Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis 101066 I CLIMATE AND DISASTER RESILIENCE OF GREATER DHAKA AREA: A MICRO LEVEL ANALYSIS Bangladesh Development Series Paper No. 32 The World Bank November 2015 www.worldbank.org.bd/bds Document of the World Bank The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the author. They do not necessarily represent the views of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/World Bank and its affiliated organizations, or those of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent. i I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis World Bank Office Dhaka Plot – E-32, Agargaon Sher-e-Bangla Nagar Dhaka- 1207, Bangladesh Tel: 880 2 5566 7777 Fax: 880 2 5566 7778 www.worldbank.org.bd World Bank 1818 H Street, N.W. Washington DC 20433, USA Tel: 1 202 4731000 Fax: 1 202 477 6391 www.worldbank.org Standard Disclaimer: The volume is a product of the staff of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/ The World Bank. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper do not necessarily reflect the views of the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominators, and other information shown in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of the World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Copyright Statement: The material in this publication is copyrighted. The World Bank encourages dissemination of its work and will normally grant permission to reproduce portion of the work promptly. Printed by: Bangladesh ii Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report was prepared by Sarwar Jahan, World Bank Consultant and Professor of the Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology. The study was conducted under the World Bank-supported study on Urban Flooding of Greater Dhaka in a Changing Climate: Potential Damage and Adaptation (Task team Leader: Susmita Dasgupta). The team would like to thank Dr. Asif Zaman, Water Resources Consultant, Institute of Water Management, Subhendu Roy, professor of economics at Massasoit College in Massachusetts and Lia Sieghart, Environment Program leader of the World Bank for providing guidance and support. At the Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology (BUET), Department of Urban and Regional Planning, we would like to note the contributions of Shakil Akther, professor(and director, Center for Regional Development Studies); Ishrat Islam, professor and head of the Department; and Gulshan Ara Parvin, former associate professor (and former post-doctoral fellow, Graduate School of Global Environmental Studies, Kyoto University). At Dhaka University, Department of Geography and Environment, we would like to thank professors A. Q. M. Mahbub and Nurul Islam Nazem. We also extend our thanks to Akhter H. Choudhury, professor, Khulna University, Urban and Rural Planning Discipline; Md. Moinul Islam, town planner, Narayanganj City Corporation; Md. Taibur Rahman, senior assistant chief, Bangladesh Planning Commission; and Khurshid Zabin Hossain Taufique, former director, town planning, RAJUK. The team benefited greatly from comments received from the peer reviewers, Mr. Mainul Huq, CEO, Development Policy Group, and Shahpar Selim, Environmental Specialist affiliated with the World Bank. We gratefully acknowledge the financial support provided by the Bangladesh Climate Change Resilience Fund (BCCRF). In April 2012, the BCCRF Management Committee endorsed this study, requested by the Government of Bangladesh, as a priority research project. The BCCRF is a multi-donor trust fund supported by the governments of the United Kingdom, Denmark, Sweden, Switzerland, Australia, the United States, and the European Union. iii I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis iv Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I ABSTRACT Megacity Dhaka encounters various kinds of natural disasters quite frequently owing to its geographical location and a number of other physical and environmental conditions including low topography, land characteristics, multiplicity of rivers and the monsoon climate. Climate and disaster resilience is not the same in all parts of a city. Spatial variations in resilience patterns result from differences in the strengths and weaknesses of the city’s economic, social, physical, institutional or natural aspects across its various parts. Traditional frameworks to assess adaptive capacity at the local level have focused largely on assets and capitals as indicators.  While useful in understanding the capacity of a system to cope with disasters and adapt to changing environments, asset-oriented approaches overlook the processes and functions of a system (for example, governance system, community participation in decision-making, knowledge dissemination and management, structure of institutions and entitlements etc.) that are important aspects influencing the capacity of a human system to respond to climate change events. This study used Climate Disaster Resilience Index (CDRI) - a planning tool developed by the Climate and Disaster Resilience Initiative of the Kyoto University to measure climate disaster resilience of Dhaka City in its seven drainage zones - at ward and thana level. To compute Dhaka’s CDRI, a micro-level analysis was conducted and local situations of wards and thanas were assessed collecting survey data. The CDRI was quantified with 125 variables (25 components along five dimensions physical, social, economic, institutional and natural). The CDRI analysis furnished valuable information which can be fruitfully used in strategic planning or policy formulation. The analysis provided a wealth of information that can be used to identify priority zones as well as priority sectors in Dhaka for improving disaster resilience. The study identified weaknesses and potentials of different zones in various aspects, and also provided information on relevant variables to facilitate preparation of hazard and vulnerability maps in different zones. It is expected that this analysis would facilitate area-specific action planning for addressing the weaknesses and utilizing the potentials to strengthen the climate disaster resilience of the area.  Since the analysis covers most of the important physical, social, economic, institutional and environmental aspects relevant for Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and Climate change Adaptation (CCA), it would be easier to integrate the Disaster Management Plan of the city with its Urban Development Plan. v I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis vi Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii ABSTRACT v INTRODUCTION 1 ASSESSMENT OF ADAPTIVE CAPACITY/RESILIENCE 2 Framework for Assessment of Adaptive Capacity/ Resilience 3 Climate Disaster Resilience index 3 Computation of Climate Disaster Resilience Index (CDRI) 5 Study Area 6 Local Level CDRI 7 Data Collection 10 CLIMATE DISASTER RESILIENCE OF DHAKA CITY 10 Components of Major Dimensions 11 Physical Dimension 11 Social Dimension 12 Economic Dimension 13 Institutional Dimension 14 Natural Dimension 15 SPATIAL VARIATIONS OF CLIMATE DISASTER RESILIENCE IN DHAKA 15 Resilience of Physical Components 17 Resilience of Social Components 18 Resilience of Economic Components 18 Resilience of Institutional Components 19 Resilience of Natural Components 22 CLIMATE DISASTER RESILIENCE OF DCC WARDS 24 Physical Dimension 24 Social Dimension 24 Economic Dimension 27 Institutional Dimension 27 Natural Dimension 27 INTER-ZONAL VARIATIONS IN RESILIENCE LEVELS: EXPALNATIONS AND POLICY OPTIONS 29 Explaining Inter-Zonal Variations 29 Physical Resilience 29 Social Resilience 30 Economic Resilience 31 vii I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Institutional Resilience 32 Natural Resilience 34 Policy Options 35 Physical Aspects 35 Social Aspects 36 Economic Aspects 36 Institutional Aspects 37 Natural Aspects 38 CONCLUDING REMARKS 39 REFERENCES 40 ANNEX-I: Tables on Importance and Status of Variables under Major Dimensions 40 ANNEX-II: Tables on CDRI Values and Resilience Levels of Wards for Parameters 49 under Major Dimensions ANNEX-III: Table on Percentage of Impervious Area for Various Land Uses 81 TABLES Table -1: CDRI Scores and Resilience Levels in Study Zones by Various 20 Dimensions Table- 2: CDRI Scores and C Resilience Levels of Physical Components 20 Table- 3: CDRI Scores and Corresponding Resilience Levels of Social 21 Components Table-4: CDRI Scores and Corresponding Resilience Levels of