Nargis and Haiyan: The Politics of Natural Disaster Management in Myanmar and the Philippines

Abstract

This paper examines the impact of two of the gravest natural disasters in contemporary Asian history: Cyclone Nargis, which devastated parts of Myanmar in May 2008, and Typhoon Haiyan, which hit the Philippines in November 2013. It addresses the role played by greatly divergent governance structures, noting that governance failures led to the exacerbation of the disasters in both cases. The paper explores the links between the national government as the primary duty-bearer for good governance and natural disaster risk management, examining institutions, infrastructures, education and budgetary allocations in each country; seeking the underlying causes of inefficient disaster management. This includes the extent to which each government fell short in its response even though each country is regularly exposed to typhoons and tropical storms. In each case the findings are that the national resilience and government preparedness efforts to reduce the impact of natural disasters were insufficient, and that the authorities, either through lack of capacity or lack of will, experienced reaction shortcomings. The final section contains lessons learned and policy prescriptions in order to enhance resilience in the face of future natural disasters in Asia.

Keywords:

• Governance
• human security
• disaster management
• Typhoon Haiyan
• Cyclone Nargis
• Myanmar
• The Philippines
• risk management resilience

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their gratitude for invaluable feedback from the editors of Asian Studies Review and the anonymous peer reviewers.

Notes

1. According to the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR, 2009), resilience is “The ability of a system, community or society exposed to hazards to resist, absorb, accommodate to and recover from the effects of a hazard in a timely and efficient manner, including through the preservation and restoration of its essential basic structures and functions”.

2. Development/underdevelopment here refers to both the traditional state-centric institutional model embodied by aggregate measurements such as GDP per capita and GNI per capita, and the human development variants. One problem related to disaster risk reduction is that while underdevelopment in traditional terms can certainly undermine resilience, as on average infrastructure, housing, response teams etc. are less well provided for, macro-development projects, or a failure to have a human-centred focus in development planning, can also impact negatively on resilience.

3. “Governance is the sum of the many ways individuals and institutions, public and private, manage their common affairs” (Commission on Global Governance, 1995, p. 2). Sound governance is a subset of governance, wherein public resources and problems are managed effectively, efficiently and in response to the critical needs of society (UNDP, 1997, p. 9).

4. For the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR), there is no such thing as a “natural” disaster, only natural hazards, and Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) aims to reduce the damage caused by natural hazards such as earthquakes, floods, droughts and cyclones, through an ethic of prevention. Meanwhile, mainstreaming disaster risk management in development planning can reverse the current trend of rising disaster impact. “Economic development, population growth, and rapid urbanization are driving the increase in disaster losses. According to the United Nations, more than two-thirds of the world’s population will live in cities by 2050. If countries act decisively, they can save lives and assets” (World Bank, 2016).