This chapter assesses the ability of Colombia’s risk governance system, anchored in Law 1523/2010, to support policy outcomes for sustainable and inclusive development across the country. Law 1523/2012 is evaluated against its capacity to provide strategic guidance and to anchor disaster risk management in the national policy agenda. It also reviews the framework’s ability to devise clear roles and responsibilities and to convene all relevant actors to co-ordinate national disaster risk management policies and measures under the strategic leadership of a central lead institution. The chapter also assesses transparency and inclusiveness in the policy formulation and implementation process as key elements of good disaster risk governance.
Risk Governance Scan of Colombia
OECD Reviews of Risk Management Policies
Chapter 3. Colombia’s strategic framework for disaster risk governance
Abstract
This risk governance scan seeks to assess Colombia’s Law 1523/2012, which provides a disaster risk governance framework for Colombia, in its ability to support policy outcomes for sustainable and inclusive development across the country. For a disaster risk governance system to effectively support the fulfilment of these objectives, it has to be strongly anchored and tied into the national policy agenda, so that all stakeholders integrate disaster risk as a priority action in their policies and implementation processes. To this end, the OECD Recommendation of the Council on the Governance of Critical Risks (OECD, 2014) suggests designating a lead institution at national level to provide comprehensive and strategic leadership and guide the actions of all other governmental and non-governmental stakeholders towards the fulfilment of these shared objectives.
This chapter assesses the ability of Colombia’s risk governance system to fulfil these objectives (Figure 3.1). It evaluates its leadership role against its capacity to provide strategic guidance, but also in its ability to devise clear roles and responsibilities and to convene actors to co-ordinate national policies and risk priority actions. Furthermore, this chapter will evaluate transparency and inclusiveness in the policy formulation and implementation process. The degree of inclusiveness influences the ability of the government to establish ownership of risks and engage stakeholders in disaster risk management actions. Along with transparency, inclusiveness is an important factor in establishing trust among societal actors that the government manages risks appropriately and that it renders itself accountable for its actions.
Figure 3.1. Elements of good disaster risk governance
Source: Based on (OECD, 2014)
Historical development of Colombia’s disaster risk management institutions
Given the prevalence of natural hazards in Colombia, the first formal institutions were established in 1948,1 giving the Colombian Red Cross, a civil society organisation, the responsibility for preparing for and responding to disasters. Subsequent laws expanded the set of stakeholders involved in managing disasters, eventually making it a core government responsibility, with the National Civil Defense Bureau (Dirección Nacional de la Defensa Civil) as lead institution.2 To co-ordinate the growing number of stakeholders that manage disaster response, the National Sanitation Code of 1979 created the National Emergency Committee (Comité Nacional de Emergencias) with its subnational equivalents, the local and regional emergency committees (comités regionales y locales de emergencias). In 1984, the National Calamities Fund (Fondo Nacional de Calamidades) was established to finance the response to disasters (World Bank, 2012).
In Colombia, as in many other OECD countries, policy development in this area has often evolved as a response to major events. The creation of the National System for Disaster Prevention and Response (Sistema Nacional para la Prevención y Atención de Desastres, SNPAD)3 in 1989 marked an important shift from a focus on disaster response to the consideration of disaster risk reduction measures. Drawing the lessons from the Nevado del Ruiz volcanic disaster in 1985 and the earthquake in Popayan in 1983, Law 46 introduced legal responsibilities for disaster risk reduction. In 1998, the Ministry of Interior issued the Plan for Disaster Prevention and Attention (Plan Nacional de Prevención y Atención de Desastres, PNPAD), which sought to strengthen disaster risk reduction in all phases of the disaster risk management cycle. It aimed at improving capacities to conduct risk identification, assessment and communication; at integrating risk in public investment projects at national and subnational level as well as in land-use planning; at establishing risk-informed building codes and infrastructure protection mechanisms; and at integrating resilience measures in the recovery and rehabilitation phase (Colombian Ministry of the Interior, 1998). Decree 919 established subnational governments to mainstream disaster risk management into local and regional development plans and public policies and required vulnerability analyses for large public works. Subsequent legislation further anchored disaster risk reduction in the law by prescribing risk-informed land-use planning and by limiting construction in hazard-prone areas (World Bank, 2012).4
Strategic value of the new national legal and policy framework
Disaster risk management at the heart of the national development agenda
With the adoption of Law 1523/20125, Colombia established a comprehensive legal framework that guides all national and subnational government stakeholders in the implementation of an integrated approach to disaster risk management, from disaster risk identification to recovery and rehabilitation.
