EMI participates in the ProVention Consortium Forum 2008 
Dr. Fouad Bendimerad and Dr. Bijan Khazai of EMI participated in the Provention Consortium Forum held in Panaman last 8-10 April 2008. The Megacity Indicators Systems (MIS) being developed for Istanbul was presented as a case study for the Urban Risk session of the Forum. Participants included members from UN organizations, World Bank, Inter American Bank, IFRC and other NGOs who were invited to participate in the session. It was shown how the MIS tool and indicators will be used both as a risk communication tool and as a policy and decision-making tool to track progress in improving the planning and operational DRR functions of the Municipality in Istanbul. The application of the methodology in Metro Manila was also shown to illustrate the MIS tool.
Discussions in the session were focused on using indicators to communicate risk and to build partnerships between central government, local government and community organizations. The differences between institutional and community-based approaches were highlighted, as this particular application was implemented within an institutional framework and the indicators were developed in the context of DRR and emergency management operations of the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality. The link between community-based participatory approaches and institutional approaches was of special interest to the participants, and the role of using indicators to bridge this gap was discussed. Having an input into the indicator model that reflects the demand of the community, for example from a Vulnerability Capacity Assessment (VCA), was seen as a way a community could connect to the functional and transformative operations and decisions made within local governments. However as discussed in other sessions particularly the case of Las Nubus, there is a question as to what mechanisms can be used to scale up VCAs from several communities to the many thousands of communities or neighborhoods that exist within megacities? There is also a question whether local governments will be automatically receptive to this input or see it as a threat, without the proper instruments? Creative approaches using indicators that allow for communities to influence decisions made by their local governments constitute an important question for future work.
The use of particular indicators were also discussed and debated. Some of the discussion was focused on the development of indicators to reflect social protection issues such as gender and ethnicity as well as social equity issues such as formal and informal settlements. It was understood by the participants that the choice of indicators in the Istanbul MIS application was narrowed by the local realities of Istanbul and the context of the target audience which in this case was the Istanbul Municipality. The methodology and the software tool which streamlines the methodology, however, can be applied to any context as long as the aim in using the indicators and the boundary conditions are well defined. Overall, the flexibility of the methodology and the interactive use of the MIS tool was seen as a powerful approach to monitor the progress of DRR promote a process of change through risk communication.
Discussions in the session were focused on using indicators to communicate risk and to build partnerships between central government, local government and community organizations. The differences between institutional and community-based approaches were highlighted, as this particular application was implemented within an institutional framework and the indicators were developed in the context of DRR and emergency management operations of the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality. The link between community-based participatory approaches and institutional approaches was of special interest to the participants, and the role of using indicators to bridge this gap was discussed. Having an input into the indicator model that reflects the demand of the community, for example from a Vulnerability Capacity Assessment (VCA), was seen as a way a community could connect to the functional and transformative operations and decisions made within local governments. However as discussed in other sessions particularly the case of Las Nubus, there is a question as to what mechanisms can be used to scale up VCAs from several communities to the many thousands of communities or neighborhoods that exist within megacities? There is also a question whether local governments will be automatically receptive to this input or see it as a threat, without the proper instruments? Creative approaches using indicators that allow for communities to influence decisions made by their local governments constitute an important question for future work.
The use of particular indicators were also discussed and debated. Some of the discussion was focused on the development of indicators to reflect social protection issues such as gender and ethnicity as well as social equity issues such as formal and informal settlements. It was understood by the participants that the choice of indicators in the Istanbul MIS application was narrowed by the local realities of Istanbul and the context of the target audience which in this case was the Istanbul Municipality. The methodology and the software tool which streamlines the methodology, however, can be applied to any context as long as the aim in using the indicators and the boundary conditions are well defined. Overall, the flexibility of the methodology and the interactive use of the MIS tool was seen as a powerful approach to monitor the progress of DRR promote a process of change through risk communication.