Economic 21 Components Table-5: CDRI Scores and Corresponding Resilience Levels of Institutional 23 Components Table -6: CDRI Scores and Corresponding Resilience Levels of Natural 23 Components Table-7: Distribution of Wards by Physical Resilience in Study Zones 25 within DCC (North & South) Table-8: Distribution of Wards by Social Resilience in Study Zones 25 within DCC (North & South) Table-9: Distribution of Wards by Economic Resilience in Study Zones 26 within DCC (North & South) Table-10: Distribution of Wards by Institutional Resilience in Study Zones 26 within DCC (North & South) Table-11: Distribution of Wards by Natural Resilience in Study Zones 28 within DCC (North & South) Table-12: Distribution of Wards by Major Dimensions within DCC 28 (North & South) viii Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I FIGURES Figure-1 Detailed Study Area 7 Figure-2: Subdivisions of Study Area for Local Analysis 9 Figure-3: Resilience of the City in Major Dimensions 11 Figure-4: CDRI: Physical Dimension 12 Figure-5: CDRI: Social Dimension 12 Figure-6: CDRI: Economic Dimension 13 Figure-7: CDRI: Institutional Dimension 14 Figure-8: CDRI: Natural Dimension 15 Figure 9: Overall CDRI of Various Zones in Physical and Social Dimensions 16 Figure 10: Overall CDRI of Various Zones in Economic, Institutional and 17 Natural Dimensions Figure 11: Overall CDRI Scores of Different Areas 18 Figure-12: Resilience Level (CDRI) of Physical Parameters in Different Zones 29 Figure-13: Resilience Level (CDRI) of Social Parameters in Different Zones 30 Figure-14: Resilience Level (CDRI) of Economic Parameters in Different Zones 32 Figure-15: Resilience Level (CDRI) of Institutional Parameters in Different Zones 33 Figure-16: Resilience Level (CDRI) of Natural Parameters in Different Zones 34 ix I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis x Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I INTRODUCTION Bangladesh encounters various kinds of natural disasters quite frequently owing to its geographical location and a number of other physical and environmental conditions including low topography, land characteristics, multiplicity of rivers and the monsoon climate. Though Bangladesh’s contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions is one of the lowest, its unfavorable geophysical conditions, high density of population and widespread poverty make it extremely vulnerable to climate change. Climate change related impacts such as temperature and precipitation variability, drought, flooding and extreme rainfall, cyclone and storm surge, tornado, and sea level rise have become major concerns for the country because of the adverse impacts these may have on development activities. The factors responsible for climate change are global in nature but its impacts are felt locally. Dhaka has been declared as the most vulnerable megacity to climate change by the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) in 2009. The intensity and pace of present and future climate changes induced by continuous emission of greenhouse gas will be a major challenge for the city as the frequency and intensity of climate-related events are likely to increase. This will threaten the critical infrastructure that supplies the city dwellers with essential services such as electricity, water, waste disposal, transportation, telecommunication etc. Dhaka has long been experiencing devastating floods on a regular basis. In recent past floods of 1954, 1955, 1962 and 1966 were of major significance in terms of loss of lives and properties. Floods that occurred more recently, that is, in 1987, 1988, 1998, 2004 and 2007 also severely affected the city. Among these floods of 1988, 1998 and 2994 were catastrophic. The 1998 flood which inundated about 79 percent of the city was also an unprecedented event of its kind in terms of duration and damages. The inundation depths ranged from 0.3 to over 3.0 metres which lasted for about 10 weeks. About two-third of the population were affected and suffered colossal damages in terms of housing, clothing, income and other assets. The 2004 flood also wreaked havoc in the city. More than 5 million people or half of the city population were affected. Eighteen out of twenty two thanas went under water, the sewerage system broke down and the city residents faced an acute drinking water crisis as supplies had become contaminated. Water pipelines stretching over a few hundred kilometers and many reservoirs were also under water posing a serious threat to public health. Apart from flooding water-logging has also become a perennial problem of the city. The problem becomes quite serious during annual monsoon with widespread and lengthy disruption of roads, telecommunications, electricity supply and water supply. In September, 2004 continuous rainfall for about 48 hours inundated most parts of the city. A record 315 millimitres of rainfall in the city on 12th and 13th September disrupted business and economic activities and affected 250 schools and 681 garment factories in addition to shopping malls, business houses and various other factories. Dhaka is surrounded by a number of rivers that include Buriganga, Tongi, Turag, Balu and Sitlakhya. In earlier centuries the city was criss-crossed by many drainage channels which carried away run- off to the surrounding rivers. Dhaka had 43 natural canals, 17 of which no longer exist. Dhaka 1 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis WASA, however, has been able to bring the rest 26 canals under its control. Eleven canals are being rehabilitated under the Removal of Water-logging Project phase-2 while the rehabilitation works of eight canals are being carried out under a World Bank Project. With increased urbanization most of these canals have been filled up. Low-lying areas which work as retention areas for rain water are also becoming filled up with residential, industrial and other urban land uses. Consequently drainage is impeded and many parts of the city become impassable or inaccessible after normal rains. Even after an hour long rainfall many parts of the city including low and middle class residences go under water because of poor condition of drainage channels, many of which had been encroached, filled, silted and blocked due to garbage disposal. With the expansion of the city, remaining open spaces and low-lying areas are likely to face intense pressure from private land development companies and the situation would become worse if protective measures are not taken to save these lands from further encroachment. As a rapidly urbanizing city Dhaka is faced with innumerable challenges. Rapid growth of population has been creating pressure on the city’s capacity to deliver basic services. Problems of transportation, housing, water supply, sanitation, waste disposal have seriously affected the livability of the city. Being the political, economic, social and cultural centre of the nation, its protection from climate related disasters is of utmost importance. Without adequate protection, population of the city will be continuously exposed to risks from extreme climatic events and the high vulnerability of Dhaka to various hazards is a serious problem that needs urgent attention. Climate and disaster resilience may not be the same in all parts of a city. Spatial variations in resilience patterns in a city may result from differences in the strengths and weaknesses of the city’s economic, social, physical, institutional or natural aspects across its various parts. An assessment of such strengths and weaknesses is essential for identifying the areas which are exposed to various levels of risks and vulnerabilities. This is particularly important for a megacity like Dhaka which has been experiencing continuous deterioration in its natural environment due to excessive pressure of population and unbridled exploitation of its land and water resources by the private as well as the public sectors. Current approach to climate change adaptation in Dhaka is still dependent on national level plans that are not very relevant to the city, given its megacity characteristics. The city is divided into a number of City Corporations each of which consists of a large number of Wards. These wards may vary quite significantly in terms of physical features, land development levels, land use patterns, socio-economic characteristics, and exposure to various types of natural hazards. This underlines the need for an approach that takes into account micro level variations