As noted in the OECD Council Recommendation of the Council on the Governance of Critical Risks (OECD, 2014), for a disaster risk governance framework to be effective, it should be strongly embedded in the national policy agenda.
Disaster risk management is anchored in the government’s national development agenda. In Colombia, the national policy priorities are laid out in the National Development Plan (Plan Nacional de Desarollo, PND); the most recent version of the PND covers the period 2014-18. The PND sets out policy priorities of the government for a four-year period, formulating key policy objectives and priorities for public investment spending as well as planned budget allocations. The current PND contains five overall policy objectives and a transversal priority on green growth. Disaster risk management is prominently placed in this transversal component of the PND, which demonstrates the government’s recognition of the cross-cutting nature of disaster risk management and the need for embedding it in national sectoral as well as territorial development plans (DNP, 2014).
The management of disaster risks is recognised as a key factor for Colombia’s sustained and inclusive development. The National Development Plan describes disaster risk and the interconnected risk of climate change as potentially undermining factors for the country’s economic competitiveness, affecting the sustainability of key infrastructure investments and threatening the quality of life for its population, especially the poorest segment. To reduce disaster risks, the PND recommends strengthening the National System for Disaster Risk Management (Sistema Nacional de Gestión del Riesgo de Desastres, SNGRD), to carry out the activities set out in Law 1523/2012, recognising the National Unit for Disaster Risk Management (Unidad Nacional para la Gestión del Riesgo de Desastres, UNGRD) as the national lead organisation. The PND acknowledges the importance of mobilising all national stakeholders to contribute to the SNGRD as well as to improve the technical capacity for managing disaster risks (DNP, 2014).
This section will evaluate the SNGRD against the four key quality aspects that characterise an effective disaster risk governance framework (Figure 3.1), based on the criteria spelled out in the OECD Recommendation (OECD, 2014):
1. the quality of its central government leadership
2. the clarity of roles and responsibilities attributed to different national and subnational as well as non-governmental stakeholders
3. the effectiveness of mechanisms for cross-sectoral and cross-governmental co‑ordination
4. the openness and inclusiveness of its national policy and strategy formulation processes.
Box 3.1. Disaster risk management in Colombia’s National Development Plan
The National Development Plan recognises Colombia as one of the most disaster-prone countries in Latin America. It highlights the devastating impact of recent disasters on public infrastructure and the vulnerable population, and the deteriorating impact disasters can have on the competitiveness of economic sectors. It also recognises the potential fiscal impact disasters may entail, particularly in light of changes in climate and in case of low probability high-loss events.
To reduce disaster risks in Colombia, the National Development Plan suggests strengthening the National Disaster Risk Management System, as defined by Law 1523/2012. In particular it aims at: strengthening the co‑ordination of disaster risk management, ensuring the participation of all national sectoral stakeholders in the national committees; strengthening the technical assistance provided to assist subnational and sectoral entities in integrating disaster risk management in their activities; and monitoring the implementation of the National Plan for Disaster Risk Management. To achieve these objectives, the National Development Plan proposes to improve the use of funding available through the National Disaster Risk Management Fund to ensure allocations are made in line with Law 1523/2012 and with the objective to co‑finance activities that foster the integration of disaster risk management across sectors and territorial development activities.
Table 3.1. Disaster risk management objectives in the National Development Plan 2014-18
Source: (DNP, 2014)
The National Development Plan includes concrete objectives to be attained in the area of disaster risk management through 2018 (some exemplary indicators are presented in Table 3.1), including sectoral activities that are to be carried out to reduce existing risks as well as avoid creating new ones. Concrete roles are given to the Ministries of Housing and Territorial Development, Transport, Agriculture, Justice and Security, Finance and Public Credit as well as Mining and Energy. Each of the ministries should work to understand the exposure of sectoral infrastructure to disaster risks; to estimate potential losses and damages; to define risk reduction and protection strategies, including disaster risk insurance; and to mainstream disaster risk considerations in new public investment projects.
