INTRODUCCIÓN
This review of the Global Assessment Report serves as the background research
for interviews that were carried out in December 2017 with 9-11 year olds in
Canoa, Ecuador about their understanding and emotions across the disaster life cycle
as well as before the possible next earthquake.1
The authors of the Global Assessment Report note that from a child rights perspective,
disaster impacts affect not only a child’s basic right to survival and development,
but cut across their right to participate and for decisions to be made in their best interests.
Child-centred approaches recognise the role and rights of children as citizens
and agents of change, seeking to engage them in Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR)/
Child-Centred Approach (CCA) decision-making and accountability processes and
supporting child-centred community-based programs of action.22
RESEARCH EVIDENCE FOR CHILDREN’S RIGHTS TO
DISASTER PREVENTION PARTICIPATION
Previous research within the Children in a Changing Climate3 coalition has looked
at spaces where children have opportunities to influence and engage in Disaster Risk
Reduction climate change policy and developed an evidence base from which to articulate
the capacity of children as agents of change within their communities.
The Global Assessment Report (GAR) on Disaster Risk Reduction: Enabling
Child-Centred Agency provides an overview of the institutional and legal frameworks
for disaster risk reduction (DRR) and child-centred policies in the Philippines and
El Salvador as they are translated into practice. Empirical examples of the political,
cultural and institutional environment underpinning child-centre DRR programs
conclude with lessons learnt from both countries to articulate the key elements of an
enabling environment for child centred DRR policies and practice.
Children under Article 1 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the
Child are defined as those who are “under 18” - in line with the “age of majority” in
many countries thus the emphasis of the Report is on those internationally recognised
as children.
Child-centred DRR is an overarching framework that recognises children as both
beneficiaries and active citizens engaged in decision-making, planning and accountability
processes for prevention, preparedness and response to be supported as agents
of change in their spheres of influence-household, school, the community and beyond.
FROM VULNERABILITY TO CAPACITY
In many countries, disaster risk management policy and functions remain focussed
on a humanitarian and aid driven emergency response agenda, often focusing on the
immediate economic loss of the disaster event and the cost of rehabilitation and repair
of major infrastructure. Yet there are immediate and long-term human dimensions
of loss by an estimated 66.5 million children annually4 with most literature pointing
towards higher mortality and morbidity rates among children as a result of climate stresses and extreme events.5 This is especially acute for children and households with
low resilience in developing countries where governance is weak, education systems
are poor, coping capacities are lower and where climate-sensitive health factors such
as malnutrition, diarrhoea and malaria are higher.
By moving away from a concept of vulnerability involving passivity and suffering,
this means increasing capacities and therefore fostering and enabling people’s
resilience which requires engagement with communities to understand the causal factors
of differentiated vulnerability, the specific nature of risk, and working with those
actors to build household and community resilience to external shocks, as well as
influencing the wider institutional arena and implicating child-centred approaches to
ensure specific needs are planned for and protected during emergencies.6
THE IMPORTANCE OF SCHOOLS
Schools remain a focus of much of the action on children and disasters, including
through teaching on environmental issues and hazard risks, disaster proofing of buildings
to make them safer, and preparedness drills. Schools are also increasingly seen as
a community institution from which to undertake community-wide awareness raising.
The extensive and growing range of guidance and teaching materials for school-based
child-centred DRR is evidenced by the extensive collection of over 2000 items in the
Prevention web Educational Materials Collection.7
Emphasising the value of engagement with children is not to expect them to have all the
answers. Rather it reinforces the case for... policy-making to include bottom-up processes
to ensure approaches are context specific and take account of the needs of marginalised
groups.8
THE ROLE OF INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS
AND GOVERNANCE - CHILDREN’S RIGHTS,
NEEDS AND CAPACITIES
Much of the recent advocacy work around child agency and capacities for DRR
and Child Centred Agency (CCR) are built on rights-based arguments. The United
Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) sets out four main principles
which reflect all the articles in the convention, these are: survival and development;
non-discrimination; child participation; and the best interests of the child. Many of
these underpin the need for child centred DRR and CCA to take a protective approach
to ensuring that disasters and the changing climate do not erode a child’s basic right
to health, shelter, food, clean water, education and freedom from harm. However,
participation, as one of the four fundamental principles, is increasingly recognised as
fundamental to policy making that is sensitive to children’s needs and well-being, and
therefore of value to wider society. It is also fundamental to children’s self-esteem and
a means of empowerment. Child participation is recognised as a right under Article
12, but participation is also a means to children realising their rights more generally.9
Recognising a child’s right to participate empowers them as individuals and members
of civil society-as citizens - it gives them the opportunity to exercise their citizenship
rights and to influence the actions and decisions that affect their lives.