in the adaptive capacity of a city. This research, therefore, focuses on the assessment of the local preparedness for climate- induced large-scale emergencies in greater Dhaka area taking into account ward level variations in physical, socio-economic, institutional and natural characteristics. ASSESSMENT OF ADAPTIVE CAPACITY/RESILIENCE Adaptive capacity of a society refers to the ability to plan, prepare for, facilitate and implement adaptation measures. The adaptive capacity of a city to cope with a potential disaster is largely determined by its ability to “resist, absorb, accommodate to and recover from the effects of a 2 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I hazard in a timely and efficient manner, including through the preservation and restoration of its essential structures and functions” (UNISDR, 2009). This ability of a city to “absorb, maintain and bounce back”, referred to as its resilience, is influenced by the aspects of the physical, social, economic, institutional, and natural components of a city or an urban area (Joerin and Shaw, 2011). Framework for Assessment of Adaptive Capacity/ Resilience Traditional frameworks to assess adaptive capacity at the local level have focused largely on assets and capitals as indicators. While useful in understanding the capacity of a system to cope with and adapt to changing environments, asset-oriented approaches overlook the processes and functions of a system that can enhance its adaptive capacity. For example, governance system, community participation in decision-making, knowledge dissemination and management, structure of institutions and entitlements etc. are important aspects influencing the capacity of a human system to respond to climate change events. This underlines the need for a multidimensional approach for assessment of adaptation capacity at the local level. Climate Disaster Resilience index Climate Disaster Resilience Index (CDRI) is a planning tool developed by the Climate and Disaster Resilience Initiative of the Kyoto University. CDRI measures climate disaster resilience by considering five dimensions (Joerin and Shaw, 2011):  physical  social  Economic  institutional, and  natural Each dimension has five parameters and each parameter in turn has five variables. Physical Dimension and Related Parameters and Variables u Electricity (access, availability, supply capacity, dependence on external supply, alternative capacity) u Water (access, availability, supply capacity, dependence on external supply, alternative capacity) u Sanitation and solid waste disposal (access to sanitation, toilets, collection of wastes, waste treatment, recycling) u Accessibility of roads (percentage of land transportation network, paved roads, accessibility during flooding, status of interruption after intense rainfall, roadside covered drain) u Housing and land use (building code, buildings with nonpermanent structure, buildings above water logging, ownership, population living in proximity to polluted industries) 3 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Social Dimension and Related Parameters and Variables u Population (population growth, population under 14 and above 64, population of informal settlers, population density) u Health (population suffering from waterborne/vector-borne diseases, population suffering from waterborne diseases after a disaster, access to primary health facilities, capacity of health facilities during a disaster, preparedness for disaster) u Education and awareness (literacy rate, population’s awareness about disasters, availability of public awareness programs/disaster drills, access to Internet, functionality of schools after disaster) u Social Capital (population participating in community activities/clubs, acceptance level of community leader [in ward], ability of communities to build consensus and to participate in city’s decision-making process (level of democracy), mixing and interlinking of social class) u Community preparedness during a disaster (preparedness [logistics, materials, and management], provision of shelter for affected people, support from NGOs/CBOs, population evacuating voluntarily, population participating in relief works) Economic Dimension and Related Parameters and Variables u Income (population below poverty line, number of income sources per household, income derived in informal sector, income disparity, percentage of households have reduced income due to a disaster) u Employment (formal sector: percentage of labor unemployed, of youth unemployed, of women employed, of employees who come from outside the city, of child labor in city) u Household assets (households have television, mobile phone, motorized vehicle, nonmotorized vehicle, basic furniture) u Finance and savings (availability of credit facility to prevent disaster, accessibility to credits, accessibility to credits for urban poor, saving practice of households, household’s properties insured) u Budget and subsidy (City’s annual budget for DRR and CCA, availability of subsidies/ incentives for residents to rebuild houses, alternative livelihood, health care after a disaster) Institutional Dimension and Related Parameters and Variables u Mainstreaming of DRR and CCA (mainstreaming of CCA and DRR in cities development plans, in housing and transport policies, ability [manpower] and capacity [technical] to produce development plans, extent of community participation in development plan preparation process, implementation of disaster management plan) u Effectiveness of cities crisis management framework (existence of disaster management plan, existence and effectiveness of an emergency team during a disaster: leadership, availability of evacuation centers, efficiency of trained emergency workers during a disaster, existence of alternative decision-making personnel) 4 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I u Knowledge dissemination and management (effectiveness to learn from previous disasters, availability of disaster training programs for emergency workers, existence of disaster awareness programs for communities, capacity (books, leaflets, etc.) to disseminate disaster awareness programs (disaster education), extent of community satisfaction from disaster awareness programs) u Institutional collaboration with other organizations and stakeholders, during a disaster (cities dependency on external institutions/support, collaboration and interconnectedness with neighboring cities, citiy’s cooperation (support) with central municipal department for emergency management, cooperation of city’s ward officials for emergency management, city’s institutional collaboration with NGOs and private organizations) u Good governance (effectiveness of early warning systems, accountability and transparency of city government, implementation of building codes, existence of disaster drills, promptness of city body to disseminate emergency information during a disaster to communities, capability of city body to lead recovery process) Natural Dimension and Related Parameters and Variables u Intensity/severity of natural hazards (floods, cyclones, heat waves, droughts [water scarcity], tornados) u Frequency of natural hazards (floods, cyclones, heat waves, droughts [water scarcity], tornados) u Ecosystem services (quality of city’s biodiversity, soils, air, water bodies, urban salinity) u Land use in natural terms (area vulnerable to climate-related hazards, urban morphology, settlements on hazardous ground, amount of Urban Green Space [UGS], loss of UGS) u Environmental policies (use of city-level hazard maps in development activities, extent of environmental conservation regulations reflected in development plans, extent of implementation of environmental conservation policies, implementation of efficient waste management system [RRR], implementation of mitigation policies to reduce air pollution) Computation of Climate Disaster Resilience Index (CDRI) The CDRI questionnaire has 125 variables. Each variable (x1, x2, . . . , x5) provides five choices answers starting from not available/very poor (1) to best (5). In addition, all the five variables representing a parameter are ranked on the basis of weights (w1,w2, . . . , w5) that range from not important (1) to very important (5). Respondents are requested to assign weights to the variables and parameters in order to reflect the priorities of the cities and the relevance of the indicators to the local situation. Using data collected from the questionnaire surveys, Weighted