Source: DNP (2014).
Central government leadership
As noted in the OECD Recommendation, strong leadership at national level lies at the core of an effective disaster risk governance framework. The Recommendation calls for the designation of a national lead agency for the governance of critical risks, equipped with co‑ordination and incentive-setting power for the entire disaster risk management cycle (OECD, 2014). Results from the 2016 OECD Survey on the Governance of Critical Risks show that most OECD countries designate such a lead institution at central government level, although the roles that are assigned to these institutions vary considerably across countries (OECD, 2018).
In Colombia, the UNGRD is the designated national lead agency for disaster risk management. The director of the UNGRD is a representative of the President of Colombia, whose responsibility includes the maintenance of security and health of the country’s population. Established in 2011,6 the UNGRD replaced the previous Directorate for Risk Management, which was part of the Ministry of the Interior and Justice. As an autonomous agency attached to the centre of government through the Administrative Department of the Presidency of the Republic (Departamento Administrativo de la Presidencia de la República, DAPRE), it has its own technical expert staff that is not subject to staff rotation rules applied to other civil servants that are part of the central government. Figure 3.2 illustrates the comprehensive leadership roles of the UNGRD. The only function that it does not cover is policy evaluation, which is the responsibility of the Department of National Planning (Departamento Nacional de Planeación, DNP).
Figure 3.2. Leadership roles of the National Unit for Disaster Risk Management
Note: The question asked: “Which of the following disaster risk governance functions does the UNGRD carry out?”.
Source: 2018 OECD Colombia Risk Governance Survey.
The core leadership functions carried out by the UNGRD are:
1. the formulation of the national and strategic vision of the country’s disaster risk management system and the design of national disaster risk management policies;
2. the provision of technical assistance for, as well as an oversight function of, the mainstreaming of disaster risk management policies into national sectoral and subnational development policies;
3. the facilitation of the co-ordination of all key stakeholders to work together on the implementation of national priorities;
4. the support and monitoring of the implementation of national policies.
Colombia’s strategic vision is laid out in the National Plan for Disaster Risk Management (Plan Nacional de Gestión del Riesgo de Desastres, PNGRD), which currently covers the period 2015-25. The current PNGRD sets out goals and activities for each phase of the disaster risk management cycle and designates the stakeholder(s) responsible for their short-, medium- or long-term implementation. The current plan sets out priorities for actions largely on the basis of what stakeholders have already been doing, rather than orientating more ambitious ones to be reached by 2025 (UNGRD, 2016).
The UNGRD uses different instruments to mainstream disaster risk management into national and subnational policies. It organises technical workshops with different stakeholders from line ministries and subnational governments as well as with academia and civil society. The UNGRD works directly with line ministries responsible for critical infrastructure (transport, housing, agriculture) to mainstream disaster risk management objectives into their sectoral policies. At the subnational level, the UNGRD supports the implementation of disaster risk management actions through the intra-institutional committees, as well as through the territorial councils at state and municipal level (UNGRD, 2018).
The UNGRD leads and facilitates the co-ordination and co-operation among disaster risk management stakeholders. It brings all responsible stakeholders together to co-ordinate the implementation of the national policy priorities for disaster risk management. It carries out this function as the secretary of the intra-sectorial committees (see below), which are platforms to promote policy coherence, facilitate collaboration and address competing objectives, organised around different functions in the disaster risk management cycle (Lacambra et al., 2014).
The UNGRD fosters policy implementation through non-financial and financial incentive mechanisms. It provides non-financial incentives, such as the provision of technical guidelines and toolkits as well as training sessions on specific disaster risk management issues, and continued work refining the regulatory framework for disaster risk management. Further to this, the UNGRD carries out disaster risk communication campaigns (UNGRD, 2018). The UNGRD is also in charge of monitoring the implementation of projects as defined by the PNGRD and publishes monitoring results on its website7 (Box 3.3).
