that were implemented using the Neighborhood Approach (NA) in six Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) countries (Colombia, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, and Peru) by the USAID/OFDA. The study will also review the implementing strategy of the USAID/OFDA in the LAC region from 2012 to 2016. The findings will inform future programming decisions and adjustments to ongoing USAID/OFDA urban DRR programming, adding to the evidence base of the NA as a DRR tool. If you decide to participate in this study, you will be one of 40 government officials and key stakeholders who will be interviewed for this study. You have been selected because of your official position in the local/national level governance of the neighborhood in which USAID/OFDA’s urban DRR project was implemented, and your experience with the NA as a DRR tool during this time. Your expertise is highly appreciated and will help inform future policy decisions and adjustments to ongoing USAID/OFDA urban DRR programming in the LAC region and globally. It is expected that future USAID/OFDA urban DRR projects that reach out to other neighborhoods across the LAC region will benefit from more effective and more sustainable projects. This interview will take between 45 minutes and one hour of your time. If you agree to be in this study, you are expected to respond to the questions. You may withdraw and discontinue participation at any time without penalty. If you have questions while taking part in our study, please stop me at any time and ask. If you feel uncomfortable in any way with any question, please feel free to decline to answer that question or end the interview. There are no foreseeable risks or benefits to you for participating in this study. There is no cost or payment to you for participating in this study. You will remain anonymous throughout the research process. We will not include any information that will make it possible to identify you as a subject in any sort of report we might publish about this research. Research records will be stored securely and only the research team and sponsor agencies (United States Agency for International Development) will have access to the records. If you have any questions for one of the researchers conducting this study, you may contact Juan Pablo Sarmiento at +1(305)348-0346. If you would like to talk with someone about your rights of being a subject in this research study or about ethical issues with this research study, you may contact the FIU Office of Research Integrity by phone at 305-348-2494 or by email at ori@fiu.edu. Your participation in this research is voluntary and you will not be penalized or lose benefits if you refuse to participate or decide to stop. Do you consent to participate in this project? 1 INFORMED CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE IN A RESEARCH STUDY USAID/OFDA Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming Good morning, my name is Juan Pablo Sarmiento, and I am the Principal Investigator of the study on USAID/OFDA Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming. The co-investigators of this study are Vicente Sandoval and Marije van Lidth de Jeude. You have been selected to participate in a research study on Urban DRR Programming. The purpose of this study is to evaluate eight disaster risk reduction (DRR) interventions that were implemented by the USAID/OFDA in six countries: Colombia, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, and Peru. The findings of this study will inform future decisions of ongoing USAID/OFDA urban DRR programming. It is expected that future USAID/OFDA urban DRR projects that reach out to other neighborhoods across the LAC region will benefit from more effective and more sustainable projects. If you decide to participate in this study, you will be one of 320 household heads who will be surveyed in six countries. The participation will take between 45 minutes and one hour of your time. If you agree to participate in this study, you are expected to respond to the questions. You may withdraw and discontinue participation at any time without penalty. If you have questions while taking part in our study, please stop me at any time and ask. If you feel uncomfortable in any way with any question, please feel free to decline to answer that question or end the survey. There are no foreseeable risks or benefits to you for participating in this study. There is no cost or payment to you for participating in this study. You will remain anonymous throughout the research process. We will not include any information that will make it possible to identify you as a subject in any sort of report we might publish about this research. Research records will be stored securely and only the research team and sponsor agencies (United States Agency for International Development) will have access to the records. If you have any questions for one of the researchers conducting this study, you may contact Juan Pablo Sarmiento at +1(305)348-0346. If you would like to talk with someone about your rights of being a subject in this research study or about ethical issues with this research study, you may contact the FIU Office of Research Integrity by phone at 305-348-2494 or by email at ori@fiu.edu. Your participation in this research is voluntary and you will not be penalized or lose benefits if you refuse to participate or decide to stop. Do you consent to participate in this project? 1 INFORMED CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE IN A RESEARCH STUDY USAID/OFDA Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming Good morning, my name is Juan Pablo Sarmiento, and I am the Principal Investigator of the study on USAID/OFDA Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming. The co-investigators of this study are Vicente Sandoval and Marije van Lidth de Jeude. You have been selected to participate in a research study of Urban DRR Programming. The purpose of this study is to evaluate eight disaster risk reduction (DRR) interventions that were implemented by the USAID/OFDA in six Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) countries: Colombia, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, and Peru. The findings will inform future decisions of ongoing USAID/OFDA urban DRR programming. It is expected that future USAID/OFDA urban DRR projects that reach out to other neighborhoods across the LAC region will benefit from more effective and more sustainable projects. If you decide to participate in this study, you will be one of 80 community members across six countries who will be asked to participate in focus group studies for this research project. The participation will take approximately one hour of your time. If you agree to be in this study, you are expected to respond to the questions. You may withdraw and discontinue participation at any time without penalty. If you have questions while taking part in our study, please stop me at any time and ask. If you feel uncomfortable in any way with any question, please feel free to decline to answer that question or end your participation. There are no foreseeable risks or benefits to you for participating in this study. There is no cost or payment to you for participating in this study. You will remain anonymous throughout the research process. We will not include any information that will make it possible to identify you as a subject in any sort of report we might publish about this research. Research records will be stored securely and only the research team and sponsor agencies (United States Agency for International Development) will have access to the records. If you have questions while taking part in our study, please stop me at any time and ask. If you have any questions for one of the researchers conducting this study, you may contact Juan Pablo Sarmiento at +1(305)348-0346. If you would like to talk with someone about your rights of being a subject in this research study or about ethical issues with this research study, you may contact the FIU Office of Research Integrity by phone at 305-348-2494 or by email at ori@fiu.edu. Your participation in this research is voluntary and you will not be penalized or lose benefits if you refuse to participate or decide to stop. Do you consent to participate in this project? Performance Evaluation: LAC Urban DRR Programming The Neighborhood Approach ANNEX List of Respondents Table of Contents List of Respondents Interviewing participants summary Interviewing participants list (Coded) Interviewing participants summary from November 6th 2017 to March 9th 2018 (5 months) Sex/Gender Count Percentage Hierarchical/Geographical level Interviewing participants list Identification Sex/Ge nder Code for the code￾book Role Institution/Organiz ation Project related Place of interview Rec . Date of interview