Mean Index (WMI) method is used to compute the scores for each parameter. The formula is shown below: 5 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis The CDRI of the city is the simple average of the indexes of the five dimensions. The index value ranges from 1 to 5. Higher CDRI values are equivalent to higher preparedness to cope with climate change and disasters. Needless to say, these results are not absolute values, but serve mainly as broad policy guidance. The quality of the results is very much dependent on the quality of the input data from the survey respondents. As the present study deals mainly with flooding and water logging, some changes have been made in the natural dimension. All the five parameters have been retained while the number of variables under four parameters have been adjusted. In case of intensity and frequency of natural hazards only flood has been considered as the variable while water bodies is the only variable that has been considered for the parameter ecosystem service. There has been no change in the number of variables under the parameter land use in natural terms. In case of environmental policies all the variables except implementation of mitigation policies to reduce air pollution has been retained. Such changes are shown below: Natural Dimension and Related Parameters and Variables u Intensity/severity of natural hazards (floods) u Frequency of natural hazards (floods) u Ecosystem services (water bodies) u Land use in natural terms (area vulnerable to climate-related hazards, urban morphology, settlements on hazardous ground, amount of Urban Green Space [UGS], loss of UGS) u Environmental policies (use of city-level hazard maps in development activities, extent of environmental conservation regulations reflected in development plans, extent of implementation of environmental conservation policies, implementation of efficient waste management system [RRR]) Calculation of WMI has been adjusted in accordance with the changes above. Study Area The portion of Dhaka Metropolitan Area (DMA) that has been delineated for detailed study, as shown in Figure-1, consists of eastern part of Dhaka Metropolitan Area (136 sq. km.), Western part of Dhaka Metropolitan Area (124 sq. km.), DND Area (57 sq. km.) and Narayanganj Area (33 sq. kms.). Western part of DMA is the most built-up and densely populated. It is also protected from river flooding by an embankment system. The eastern part of DMA is exposed to river flooding from the Balu River. However, there is a plan to protect this area also from river flooding in the future. Narayanganj town and adjoining zones, with an area of 33 sq. km., is located in the southern part of the study area. It is bounded by the DND area to the north, Buriganga River to the west, the Lakhya River to the east and the Dhaleshwari River to the south. The area mainly suffers from urban flooding. 6 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I The 57 sq. km. Dhaka-Narayanganj-Demra (DND) irrigation project is also in the study area. This area was originally developed by the Bangladesh Water Development Board (BWDB) in 1962. The DND area is bounded by Lakhya river in the east, Buriganga River in the west, Narayanganj town in the south and the Dhaka-Demra-Chittagong Road cum embankment in the north. The area is protected from river floods by polders and drained by canals and pumps. Initially, this land was of comparatively low value and free of urban flooding. However, rapid growth of population has led to haphazard land development. Consequently, water-logging occurs during the monsoon season - some time for prolonged duration. Figure-1: Detailed Study Area Local Level CDRI For the purpose of detailed hydrologic modeling the study area covering 351 square kilometres has been divided into seven model zones/zones. These are shown in Figure-2 and described as follows: 1. Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari): this zone in the north-western part of the city covers approximately 64 square kilometers. This area consists of six thanas including Airport, Pallabi, Savar, Tongi, Uttara and Kafrul. There are seven wards in the area. 2. Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur): This zone covers approximately 28 square kilometers in the south-western part of the city. It includes parts of Mahammadpur, Mirpur, Kafrul, and Hazaribagh thanas. The area has fifteen wards. 7 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis 3. Eastern Dhaka: The zone covers the whole of eastern Dhaka from Tongi Khal to Demra. Total area is about 118 square kilometers that includes Badda, Khilgao and parts of sabujbagh and Rupganj thanas. 4. Central Dhaka: this zone located in the middle of the city consists of 8 thanas and parts of 7 other thanas. The area has 44 wards of Dhaka North and South city corporations and covers 39 square kilometers. 5. Old Dhaka: This is a high density area in the south along the Buriganga river covering approximately twelve square kilometers. It includes nineteen wards of Lalbagh, Kotwali, Sutrapur and shyampur thanas of old Dhaka. 6. DND Area: this zone in the southern part of the city includes five wards of Shyampur thana and the area of Demra thana. It covers approximately 57 square kilometers. 7. Narayanganj: this area includes nine wards of former Narayanganj Pourashava and part of the area under Narayanganj sadar thana. It covers approximately 33 square kilometers. CDRI has been computed for these seven zones/ zone so as to obtain information about local level resilience against flood and water logging in the city. In this connection, reference may be made of an earlier study by Parvin and Shaw (2011) that investigated disaster resilience of Dhaka City Corporation area at zonal level using CDRI. The present study differs from the study by Parvin and Shaw in two respects. First, the present study area is larger than the earlier study. Second, in the present study analysis is carried out at three spatial levels- ward at the lowest level, a larger area consisting of several wards at the second level and the city at the highest level. In the study by Parvin and Shaw, analysis was done at two levels- at zone level and city level. 8 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Figure-2: Subdivisions of Study Area for Local Analysis 9 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Data Collection Data used to assess the level of disaster resilience were collected from primary as well as secondary sources. The questionnaire that was used to collect data comprised one hundred and twenty five different variables which were grouped into twenty five parameters which were again grouped into five dimensions: physical, social, economic, institutional and natural. These variables, parameters and dimensions have already been described above. The questionnaire was treated as a 5x5x5 matrix. There were a total of 125 questions used to assess the situation with respect 125 variables in different parts (wards and thanas) of the study zones. Respondents used a 5-point rating scale to assess the status (condition) of each variable where 1 means the worst status/condition and 5 means the best. In addition to assessment of status or condition of each variable, the importance/ weight of each variable, influencing disaster resilience has also been assessed. A group of disaster management experts were asked to assign a weight (1 to 5, least to highest) to each variable according to their perceived importance. Data were collected from planners who were involved in the preparation of the Detailed Area Plan (2009) of Dhaka metropolitan Area. For the preparation of the plan extensive socio-economic and physical surveys were carried out. The planners belonged to different consultancy firms each of which was responsible for preparing the plan of a particular area of the city. Data on some variables, especially related to physical and social aspects, were also collected from secondary sources such as reports of the population census, 2011 and detailed Area Plan Reports. The 5-point rating scale was applied to these data to determine the status of a variable in a particular area. Data collected through questionnaire survey and secondary sources were then used to compute the Climate Disaster Resilience Index (CDRI) of the city and its various parts through the application of the formula as shown above. CLIMATE DISASTER RESILIENCE OF DHAKA CITY In this study disaster resilience of the city is measured by the Climate