Based on Law 1523/2012, the UNGRD can tap into the National Fund for Disaster Risk Management (Fondo Nacional de Gestión del Riesgo de Desastres, FNGRD) (Box 3.2) to provide financial incentives by means of co-financing to national sectoral units or subnational governments investing in disaster risk reduction measures. Although the concrete expenditures of the fund would have to be evaluated in more detail, it appears that it has been used to a limited extent to this end. It is mostly used to provide financial assistance in the event of a disaster, which leaves only limited room to co-finance disaster risk reduction projects. The unspecified requirement for allocating funding from sectoral budgets to the fund creates a second challenge, as it prevents forward-looking financial planning, and may result in underfunding (UNGRD, 2018).
To support the UNGRD in its steering function, Law 1523/2012 requires the UNGRD to establish a national information system (the SNGRD). To date some, but not all, available hazard maps can be found on the UNGRD’s website, but there is little systematic information on other risk management functions. To be a useful tool, the national information system should also contain guidance on effective disaster prevention, preparation, response and recovery tailored to levels of government, as well as households and businesses (see Chapter 4) (UNGRD, 2018).
Box 3.2. The National Fund for Disaster Risk Management in Colombia
The National Fund for Disaster Risk Management (FNGRD) was initially set up as the National Calamity Fund, to provide financial assistance in the response to disasters. In 2012, with the introduction of Law 1523, the fund’s purpose was expanded to leverage the implementation of the national risk management objectives spelled out in Law 1523/2012.
Law 1523/2012 divides the FNGRD into five sub-accounts, namely risk knowledge, risk reduction, disaster management, recovery and financial protection. The fund is administered by the Fiduciaria La Previsora and executed by the National Unit for Disaster Risk Management (UNGRD) and, in addition to providing emergency financial assistance, is supposed to co-finance risk reduction projects implemented by national sectoral agencies or subnational governments.
The FNGRD is operated as a special account with asset, administrative, accounting and statistical independence. In 2013, for example, the available resources were mostly used for risk reduction projects, followed by disaster management/response projects and, to a lesser extent, to finance risk knowledge activities. The annual allocation for the FNGRD is only able to provide limited initial response to an emergency and very little funding is dedicated to risk reduction measures (World Bank, 2012).
Sources: UNGRD (2016), Congress of Colombia (2012), World Bank (2012).
Stakeholder roles and responsibilities in the National System for Disaster Risk Management
In complement to the central government leadership function, an effective disaster risk governance framework establishes clear roles and responsibilities for all stakeholders. This includes roles for the whole of government, i.e. at national and subnational level, as well as for the whole of society, including non-governmental stakeholders.
In Colombia, the roles and responsibilities for disaster risk management are articulated through the SNGRD, created by Law 1523/2012. The SNGRD, whose structure is depicted in Figure 3.3, includes public entities (sectoral, territorial and institutional), private entities (for profit and non-profit) as well as individuals and households, and describes how their interaction is organised in the form of different councils and committees. The National Plan for Disaster Risk Management, as aforementioned, turns the provisions of Law 1523/2012 down into concrete actions and designates the stakeholder(s) responsible for their short-, medium- or long-term implementation (UNGRD, 2017).
Box 3.3. The biannual monitoring of Colombia’s National Disaster Risk Management Plan
Regular monitoring of progress made in project implementation is important to keep track of project performance and task duration, and to identify potential bottlenecks and problems that could derail a project from its planned timeline.
In Colombia, the National Unit for Disaster Risk Management (UNGRD), in co-operation with the technical committees in the National System for Disaster Risk Management (SNGRD) and with input from the territorial councils, monitors the implementation of projects agreed as part of the National Plan for Disaster Risk Management (PNGRD). In line with the provisions of Decree 1081/2015 and Law 1523/2012, monitoring takes place twice a year, and is presented in a report published on the UNGRD’s website. As part of the monitoring, progress in completing objectives within the timelines (short term: 2015-18; medium term: 2019-21; long term: 2022-25) and resources spent are reviewed. The idea behind the monitoring exercise is to ensure transparency to enable continuous improvement and to build trust in the government’s capacity to implement disaster risk management objectives.
However, so far, the available four progress reports suggest that while many projects are already under implementation, few have been completed (including those set to end by 2018), suggesting that there is further scope to using monitoring to drive policy implementation. One way the monitoring report could add value would be to identify bottlenecks for implementation, and propose ways to overcome them, along with determining clear subgoals. It would also be useful to specify the links between project progress and overall implementation of the national disaster risk management objectives.
