Measuring Natural Risks in the Philippines : Socioeconomic Resilience and Wellbeing Losses
Traditional risk assessments use asset losses as the main metric to measure the severity of a disaster. This paper proposes an expanded risk assessment based on a framework that adds socioeconomic resilience and uses wellbeing losses as its main me...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Working Paper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2019
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/482401548966120315/Measuring-Natural-Risks-in-the-Philippines-Socioeconomic-Resilience-and-Wellbeing-Losses http://hdl.handle.net/10986/31227 |
| Summary: | Traditional risk assessments use asset
losses as the main metric to measure the severity of a
disaster. This paper proposes an expanded risk assessment
based on a framework that adds socioeconomic resilience and
uses wellbeing losses as its main measure of disaster
severity. Using a new, agent-based model that represents
explicitly the recovery and reconstruction process at the
household level, this risk assessment provides new insights
into disaster risks in the Philippines. First, there is a
close link between natural disasters and poverty. On
average, the estimates suggest that almost half a million
Filipinos per year face transient consumption poverty due to
natural disasters. Nationally, the bottom income quintile
suffers only 9 percent of the total asset losses, but 31
percent of the total wellbeing losses. The average annual
wellbeing losses due to disasters in the Philippines is
estimated at US$3.9 billion per year, more than double the
asset losses of US$1.4 billion. Second, the regions
identified as priorities for risk-management interventions
differ depending on which risk metric is used. Cost-benefit
analyses based on asset losses direct risk reduction
investments toward the richest regions and areas. A focus on
poverty or wellbeing rebalances the analysis and generates a
different set of regional priorities. Finally, measuring
disaster impacts through poverty and wellbeing impacts
allows the quantification of the benefits from interventions
like rapid post-disaster support and adaptive social
protection. Although these measures do not reduce asset
losses, they efficiently reduce their consequences for
wellbeing by making the population more resilient. |
|---|