Disaster resilience Index (CDRI) score which varies between 1 and 5. Score 1 shows poor or worst resilience while score 5 indicates best resilience. These scores have been grouped into four categories each of which shows a particular level of resilience. Thus, resilience levels according to CDRI Scores are: 1 – 2 = Poor, 2.1 – 3.0 = Moderate/Medium, 3.1 – 4.0 = Good, 4.1 – 5.0 = Best. Overall CDRI of the city is the average of the CDRI scores obtained by the city in five major dimensions: physical, social, economic, institutional and natural. Figure-3 shows the resilience of the city by major dimensions as well as overall resilience. The city has an overall CDRI of 2.35 which indicates that the city has moderate level of resilience. There are, however, variations in the levels of resilience by major dimensions. Institutional resilience is lowest while physical resilience is highest. It is important to note that CDRI scores for physical, social, economic and natural dimensions vary between 2.16 and 2.73 which indicate moderate level of resilience while CDRI score for institutional dimension is 1.96 which indicates poor level of resilience. Institutional capacity of the city is thus very weak. 10 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Components of Major Dimensions Within the same level of resilience there may be variation in the degree of resilience. Thus, physical dimension has higher degree of resilience than social, economic or natural dimensions although resilience levels of all these dimensions have been categorized as moderate. These variations mainly result from the variations in the CDRI scores of various parameters/components that make up these dimensions. Physical Dimension Physical dimension has five components: electricity, water supply, sanitation and solid waste disposal, accessibility of roads, and housing and land use. Figure-4 presents the CDRI scores of various physical components. CDRI score for electricity is 2.90 which is highest and this is followed by accessibility of roads (2.93), sanitation and solid waste disposal (2.74), housing and land use (2.57), and water (2.52). It is important to note that CDRI scores of all these components also fall in the moderate category. Within this category, however, water has the lowest degree of resilience. Status and importance of Variables CDRI score of a particular component is the weighted average of the scores of five variables that are represented by the component. The score of each variable under a particular component/parameter shows the current status/condition of the variable in the study area. Figure-3: Resilience of the City in major Dimensions These variables have also been given weights by a team of experts and average of the weights for 5.00 each variable shows the level of 4.00 importance of the variable for the 2.73 city in terms of disaster resilience. 3.00 2.50 2.16 2.41 2.35 1.96 Table-1 of Annex-I shows the 2.00 variables under each component of the physical dimension, their 1.00 scores and corresponding status/ l l ic l al ll ica cia na ra om condition as well as their weights ur tio ve ys So t Na on itu O Ph and corresponding level of Ec st In importance. The status of majority of the physical variables (15 out of 25) in the city as a whole is moderate while only three variables have good status. The status of seven variables is poor indicating that most of the physical variables (22 out of 25) are either in poor or moderate condition. Even within the same status, variables differ in terms of their performances as indicated by the scores. Out of 25 variables under physical dimension, 3 variables are of highest importance, 14 variables are highly important, 7 variables are moderately important and 1 variable is of low importance for the city in terms of its disaster resilience. The variables which are of highest importance are access to water supply, availability of water supply and access to sanitation. Even among the highly important variables, some are more important than others as indicted by the weights. Thus 11 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis accessibility to and availability Figure-4: CDRI : Physical Dimension of electricity, toilet facility, accessibility to roads during disaster, building code and Housing and land use 2.57 buildings above water logging are more important than others Accessibility of roads 2.93 of the same category so far as Sanitation and solid waste disaster resilience of the city is 2.74 disposal concerned. Water 2.52 Social Dimension Electricity 2.90 Figure-5 shows the CDRI scores of various social components. 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 Out of five components of social dimension, four components, that is, population, education and awareness, social capital, and Figure-5: CDRI : Social Dimension community preparedness have CDRI scores that vary between 2.20 and 2.96 and therefore show Community preparedness 2.57 moderate level of resilience. The CDRI score of the remaining Social Capital 2.51 component, that is, health is 2.96 Education and awareness 2.20 indicating a level of resilience that is categorized as moderate. 2.96 Health Among the components having moderate level of resilience, Population 2.29 social capital and community preparedness have higher degrees 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 of resilience than population, and education and awareness. Status and Importance of Variables Table-2 of Annex-I shows the variables under each component of the social dimension, their scores and corresponding status/condition as well as their weights and corresponding level of importance. The status of twelve social variables is poor while that of ten variables is moderate. Only two variables have been rated as good by the planners. These are health related variables that include population suffering from waterborne diseases and population suffering from waterborne diseases after a disaster. It is important to note that nearly 50% of the social variables are perceived as performing poorly while performance of 40% of the variables is perceived as moderate. What is more striking is that all the variables related to education and awareness has been rated as poor or worst. Only health related variables have been rated as moderate or good. 12 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I As regards importance of variables as assigned by the experts, it is found that one social variable, that is, capacity of health facilities during a disaster is of highest importance while 18 other social variables are highly important, 5 variables are moderately important and one variable is of low importance in terms of disaster resilience of the city. Among highly important variables, population density, access to primary health facilities, preparedness for disaster, population’s awareness about disaster, acceptance level of community leaders, preparedness in terms of logistics, materials and management, and provision of shelter for affected people are more important than other highly important variables. A comparison of importance and present status of variables indicates that the present status of nine highly important social variables is rated as poor which negatively affects the resilience of the city. Out of five moderately important social variables, performance of two variables is rated as moderate while the rest three variables are performing poorly. Economic Dimension Although economic resilience of the city is moderate, there are significant variations among the components/parameters (Figure-6). CDRI scores of two components - budget and subsidy, and finance and savings are 1.49 and 1.60 respectively indicating poor disaster resilience of these components. Disaster resilience of rest three components- household assets, employment and income is moderate since their CDRI scores vary between 2.54 and 2.62. Status and Importance of Variables Table-3 of Annex-I shows the variables under each component of the economic dimension, their scores and corresponding status/condition as well as their weights and corresponding level of importance. Poor resilience of two economic Figure-6: CDRI : Economic Dimension components can be explained with reference to the current status of Budget and subsidy 1.49 the performance of the variables under these components. Thus Finance and savings 1.60 out of five variables under budget and subsidy, current status of Household assets 2.54 three variables- funding for city’s disaster management, city’s annual Employment 2.56 budget for DRR and CCA and Income 2.62 availability of incentive/subsidy to rebuild houses is poor while the current status of the rest two 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 variables- alternative livelihood and health care after a disaster is worst. Similarly, all the five variables under finance and savings have scores that vary between 1.38 and 2.08 showing poor or worst condition of these variables for the city as a whole. 