Source: UNGRD (2018), UNGRD (2016).
Whole-of-government approach to disaster risk management
Effective disaster risk management hinges on the engagement of all government actors at central and subnational levels (OECD, 2014). In Colombia, Law 1523/2012 requires all central and subnational public entities to mainstream disaster risk management into their respective policy fields, and carry out disaster risk management actions within the framework of their competence. All government entities are required to ensure that public investments take hazard information into account in their planning process so as to avoid the creation of new risks. The law also requires territorial and land-use planning to take account of prevailing hazards. Entities in charge of critical service provision have the additional responsibility to develop emergency response strategies and contingency plans (Congress of Colombia, 2012).
Figure 3.3. National System for Disaster Risk Management
Source: Adapted from (UNGRD, 2018)
Some ministries build on the requirements of Law 1523/2012 with their own decrees. For instance, the Ministry of Housing, City and Territory issued Decree 1807 to ensure risk‑informed land-use planning. This requirement applies to both land-use planning for new areas, and to the review of existing documents, and is the result of a co-ordination and advisory process with the UNGRD and other stakeholders in the SNGRD (Colombian Ministry of Housing, City and Territory, 2014).
Law 1523/2012 clearly recognises the importance of a whole-of-government engagement in disaster risk management and the UNGRD has assumed the role in mobilising all actors towards this end. While a review at subnational level goes beyond the current review and is thus subject to further investigation, at national level the PNGRD implementation review suggests that stakeholders have started to engage in contributing to the implementation of the national disaster risk management objectives. However, to fully evaluate the contribution of each actor towards the national disaster risk management objectives, a more detailed review of each actor’s engagements, especially at the subnational level, would be necessary.
Whole-of-society approach to disaster risk management
Public stakeholders have a lead role in creating a resilient society, but they cannot do so if households, civil society and businesses do not do their part. A “whole-of-society” approach, as outlined in the OECD Recommendation, is needed to encourage non-governmental actors to carry out self-protection and resilience measures (OECD, 2014).
Law 1523/2012 introduced a whole-of-society responsibility for disaster risk management in Colombia. As per Article 8, businesses and all individuals living in Colombia should be risk informed and carry out disaster risk management measures. Introducing a legal disaster risk management obligation that extends to private actors is an important step forward from previous legislation and planning instruments that prioritised government engagement. Although the 2012 law renders disaster risk management a shared task, it does not specify legal obligations beyond the requirement for developing emergency management plans from public service providers (for which Decree 2157/2017 provides additional guidance). Other OECD countries have made further advancements in this regard. In Switzerland, hazard insurance for buildings is mandatory across almost the whole country, whereas in France all household, business and motor vehicle insurance policies are tied to the mandatory CATNAT disaster insurance scheme (OECD, 2017).
Despite the absence of a clear legal responsibility, some good practices of business engagement in disaster risk management are emerging. Ecopetrol, the country’s primary oil producer, has conducted risk assessments of its facilities and along its pipelines, mostly with a focus on intentional man-made threats, such as terrorism linked to internal conflict. Since Ecopetrol has increasingly been affected by natural hazards, such as mudslides during the 2010/11 La Niña events, it has recognised the need to improve its capacity to assess the link between natural and technological hazards and adapt its preparedness capacity as well as mitigating measures.
There are also cases that demonstrate that more can be done to ensure resilience engagement among private or semi-private actors. The crisis that has been unfolding on the Hidroituango dam (see Box 2.4 in Chapter 2) shows that more can be done, especially by critical infrastructure operators, to incorporate prevailing natural hazards and interconnected natural and man-made risks into their planning process as well as their operations and maintenance.
Cross-government co-ordination
To prevent duplication of efforts, and ensure maximum outcomes, transboundary (i.e. across sectoral and municipal jurisdictions) and effective co-operation and co-ordination between stakeholders is necessary. To this end, the OECD Recommendation (OECD, 2014) promotes interagency platforms that foster co-ordination, guide policy design and implementation, prevent duplication of efforts, and foster exchange of good practices. Co‑ordination mechanisms include standing working groups or committees that bring together responsible government stakeholders and, where applicable, business and civil society representatives. They also include networks of experts that convene on technical matters or public consultation processes.
