Hazard analysis of Arid and semi-Arid (ASAL) regions of Kenya.

INTRODUCTION: This paper describes a situationanalysis on hazards in the Arid and semi-Arid lands of Kenya. The leading hazards affecting the Arid and semi-arid lands are mainly natural and include among others drought, floods, and landslides. Other hazards of importance were found to be war and conflict, HIV/AIDS and fires. Over 80% of these are weather related. OBJECTIVES: The overall objective of this study was to prioritize hazards in the ASAL region. Specifically, the study identified the top ten hazards in the ASAL Districts of Kenya, determined Probability of occurrence; Analyzed the potential impact of the hazard and utilizing multiplier effect prioritized the Hazards using a hypothetical model. METHODOLOGY: This was a descriptive study conducted in over half of the Kenya's ASAL Districts in four regions of Lower and Upper Eastern, North Eastern and part of the Coast region. Six Districts were purposively selected per region with six officers from each District all totaling one hundred and forty four. The sectors where respondents were sourced from were Agriculture, Health, local Government, and Provincial Administration, Environment and NGO. The members through a consensus process analyzed hazards in groups of their respective districts using a tool that had been developed and respondents trained on its use. RESULTS: One hundred and forty four (144) officers from Twenty four Districts in the four regions were recruited. One hundred twenty seven (81%) were male and only 27 (19% ) were female The representation of participants per sector was Governance 25% followed by Civil society organizations 21%, Health 16%, Agriculture and arid lands 15%, Research and scientific institutions 13%. The top Priority Hazards identified using the mean score were Drought and famine (5.4) Epidemics and epizootics (3.8), HIV/AIDS (3.6), War and conflict (2.5), Floods (2.5) CONCLUSIONS: The exercise confirmed the priority hazards in the Arid and semi-arid regions of Kenya and described vulnerability factors that included water scarcity, poverty and low educational levels. The region suffers from a variety of hazards in particular Drought and famine, Epidemics including HIV/AIDS and War and conflict. Environmental degradation though given a low score may be more of a perception. There is need to undertake a comprehensive hazard and Vulnerability analysis at regional and country level to inform interventions and other developmental activities. Women should be targeted at the community and leadership level, and efforts to empower them should be stepped up.

Regional approach to building operational level capacity for disaster planning: the case of the Eastern Africa region.

BACKGROUND: The Eastern Africa region is regularly affected by a variety of disasters ranging from drought, to human conflict and population displacement. The magnitude of emergencies and response capacities is similar across the region. In order to strengthen public health disaster management capacities at the operational level in six countries of the Eastern Africa region, the USAID-funded leadership project worked through the HEALTH Alliance, a network of seven schools of public health from six countries in the region to train district-level teams. OBJECTIVES: To develop a sustainable regional approach to building operational level capacity for disaster planning. METHODS: This project was implemented through a higher education leadership initiative. Project activities were spear-headed by a network of Deans and Directors of public health schools within local universities in the Eastern Africa region. The leadership team envisioned a district-oriented systems change strategy. Pre-service and in-service curricula were developed regionally and district teams were formed to attend short training courses. Project activities began with a situational analysis of the disaster management capacity at national and operational levels. The next steps were chronologically the formation of country training teams and training of trainers, the development of a regional disaster management training curriculum and training materials, the cascading of training activities in the region, and the incorporation of emerging issues into the training curriculum. An evaluation model included the analysis of preparedness impact of the training program. RESULTS: The output from the district teams was the creation of individual district-level disaster plans and their implementation. This 4-year project focused on building operational level public health emergency response capacity, which had not previously been part of any national program. Use of the all-hazard approach rather than a scenario-based contingency planning led to the development of a standardized curriculum for training both in-service and pre-service personnel. Materials developed during the implementation phases of the project have been incorporated into public health graduate curricula in the seven schools. This systems-based strategy resulted in demonstrable outcomes related to district preparedness and university engagement in disaster management. CONCLUSION: University partnerships are an effective method to build district-level disaster planning capacity. Use of a regional network created a standardized approach across six countries.