13 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis A comparison of status and importance of economic variables shows some important results that have significant implications for the city’s climate disaster management. Out of 25 economic variables that are considered highly important for disaster resilience the status of eight variables is poor, one variable is worst and the rest three variables is moderate indicating the vulnerable situation of the city in terms of economic aspects. The performance of moderately important variables, however, is a little bit better. Out of eleven moderately important variables, the status of five variables is moderate, four variables is poor and two variables is worst. Population below poverty line is considered as the variable of highest importance for disaster resilience. Its status in the city is moderate. Institutional Dimension Institutional dimension has five components: good governance, institutional collaboration with other organizations, knowledge dissemination and management, effectiveness of city’s crisis management framework, and mainstreaming of DRR and CCA. CDRI scores of these components are shown in figure-7. The scores vary between 1.49 and 2.61 with four components having scores less than 2.00. Thus four out of five institutional components have poor disaster resilience while only one component- institutional collaboration with other organizations and stakeholders, has moderate resilience. Institutionally also the city is extremely vulnerable to climate disasters. Status and Importance of Variables Table-4 of Annex-I shows the variables under each component of the Institutional dimension, their scores and corresponding status/condition as well as their weights and corresponding level of importance. Institutional vulnerability of the city results mainly from the poor Figure-7: CDRI : Institutional Dimension performance of the variables belonging to five components of Good governance 1.84 the institutional dimension. Out of 25 variables, the status of three Institutional collaboration 2.61 variables is worst and that of nineteen variables is poor. Only Knowledge dissemination 1.49 three variables have a moderate status. It is important to note that Effectiveness of cities 1.95 crisis management three out of five components, that is, good governance, knowledge Mainstreaming of DRR 1.88 and CCA dissemination and management, and mainstreaming of DRR and 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 CCA have all the variables the status of which is either worst or poor. The status of variables belonging to other components also does not give a much better picture. A comparison of importance and present status of variables indicates that the present status of fourteen highly important institutional variables is rated as poor which negatively affects the resilience of the city. Out of four variables of highest importance, three variables have poor status and one variable has moderate status while out of four moderately important variables, two have poor and two have worst status. 14 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Natural Dimension Resilience of natural dimension is assessed in terms of intensity/severity of natural hazards, frequency of natural hazards, ecosystem services, land use in natural terms and environmental policies. Figure-8 shows the CDRI scores of natural components. Ecosystem services have the lowest CDRI score (1.57) while intensity/severity of natural hazards has the highest CDRI score (3.42).The low CDRI of ecosystem services result mainly from continuous disappearance of its water bodies. Disaster resilience of the remaining components has been assessed as moderate based on their CDRI scores. Status and Importance of Variables Table-5 of Annex-I shows the variables under each component of the natural dimension, their scores and corresponding status/condition as well as their weights and corresponding level of importance. The status of fifteen variables belonging to three components of the Figure-8: Natural Dimension natural dimension (environmental policies, land use in natural terms Environmental policies 2.03 and ecosystem services) has been assessed as poor. Some of the Land use in natural terms 2.18 important variables such as water bodies, amount of urban green Ecosystem services 1.57 space, loss of urban green space, implementation of environmental Frequency of natural 2.85 hazards conservation policies, etc. have received low scores indicating that 3.42 natural aspects of the city have been deteriorating while implementation 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 of the environmental conservation policies has not been satisfactory. As regards importance of variables as assigned by the experts, it is observed that two variables, that is, severity of floods and use of city-level hazard maps in development activities have been given highest importance in terms of disaster resilience of the city. Fourteen of the variables are considered highly important while the rest nine variables are considered moderately important. Out of fourteen highly important variables the performance of two variables has been assessed as good, two variables as moderate and the rest ten variables as poor. SPATIAL VARIATIONS OF CLIMATE DISASTER RESILIENCE IN DHAKA As we have already mentioned above, the study area has been divided into seven smaller zones/ zones for the purpose of hydrologic modeling. These zones/zones are as follows: 1. Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) 2. Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur) 3. Eastern Dhaka 15 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis 4. Central Dhaka 5. Old Dhaka 6. DND Area 7. Narayanganj Overall CDRI and CDRI of various dimensions and components under each dimension have been computed for the seven zones as described above. Figure-11 presents CDRI scores of different zones. CDRI scores of different parts of the study area vary between 2.13 and 2.46 indicating moderate level of disaster resilience although there are some variations across zones at this level. Narayangaj and Central Dhaka have highest overall resilience while DND area has the lowest overall resilience as indicated by their CDRI scores. Old Dhaka, Eastern Dhaka and Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) have very close overall CDRI scores indicating similar degree of overall resilience of these zones. Table-1 presents CDRI scores of different study zones by various dimensions. All the zones have moderate level of climate disaster resilience in physical and social dimensions. Economic resilience is poor for DND area but moderate for all the other six zones. Institutional situation is, however, quite disappointing. Out of seven zones only two zones have moderate resilience. These are Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) and Old Dhaka. Institutional resilience of other five zones is poor. In case of natural dimension, Old Dhaka and DND area have poor resilience while the other five zones have moderate resilience. Thus all the zones have moderate or poor resilience in various dimensions which indicates that the city is quite vulnerable to extreme events in a changing climate. Figure-9 and figure-10 make a graphical presentation of CDRI scores of seven zones in major dimensions. A comparison of five dimensions as depicted in the radar graphs indicates that institutional resilience is lowest and extremely poor in all the zones compared to other dimensions although this aspect is very critical to deal with climate change. Figure-9: Overall CDRI of Various Zones in Physical and Social Dimensions Overall CDRI: Physical and Social Dimensions Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) 4.00 Western Western Dhaka Narayanganj 3.00 (Kallyanpur) Physical Dimension 2.00 Social Dimension 1.00 DND Area Eastern Dhaka Old Dhaka Central Dhaka (Resilience Levels: Poor (1.0 – 2.0), Moderate (2.1 – 3.0), Good (3.1 – 4.0) 16 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Figure-10: Overall CDRI of Various Zones in Economic, Institutional and Natural Dimensions Overall CDRI: Economic, Institutional and Natural Dimensions Western Dhaka (Goranchatba… 4.00 Western Narayanganj 3.00 Dhaka (Kallyanpur) 2.00 Economic Dimension Institutional Dimension 1.00 Natural Dimension DND Area Eastern Dhaka Old Dhaka Central Dhaka (Resilience Levels: Poor (1.0 – 2.0), Moderate (2.1 – 3.0), Good (3.1 – 4.0) Resilience of Physical Components Assessment of physical resilience is dependent on five components of physical dimension – electricity, water, sanitation and solid waste disposal, accessibility of roads, and housing and land use. Table-2 presents the CDRI scores and corresponding resilience levels of various physical components in seven study zones. In case of electricity overall resilience is moderate but there are variations across zones. Out of seven zones , resilience of three zones is good while that of four zones is moderate. The situation with respect to water is, however, worse. Although overall resilience is moderate, the CDRI score for water is less than electricity. All seven zones have moderate resilience. In case of sanitation and solid waste disposal, the level of resilience for five zones is moderate, one area is good and one area is poor. All the seven zones have moderate level of resilience in case of accessibility of roads. CDRI scores of all the zones are close, varying between 2.84 and 3.00. In case of housing and land use, CDRI scores vary between 2.00 and 3.10 indicating variations in levels of resilience across zones. Thus five zones have moderate, one area has good and one area has poor resilience for this component. Among the zones Eastern Dhaka performs best while Narayanganj performs worst in terms of physical resilience. Eastern Dhaka has good resilience in one component and moderate resilience in four components while DND Area has moderate resilience in four components and poor resilience in one component. 17 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Resilience of Social Components Five components that make up social dimension include population, health, education and awareness, social capital, and community preparedness. Table-3 presents the CDRI scores and corresponding resilience levels of various social components in different study zones. In case of population CDRI scores vary between 1.70 and 3.00 with DND Area having the lowest Figure-11: Overall CDRI Scores of Different Areas score and poor resilience. The rest six zones have moderate resilience for this component. Narayanganj 2.44 Health has moderate overall DND Area 2.13 resilience although there are Old Dhaka 2.35 variations across different zones. Central Dhaka 2.46 Four zones have good resilience while three zones have moderate Eastern Dhaka 2.38 resilience with respect to health. Kallyanpur (WD) 2.29 Old Dhaka has the highest CDRI score indicating best resilience of Goranchatbari (WD) 2.42 this area in this component. 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 In case of education and awareness, all the seven zones have moderate resilience although there are some variations across zones indicating spatial variations in resilience at moderate level. Thus, CDRI scores vary between 2.00 and 3.23. The situation with respect to social capital is mixed as is indicated by the variations in CDRI scores. Performance of three zones in this component is good while that of two other zones is poor. Moderate performance is observed in the remaining two zones. What is interesting to note is that although the overall resilience of this component is moderate, there are variations in the levels of resilience across different zones. Like social capital community preparedness during disaster is also an important social component and its overall level of resilience is also moderate. Unlike social capital, only one area has good performance and one area has poor performance while the remaining five zones have moderate performance with respect to this component. Resilience of Economic Components Table-4 presents the CDRI scores and resilience levels of five economic components – income, employment, household assets, finance and savings, and budget and subsidy by study zones. CDRI scores of both income and employment for the study area as a whole are 2.62 and 2.56 respectively. In case of income component, five zones have moderate, one area has poor and one area has good performance in terms of disaster resilience while in case of employment six zones have moderate performance and one area has poor performance. Thus the situation with respect to employment is worse than income both in terms of spatial variations across zones and the level of resilience for the city as a whole.. 18 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I The resilience of the city in terms of household assets is also moderate but three zones demonstrate good performance while the performance of the remaining four zones is moderate. Performance of the city as whole is poor both in terms of finance and savings, and budget and subsidy components. When zones are compared it is found that five zones have poor performance and two zones have moderate performance in finance and savings while all seven zones have poor performance in budget and subsidy. This is not unexpected given the fact that variables represented by these components such as availability of credit facility to prevent disaster, accessibility to credits by urban poor, city’s annual budget for DRR and CCA, availability of subsidy/incentive to rebuild houses etc. have poor status in all these zones. Resilience of Institutional Components Table-5 presents CDRI scores and resilience levels of study zones by institutional components. The situation is quite disappointing as most of the zones have poor resilience in four out of five components. Only in institutional collaboration during a disaster, all the zones have moderate performance. In case of mainstreaming of DRR and CCA, the performance of all the seven zones is poor. When city’s crisis management framework is considered it is observed that only one area (Old Dhaka) has moderate performance while the performance of the remaining zones is poor. Similar is the situation with respect to knowledge dissemination and management. Only one area, Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari), has moderate performance while the rest six zones have poor performance. Practice of good governance is observed as poor in four zones and moderate in three zones. When all the zones are compared in terms of their resilience in five components, Old Dhaka performs better than others while performances of Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur), Eastern Dhaka and Central Dhaka are worse than others. 19 I 20 Table -1: CDRI Scores and Resilience Levels in Study Zones by Various Dimensions Dimensions → Physical Dimension Social Dimension Economic Institutional Natural Dimension Dimension Dimension Study Zones CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience Level Level Level Level Level Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) 2.61 Moderate 2.52 Moderate 2.14 Moderate 2.12 Moderate 2.72 Moderate Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur) 2.85 Moderate 2.29 Moderate 2.11 Moderate 1.81 Poor 2.40 Moderate Eastern Dhaka 2.94 Moderate 2.42 Moderate 2.25 Moderate 1.64 Poor 2.66 Moderate Central Dhaka 2.88 Moderate 2.47 Moderate 2.33 Moderate 2.00 Poor 2.60 Moderate Old Dhaka 2.69 Moderate 2.76 Moderate 2.11 Moderate 2.28 Moderate 1.93 Poor DND Area 2.63 Moderate 2.45 Moderate 1.58 Poor 2.00 Poor 1.99 Poor Narayanganj 2.53 Moderate 2.63 Moderate 2.62 Moderate 1.84 Poor 2.59 Moderate Overall 2.73 Moderate 2.50 Moderate 2.16 Moderate 1.96 Poor 2.41 Moderate Table- 2: CDRI Scores and C Resilience Levels of Physical Components CDRI : Physical Components Components → Electricity Water Sanitation and sol- Accessibility of Housing and land Study Zones id waste disposal roads use ↓ CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Level Level Level Level Level Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) 2.72 Moderate 2.42 Moderate 2.66 Moderate 2.84 Moderate 2.41 Moderate Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur) 3.05 Good 2.84 Moderate 2.42 Moderate 2.84 Moderate 3.10 Good Eastern Dhaka 2.86 Good 2.48 Moderate 2.86 Moderate 3.00 Moderate 3.00 Moderate Central Dhaka 3.05 Good 2.84 Moderate 2.66 Moderate 3.00 Moderate 2.83 Moderate Old Dhaka 2.81 Moderate 2.19 