In Colombia, stakeholder co-ordination for disaster risk management is organised through inter-institutional platforms that are anchored in the National Disaster Risk Management System (Figure 3.4). Three technical committees cover all steps in the disaster risk management cycle: the National Committee for Risk Knowledge (Comité Nacional de Conocimiento del Riesgo, CNRCR) that focuses on disaster risk identification activities, the National Committee for Risk Reduction (Comité Nacional para la Reducción del Riesgo, CNRR) that co-ordinates disaster risk reduction policies, and the National Committee for Disaster Management (Comité Nacional para el Manejo de Desastres, CNMD) that is in charge of advising preparedness and response operations, as well as recovery and reconstruction. The technical committees are presided by the National Council for Disaster Risk Management (Consejo Nacional para la Gestión del Riesgo de Desastres, CNGRD), which encompasses delegates from all ministries and guides the policies and actions of the SNGRD. Departmental, district and municipal councils complement the national councils’ activities at subnational level. Although the committees bring together a wide range of relevant stakeholders, they might not all be comprehensive. For instance, the armed forces, navy and air force are members of the CNMD, but the Ministry of Defence (Ministerio de Defensa Nacional) as the ministry overseeing the military is not represented in this committee (Table 3.1).
Figure 3.4. National committees that co-ordinate activities of the disaster risk management cycle
Sources: Adapted from (Todd and Todd, 2011; OECD, 2014; UNGRD, 2018; Congress of Colombia, 2012)
Each committee informs the design of national policies and co-ordinates the implementation of national policies in its respective technical domain. The Risk Knowledge Committee is tasked with the identification and assessment of hazards and risks as well as the promotion of risk-informed policy making. The Risk Reduction Committee co-ordinates “the design of the risk reduction process” (Law 1523/2012, Article 23). This includes the formulation of a disaster risk financing strategy for disaster recovery and reconstruction, whereas a financing strategy for disaster risk reduction measures is not amongst the responsibilities of the Risk Reduction Committee. The Disaster Management Committee, in turn, leads and co-ordinates policy making in support of the disaster management process and provides a platform to co‑ordinate policies for disaster response and recovery.
The committees’ roles are not always clearly spelled out, and in some cases roles are redundant. In addition, the linkages between them could be leveraged to improve their outcomes and ensure effective co-ordination. For instance, the Risk Knowledge Committee and the Risk Reduction Committee are both tasked with developing action plans for disaster recovery, whereas the Disaster Management Committee is supposed to take the lead in recovery preparation. It may also cause committees to prioritise tasks of exclusive jurisdiction, expecting those of shared jurisdiction to be completed by other stakeholders. In other cases, tasks are clearly assigned to one committee, but their actual content may be ambiguous. For example, the Risk Reduction Committee is mandated to lead the “actions and corrective interventions in the current conditions of vulnerability and threat” (Law 1523/2012, Article 23), which would suggest a responsibility for carrying out structural disaster risk reduction measures. However, actual practice suggests that the Risk Reduction Committee only offers a platform to exchange, but leaves policy implementation to subnational and central government actors.
Table 3.2. Stakeholder representation in national committees in disaster risk management in Colombia
Source: Based on (Congress of Colombia, 2012)
To ensure co-ordination at subnational level, the structure at national level is mirrored at departmental, district and municipal levels. Territorial councils bring together all relevant stakeholders from the respective level of government, co-ordinated by the governor (state councils) or the mayor (municipal councils) and play an important role in translating Law 1523/2012 and the corresponding planning instruments to the regional and local level. Representatives from the respective regional autonomous corporation (corporación autónoma regional, CAR) under the oversight of the Ministry of Environment join these councils to support the integration of disaster risk considerations in land-use planning and environmental management processes. Some initiatives exist in support of co-ordination between the national and subnational levels, including in the national committees for risk knowledge and risk reduction. To adequately analyse the links between the national and subnational levels, a separate study is required.