Despite internationally supported frameworks for promoting childhood well-being
and securing child rights, it is increasingly recognised that recurring disasters and the
changes in climate are “...causing child rights to become even more difficult to safeguard,
as adults, communities and governments do not fully appreciate the threats to
their children’s future or are increasingly powerless to fulfil their responsibilities to
protect them.10
FOCUSED CASE STUDIES:
EL SALVADOR AND THE PHILIPPINES
The Global Assessment Report focuses on research that took place in the Philippines
(2008-09 and 2010) and in El Salvador (2008-09). The susceptibility of the Philippines to disaster is revealed through Office of Civil Defence statistical records
covering the period 1997 to 2007 which show that the total cost of damages brought
about by various types of disasters was P176.733 billion (over $4billion). This does
not include the indirect losses nor does it factor in the loss of lives. In 2004, the World
Bank estimated the cost of disaster annually to be 15 billion or 0.5 per cent of the
country’s gross national product. A report from the Centre for Research and Epidemiology
of Disasters places the Philippines as number one in occurrence of disasters in
the world for 2009, with the third highest number of deaths globally and 14.8 per cent
of the population being affected.11
a) El Salvador is also highly susceptible to disaster events due to its geographic
location on tectonic boundaries and tropical storm tracks, the presence of active
volcanoes, exposure to drought events, and low levels of capacity to respond
due to widespread poverty and degradation of natural ecosystems. El Salvador
in 2009 ranked second globally for relative loss in GDP, losing 4.4 per cent,
when recording deaths per 100,000 people it ranked fourth.
Climate change is likely to add to the burden in both countries due to the increasing
unpredictability of weather, and changes to the frequency and magnitude
of extreme events including storms, drought, flooding, and heat and cold
waves.
b) While national bodies in both the Philippines and El Salvador have their basis
in science-based approaches, interviews undertaken with key actors relating
to DRR at local regional levels in the study areas revealed an approach focused
primarily on understanding and tackling the human causes of disaster
events rather than hazard management. Most respondents stressed underlying
causes of vulnerability based on the levels of socio-economic development and
human behavioural factors influenced by cultural tradition. The poverty and
livelihoods context of the case study communities were therefore seen as the
dominant entry points for improving risk reduction by the majority of regional
and local DRR actors.
ADULT PERCEPTION OF CHILD AGENCY
The research suggests that adult views on child agency have the potential to foster
or stifle child participation and contributions to reducing disaster risk. Whilst families value the potential of children as actors within the household they are often not prescribed
with individual agency or voice within the home and this is often carried over
into the community sphere. Even where adults vocalised support for child-led DRR
activities this was commonly contradicted by household decision making structures in
which children have little or no voice. However, the support of the family for a child’s
action is a central enabler for child participation and agency.
As a reflection of this, the children themselves often expressed concern over their
physical capacity to act on behalf of the community due to their multiple commitments
to the school and the family. Some household interviews revealed that schooling
and family duties had to be completed prior to extra activities with youth groups.
This was particularly evident in the more remote rural villages visited.
Amongst officials at the municipal and provincial level the dominant view follows
that of Jose Rizal, a Philippine national hero, who is famously quoted as saying “the
youth is the hope of our future”. The officials consistently depicted children as the
“inheritors of the future” and the “leaders of tomorrow”, but in need of both protection
and guidance today.
CHILDREN NEED TO BE SEEN TO BE HEARD
There was considerable evidence that the visibility and experience of children’s
group activities was a crucial enabling factor in fostering community support. Many
adults and even parents of group members were not aware of the DRR activities of
the children’s groups. Yet where adults had been exposed to or involved in the activities,
they were more supportive and there was a significantly higher level of support
for child participation in communities with longer standing experiences. Visible
demonstrations of children engaging in activities to reduce risks in the household and
community provide a lived experience that acts as an important catalyst for shifting
cultural understandings to support child agency.
INCLUSION AND EXPERIENCE GENERATE SUPPORT
Household support provides not only formal permissions for children to participate
and engage in activities, but also confirmation to the children that their actions are
valued within the community, that their motivations are respected and thus they are
empowered to continue in their efforts and advocacy.
