1. A National All-Hazards Warning System for Sri Lanka Rohan Samarajiva, LIRNEasia Video News Conference Colombo, Sri Lanka 10 February 2005

2. Imagine...  A similar tsunami coming to Sri Lanka in 2016... A 24-hours/day, 365 days/year national all- hazards warning center gets the alert from the international system A warning issued within 9 minutes to emergency services, district administrative authorities, hotel groups, telecom operators, etc. When the waves hit within 90 minutes, evacuation was complete Casualties amounted to 300

3. Background  Desperate need for warning system First contact of tsunami at around 0836 Sri Lanka time in vicinity of Kalmunai Waves kept hitting points further north and south (and then the West Coast) over the next 3+ hours  No warning of tsunami based on seismic or tsunami warnings  No warning based on what happened on the East Coast  Hawai’i changed their entire disaster warning/ response system because 59 people died in 1960 tsunami  We lost around 40,000....

4. Consultative, participatory process  International input International disaster communications expert Expert referees, including those at news conference  Local input Local team: Samarajiva, Malathy Knight-John, Ayesha Zainudeen, assisted by others Expert consultation: January 26 th 2005  Alumni of Asian Disaster Preparedness Centre  Those who responded to the advertisement Web comments, including on discussion document News conference Chamber of Commerce/Adenauer Foundation event on 17 th of February

5. Education Public Warning as a part of a Risk Management System Risk Management System Multiple hazards Hazard detection Timely and AccurateWarning Appropriate action by vulnerable population Response Preparedness Hazardou s Event Recovery Mitigation Warning Focus of this concept paper

6. What is not included  Hazard detection & monitoring systems, e.g., Indian Ocean tsunami warning system, including seismometers and deep-sea tsunami sensors Cyclone detection and monitoring system  Emergency response functions Police and other agencies responsible for evacuation, etc.  Disaster awareness and education

7. Why?  Accept that first-best solution is an integrated risk management system  But, in an environment of “all talk, little action,” best approach is to focus on critical component and fix it  Chose national warning because it is important, low-cost and solvable, though few are paying attention to it and because we have expertise Contrast with education which is critically important, but National Institute of Education and others already taking the lead

8. Effective Public Warning (I)  Rationale: Human, Economic, Social and Political  Prerequisites: Education and awareness raising Planning Testing and assessment

9. Effective Public Warning (II)  Parameters For ALL-hazards Linked to regional and global systems Ubiquitous and accessible warnings Credibility of warning Large role for Public-private partnerships  Dissemination via existing and emerging private networks as well as media  Role for telecom and broadcasting industries  (Educational component)

10. Why all hazards?  Statement at expert consultation: Sri Lankans are good at installing but not at maintaining  Problem is more about systems than technologies (though technologies matter)  Have to keep systems in perfect operational order, though they are used infrequently Best method is to have an all hazard system that will be used more frequently than a single-hazard system  We can concentrate the best people in one place for the task  Cheaper

11. A National All-Hazards Warning System  Public warning is A public good: not supplied by market CORE BUSINESS OF GOVERNMENT  Two options: Government funds supply: PLAN A Supply is ‘bundled’ with private goods, supplied by private sector: PLAN B

12. PLAN A: The Island of Good Governance  Government supplies warning, funded through taxation Design elements and safeguards to ensure high performance; provisions for  deployment of proper expertise and equipment,  adequate levels of funding,  insulation from day-to-day political interference, and  transparency and accountability. Will require large effort and time in order to get it right. So, in the meantime…

13. Plan A, Variant  In Bangladesh, the Red Crescent Society operates the cyclone warning system Government provides some funds and meteorological data Tightly integrated to community based awareness and shelter programs  Many lives have been saved

14. PLAN B: Private Sector Takes Action  Private sector supplies warning Stakeholders:  Insurance  Tourism Fragmented efforts will have to be amalgamated Requires government support (indemnification, access to hazard information, etc) This is second or third best solution; something is better than nothing for now

15. Action…  Immediate: Localized and partial efforts focused on hazards relevant to specific industries/entities can be implemented Education and awareness raising  Medium-term (six months from now): Nationwide ALL-hazards warning system needs to be carefully designed and diligently implemented  Perhaps with contributions from the ground-up systems

16. Key points  Urgent need for effective system to convey information on hazards to all citizens, visitors and organizations Systems, not limited to technology  System should be at national level, with links to regional/international systems  It should convey authoritative watches and warnings to the media, emergency response authorities, and relevant others  It should be an all-hazards center, with best possible governance and independence  May be complemented by industry-run warning systems

17. Interim Concept Paper (& some comments) available at: www.lirneasia.net www.vanguardfoundationlanka.org www.lirneasia.net www.vanguardfoundationlanka.org Open for comments until February 19 th 2005 Finalization and submission by February 26 th 2005