Open and inclusive policy making
Households and businesses are those who are directly impacted by natural hazards, as well as by disaster risk management measures and policies. Public consultation processes for disaster risk management policies ensure ownership and support from all stakeholders, and facilitate greater stakeholder engagement in disaster risk management. The OECD Recommendation calls for openness and inclusiveness in disaster risk management policy‑making processes, as well as in policy implementation.
In Colombia, various means to engage stakeholders in the policy-making process in disaster risk management are available. Most public stakeholders in the SNGRD participate in technical workshops that include representatives from other line ministries or levels of government. The UNGRD, as the lead organisation in the SNGRD, organises these workshops, as well as the intra-institutional platforms. Half of the responding stakeholders also stated that they organise and participate in conferences and workshops with civil society representatives, in some cases including from marginalised groups. Technical advisory panels, such as the technical advisory commission for risk management (comisión técnica asesora de conocimiento del riesgo) and the technical advisory commission for technological risks (comisión técnica asesora de riesgos tecnológicos) may be set up as needed, and provide for an engagement of researchers and scientists.
A small number of stakeholders stated that public policies are put to scrutiny and discussion through public consultation processes, town hall meetings and public hearings. Some public policies, such as land-use decisions and the seismic code, are by default open to public consultation once the initial draft has been approved by all involved policy makers.
Some stakeholders, such as the UNGRD, also use the Colombian citizen participation website “Crystal Urn” (Urna de Cristal) to consult with the public in the development of strategic and sectorial policies. The UNGRD also uses several other online tools to inform policy making with stakeholder input, including an online petition tool and surveys. In addition, the UNGRD organises annual public hearings that are open to all stakeholders in the SNGRD that manage public funds, assets and projects related to disaster risk management. As part of this public hearing, stakeholders have the opportunity to review activities carried out by the UNGRD and to discuss evaluation results, which are also made publicly available. A survey among stakeholders informs the public hearing agenda to identify priority issues (Box 3.3).
References
Colombian Ministry of Housing, City and Territory (2014), Decreto Número 1807, http://portal.gestiondelriesgo.gov.co/Documents/SRR/decrerto_1807_19_%20septiembre_2014.pdf.
Colombian Ministry of the Interior (1998), Plan Nacional para la Prevención y Atención de Desastres [National Plan for the Prevention and Attention for Disasters], http://repositorio.gestiondelriesgo.gov.co/bitstream/handle/20.500.11762/18515/Plan-Nacional-para-la-Prevencion-y-Atencion-de%20Desastres.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.
Congress of Colombia (2012), Law 1523/2012, https://repositorio.gestiondelriesgo.gov.co/bitstream/handle/20.500.11762/20575/Ley_1523_2012.pdf?sequence=4&isAllowed=y.
DNP (2014), Bases del Plan Nacional de Desarrollo 2014-2018 “Todos por un nuevo país: paz, equidad, educación” [Foundations of the 2014-2018 National Development Plan. “Everybody for a new country: peace, equality, education”], https://colaboracion.dnp.gov.co/cdt/prensa/bases%20plan%20nacional%20de%20desarrollo%202014-2018.pdf.
Lacambra, S. et al. (2014), iGOPP: Índice de Vulnerabilidad y de Politicas Públicas en Gestión del Riesgo de Desastre [iGOPP Governance and and Public Policy Index in Disaster Risk Management], https://publications.iadb.org/handle/11319/6717?locale-attribute=es&.
OECD (2017), Boosting Disaster Prevention through Innovative Risk Governance: Insights from Austria, France and Switzerland, OECD Reviews of Risk Management Policies, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264281370-en.
OECD (2014), Boosting Resilience through Innovative Risk Governance, OECD Reviews of Risk Management Policies, OECD Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264209114-en.
OECD (2014), OECD Recommendation on the Governance of Critical Risks, http://www.oecd.org/gov/risk/Critical-Risks-Recommendation.pdf.
Todd, D. and H. Todd (2011), Natural Disaster Response: Lessons from Evaluations of the World Bank and Others. Evaluation Brief 16, http://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/sites/default/files/Data/reports/eval_brief_nat_disaster_response.pdf.
UNGRD (2018), Atlas de riesgo de Colombia: revelando los desastres latentes [Colombia’s risk atlas: revealing disasters], https://repositorio.gestiondelriesgo.gov.co/handle/20.500.11762/27179.