FACILITATION IS A CRUCIAL ENABLING FACTOR
The research demonstrates that children are capable actors, but they need stimuli
and support. There was a common perception that realising the potential of children is
necessarily a guided and supported process that may come through community based
sources such as schools, health centres or adult-led disaster groups, or through external
interventions by NGOs and CSOs. This catalytic role enables children’s groups to
draw on outside expertise for training and resources, as well as opening up potential
interaction with policy spaces and actors outside the community.
CHILDREN WORKING TOGETHER GENERATE
AGENCY AND ACTION
Facilitation needs to go beyond training and knowledge, and support analysis, debate,
prioritisation and action at community level, as well as dissemination of learning.
The ability to transform training and knowledge into action is lost without the
support of others with common and shared knowledge and agency. Holding training
events with a mix of adults and children provides an important route to common ownership
of the DRR agenda. It is essential that training and awareness of DRR policy
and practice is delivered community-wide.
Creating opportunities for presenting work to parents and adults in the community,
and safe spaces for engaging with authority figures represents an important part of a
child-sensitive enabling approach. Children are often overwhelmed by the notion of
authority, so bringing officials into spaces where children feel secure, such as facilitated
workshops, is important. The creation of formal spaces for informal engagement
between government institutions and children allows adults to be exposed to the children
as they learn, discuss and debate, building recognition of the agency and capacity
of children and seeing the potential of engagement.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND EXISTING PROGRAMS
ARE STARTING POINTS FOR ACTION
Where existing programmes such as health and education are seeking to meet the
basic needs of child welfare and improve well-being, it is important that the contribution
of these programmes for DRR is communicated and understood; as children and
communities see the multiple benefits of their action, they are motivated to continue
and strive harder to achieve the common goals. Focussing early activities on nationwide
campaigns builds links with the local, municipal and provincial authorities.
INDIVIDUAL CHAMPIONS ARE OFTEN THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN SUCCESS AND FAILURE
Authority figures (or champions) in the community who already command the
respect and trust of both children and adults, especially ones not subject to political
influence and whose roles directly pertain to child welfare such as school directors or
health workers provide a working link between outside networks and facilitation and
a reference point for parents regarding the appropriateness of group activities.
GROUPS NEED TO ENGAGE WITH WIDER NETWORKS
TO ACCESS RESOURCES AND POLICY SPACES
Wider support networks enable groups to exert influence beyond their own households
and community members, as well as interact with others. These networks were
often developed through schools, health workers, and NGOs rather than enabled by
government structures. Where groups were well linked with municipal government,
child groups accessed opportunities to exchange with peers, attend municipal wide
training and secure resources to undertake actions that are visible to community members.
The relationship also provided potential access to higher level policy spaces.
ACCESS TO POLICY SPACES AND LONG-TERM CULTURAL
SHIFTS LEAD TO SUSTAINABLE CHILD GROUPS
Building partnerships and networks within and beyond the community appears
to be critical in sustaining children’s participation, including links with formal institutions
to access and mobilise resources. Community structures can help sustain the
enabling environment through providing policy spaces where children’s voices can be
heard in community committees or school planning boards.
Importantly, there was a significantly higher level of support for child participation
in communities with longer standing experiences, and especially where former
children’s group leaders are now in local executive positions or indeed parents themselves.
This suggests that just as awareness and behavioural change around DRR will
be carried into adulthood, investment in child participation is a multi-generational
mission.
WHAT CHILDREN ACCOMPLISHED
DURING THE RESEARCH PERIOD
• Documented change in participation that was successfully undertaken by children’s
groups with relative autonomy in the Philippines: Mangrove reforestation
projects (Age: 10-16 years).
• Earthquake and cyclone preparedness drills (Age: 8-15 years).
• Removal of large stones above school buildings (Age: 8-15 years).
• Planting hill slope stabilizing plants to prevent landslides (Age: 11-16 years).
Documented activities that required behavioral change by other members of the
community in El Salvador:
• Advocacy and protests over quarrying of river beds (Age: 10-20 years).
• Identifying high risk structures and discussing reinforcement with owners
(Age: 10-15 years).
• Banning artisanal mining near the community to reduce contamination and
flood risk (Age: 14-18 years).
• Awareness campaigns and provision of communal waste disposal (Age: 12-16
years).
