Disaster Risk Reduction and Emergency Management in Armenia

have caused vast social upheaval and economic damage to Armenia. In the 2005 report ―Natural Disasters Hotspot – A Global Risk Analysis,‖ the World Bank lists Armenia in the top 60 countries exposed to multiple hazards. A 2004 United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) report on reducing natural disaster risk revealed that during 1980-00, Armenia averaged about 325 deaths per million inhabitants due to disasters—ranking third behind the Democratic Republic of Korea and Mozambique. 1 In fact, more than 80 percent of Armenians are at risk of exposure to catastrophic events. This ongoing vulnerability to natural disasters has led Armenia to appreciate the advantages of developing a comprehensive strategy to help minimize ensuing fiscal exposure because the national budget will never be adequate to mitigate, respond, and recover from these recurrent but unavoidable crises. For example, the 1988 Spitak earthquake killed more than 25,000 people, injured 19,000, damaged over 515,000 homes, and caused some US$15-20 billion in damages—more than two times Armenia's 2007 Gross Domestic Product (GDP). 2 Since the Spitak earthquake, Government has reorganized its emergency management system and established many seismic mitigation activities and must be commended for creating a Ministry of Emergency Situations (MoES) and establishing a cabinet-level Minister responsible for disaster response. Government may wish to build on these achievements by continuing to bolster existing institutional structures, response and mitigation programs, and overall capacity to prepare and respond to the potential magnitude of disasters, because in their current state, they would be insufficient to counteract the effects of any large-scale disaster. Resolving some of the outstanding issues that remain could boost overall response and mitigation efforts; Government may want to consider tackling these now to build on achievements through the following actions. First, Government has established multiple mitigation programs, involving multiple ministries. The investment in these mitigation programs would be more efficient and effective if Government now develops a comprehensive national plan, which would include strategies to coordinate inter-Ministry activities. This would reduce or eliminate overlapping responsibilities and duplication of duties and increase Government's ability to prioritize activities and allocate scarce resources. A comprehensive approach might include reviewing existing legislation, policies, and regulations to ensure cohesive mitigation programs among Ministries; and, given the 1 United Nations Development Programme, Reducing Disaster Risk: a Challenge for Development (New York, 2004). 2 2007Armenia GDP was US$9.2 billion. 2 considerable risk of earthquake and flooding, could include a strategy that prioritizes …