UNGRD (2018), National System for Disaster Risk Management, Presentation at the OECD-UNGRD Colombia Risk Governance Scan Kick-off event, Unidad Nacional de Gestión del Riesgo de Desastres.
UNGRD (2018), Plan Nacional de Gestión del Riesgo de Desastres - Una estrategia de desarrollo 2015 - 2025. Cuarto Informe de Seguimiento y Evaluación. [National Plan for Disaster Risk Management -A 2015-2025 development strategy.Fourth Monitoring and Assessment Report], http://repositorio.gestiondelriesgo.gov.co/bitstream/handle/20.500.11762/756/Cuarto_Informe_seguimiento_PNGRD.pdf?sequence=43&isAllowed=y.
UNGRD (2017), Plan Nacional de Gestión del Riesgo de Desastres - Una estrategia de desarrollo 2015 - 2015: Segundo Informe de Seguimiento y Evaluación [National Plan for Disaster Risk Management -A 2015-2025 development strategy:Second Monitoring and Assessment Report], http://repositorio.gestiondelriesgo.gov.co/bitstream/20.500.11762/756/29/Segundo-informe-seguimiento-evaluacion-PNGRD-V2-.pdf.
UNGRD (2016), Plan Nacional de Gestión del Riesgo de Desastres - Una estrategia de desarrollo 2015 - 2025 [National Plan for Disaster Risk Management - A 2015 - 2025 development strategy], http://repositorio.gestiondelriesgo.gov.co/handle/20.500.11762/756.
UNGRD (2016), Plan Nacional de Gestión del Riesgo de Desastres - Una estrategia de desarrollo 2015 - 2025. Primer Informe de Seguimiento y Evaluación [National Plan for Disaster Risk Management - A 2015 - 2025 development strategy.First Monitoring and Assessment Report, http://repositorio.gestiondelriesgo.gov.co/bitstream/20.500.11762/756/26/PNGRD-2015-2025-Primer-informe-seguimiento-evaluacion.pdf.
World Bank (2012), Analysis of disaster risk management in Colombia a contribution to the creation of public policies (Vol. 2): Main report, Wordl Bank Group, http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/658361468018050201/pdf/NonAsciiFileName0.pdf.
Notes
← 1. Law 49/1948, Congress of Colombia, www.ifrc.org/docs/idrl/621ES.pdf (in Spanish, consulted on 17 July 2018).
← 2. Based on Decree 3398/1965, Ministry of Justice, https://www.minjusticia.gov.co/portals/0/MJD/docs/decreto_3398_1965.htm; and Decree 606/1965, Presidencia de Colombia, https://www.defensacivil.gov.co/recursos_user/Documentos%20Institucional/Decretos%20no%20compilados/DECRETO%20NUMERO%20606%20DE%201967.pdf (in Spanish, consulted on 17 July 2018).
← 3. Law 46/1988, http://www.ideam.gov.co/documents/24024/26915/C_Users_hbarahona_Desktop_Monica+R_normas+pag+web_ley+46+de+1988.pdf/7990561a-63f5-4927-9c91-fad4e81383a7; and Decree 919 of 1989, www.alcaldiabogota.gov.co/sisjur/normas/Norma1.jsp?i=13549 (consulted on 17 July 2017).
← 4. Law 9/1989, www.alcaldiabogota.gov.co/sisjur/normas/Norma1.jsp?i=1175; Law 2 of 1991, www.alcaldiabogota.gov.co/sisjur/normas/Norma1.jsp?i=1575; and Law 388 of 1997, www.alcaldiabogota.gov.co/sisjur/normas/Norma1.jsp?i=339 (consulted on 17 July 2018).
← 5. Law 1523/2012, Congress of Colombia, www.ideam.gov.co/documents/24189/390483/11.+LEY+1523+DE+2012.pdf/4e93527d-3bb8-4b53-b678-fbde8107d340?version=1.2 (in Spanish, consulted on 17 July 2018).
← 6. The UNGRD was created by Decree 4147/2011.
← 7. The PNGRD monitoring results are available at: http://repositorio.gestiondelriesgo.gov.co/handle/20.500.11762/756.