Moderate 3.10 Good 3.00 Moderate 2.38 Moderate DND Area 3.00 Moderate 2.19 Moderate 2.81 Moderate 2.84 Moderate 2.00 Poor Narayanganj 2.72 Moderate 2.66 Moderate 2.00 Poor 3.00 Moderate 2.21 Moderate Overall 2.89 Moderate 2.52 Moderate 2.74 Moderate 2.93 Moderate 2.57 Moderate Table- 3: CDRI Scores and Corresponding Resilience Levels of Social Components Components → Social Dimension Study Zones Population Health Education and Social Capital Community ↓ awareness preparedness CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience Level Level Level Level Level Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) 2.21 Moderate 3.00 Moderate 1.88 Moderate 2.00 Poor 3.49 Good Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur) 1.92 Moderate 3.00 Moderate 1.88 Moderate 2.00 Poor 2.65 Moderate Eastern Dhaka 2.63 Moderate 3.00 Good 2.63 Moderate 2.23 Moderate 1.61 Poor Central Dhaka 2.35 Moderate 3.00 Good 2.14 Moderate 2.23 Moderate 2.65 Moderate Old Dhaka 2.20 Moderate 3.58 Good 2.14 Moderate 3.23 Good 2.65 Moderate DND Area 1.70 Poor 3.00 Good 1.88 Moderate 3.03 Good 2.65 Moderate Narayanganj 3.00 Moderate 2.15 Moderate 2.82 Moderate 2.82 Good 2.34 Moderate Overall 2.29 Moderate 2.96 Good 2.20 Moderate 2.50 Moderate 2.57 Moderate Table-4: CDRI Scores and Corresponding Resilience Levels of Economic Components Components → Economic Dimension Study Zones Income Employment Household assets Finance and Budget and ↓ savings subsidy CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience Level Level Level Level Level Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) 2.48 Moderate 2.61 Moderate 2.38 Moderate 1.23 Poor 2.00 Poor Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur) 2.92 Moderate 2.61 Moderate 2.38 Moderate 1.23 Poor 1.43 Poor Eastern Dhaka 2.79 Moderate 2.59 Moderate 2.71 Good 1.80 Moderate 1.37 Poor Central Dhaka 2.66 Moderate 2.61 Moderate 2.55 Good 2.00 Poor 1.83 Poor Old Dhaka 2.26 Moderate 2.61 Moderate 2.38 Moderate 1.85 Poor 1.43 Poor DND Area 2.00 Poor 2.00 Poor 1.69 Moderate 1.00 Poor 1.21 Poor Narayanganj 3.21 Good 2.93 Moderate 3.71 Good 2.09 Moderate 1.17 Poor Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Overall 2.62 Moderate 2.56 Moderate 2.54 Moderate 1.60 Poor 1.49 Poor I 21 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Resilience of Natural Components CDRI scores and resilience levels of seven zones with respect to natural components are presented in table-6. Flood is of major concern for some zones of the city. Intensity of flood is felt more strongly in Eastern Dhaka, Old Dhaka and DND Area. Frequency of flood, however, poses problems for all the zones except Narayanganj. CDRI scores of Old Dhaka and DND Area indicate that these zones have poor resilience so far as frequency of flood is concerned. Serious problems also exist with respect to ecosystem services. There has been a continuous deterioration of ecosystem services, mainly due to filling up of water bodies. A reflection of this situation can be observed in the CDRI scores of different study zones. Thus five zones have poor resilience in ecosystem services while two zones have moderate resilience in this component. Similar is the situation with respect to land use in natural terms. Variables that make up this component such as amount of urban green space, settlements in hazardous grounds, area vulnerable to natural hazards etc. have poor status in different zones. That is why four zones have poor resilience in this component. The problem is particularly serious in Old Dhaka and DND Area. Poor performance of environmental policies also poses a serious problem for the city. Lack of implementation of environmental policies/regulations and use of hazard maps in development activities lead to poor performance of environmental policy component in different zones. Thus, only one area has moderate performance and the rest six zones have poor performance with respect to environmental policy. 22 Table-5: CDRI Scores and Corresponding Resilience Levels of Institutional Components Components → Institutional Dimension Study Zones Mainstreaming of Effectiveness Knowledge Institutional Good governance ↓ DRR and CCA of cities crisis dissemination and collaboration management management during a disaster framework CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience Level Level Level Level Level Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) 2.00 Poor 2.00 Poor 2.27 Moderate 2.66 Moderate 1.65 Poor Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur) 2.00 Poor 1.86 Poor 1.27 Poor 2.25 Moderate 1.65 Poor Eastern Dhaka 2.00 Poor 1.59 Poor 1.21 Poor 2.21 Moderate 1.18 Poor Central Dhaka 2.00 Poor 1.86 Poor 1.68 Poor 2.66 Moderate 1.83 Poor Old Dhaka 2.00 Poor 2.86 Moderate 1.63 Poor 2.66 Moderate 2.25 Moderate DND Area 2.00 Poor 1.86 Poor 1.00 Poor 2.92 Moderate 2.25 Moderate Narayanganj 1.19 Poor 1.62 Poor 1.41 Poor 2.89 Moderate 2.08 Moderate Overall 1.88 Poor 1.95 Poor 1.49 Poor 2.61 Moderate 1.84 Poor Table -6: CDRI Scores and Corresponding Resilience Levels of Natural Components Components → Natural Dimension Study Zones Intensity/severity Frequency of natu- Ecosystem services Land use in natu- Environmental ↓ of natural hazards ral hazards ral terms policies CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience CDRI Resilience Level Level Level Level Level Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) 4.00 Good 3.00 Moderate 2.00 Poor 2.63 Moderate 2.00 Poor Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur) 4.00 Good 3.00 Moderate 1.00 Poor 2.00 Poor 2.00 Poor Eastern Dhaka 2.47 Moderate 2.94 Moderate 3.00 Moderate 2.89 Moderate 1.98 Poor Central Dhaka 4.00 Good 3.00 Moderate 2.00 Moderate 2.00 Poor 2.00 Poor Old Dhaka 3.00 Moderate 2.00 Poor 1.00 Poor 1.63 Poor 2.00 Poor DND Area 3.00 Moderate 2.00 Poor 1.00 Poor 1.44 Poor 2.00 poor Narayanganj 3.53 Good 4.00 Good 1.00 Poor 2.68 Moderate 1.77 Poor Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I 23 Overall 3.43 Good 2.85 Moderate 1.57 Poor 2.18 Moderate 1.96 Poor I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis CLIMATE DISASTER RESILIENCE OF DCC WARDS A ward is the smallest administrative unit of a city corporation or a Pourashava. There are a total of 34 wards in DCC North and 56 wards in DCC South. For the purpose of present analysis the wards of both the city corporations have been grouped into five zones as shown below: Name of the Area Number of Wards 1. Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur), 15 2. Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari), 07 3. Central Dhaka 44 4. Old Dhaka 19 5. DND Area 05 In Annex-II CDRI scores and corresponding resilience levels of all the wards with respect to 25 components belonging to five major dimensions have been presented. In the following sections an analysis has been made of the distribution of wards in different zones by major dimensions and levels of climate disaster resilience. Physical Dimension Table-7 presents the distribution of wards by physical resilience. About 66% of the wards have moderate resilience 34% of the wards have good resilience in physical dimension. There are, however, variations across different zones. Out of 15 wards in Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur), 13 (87%) wards have moderate resilience and 2 (13%) wards have good resilience while in Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari), 6 (86%) out of 7 wards have moderate resilience and only one ward has good resilience. Out of 19 wards in Old Dhaka, 12 (63%) wards have moderate resilience and 7 (37%) wards have good resilience while in Central Dhaka performance of 23 (52%) wards is moderate and 21 (48%) wards is good. In DND Area all the 5 wards have moderate performance in physical dimension. Social Dimension Distribution of wards by social resilience is presented in table-8. In Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur), 7 (47%) wards have moderate and only one ward has good social resilience while in Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) all the 7 wards have moderate social resilience. On the other hand, in Old Dhaka performance of 5 (26%) wards is moderate and 14 (74%) wards is good while in Central Dhaka 27 (61%) wards have moderate, 7 (16%) wards have poor and 10 (23%) wards have good performance. Like physical dimension, in social dimension also all the 5 wards of DND Area perform at moderate level. 24 Table-7: Distribution of Wards by Physical Resilience in Study Zones within DCC (North & South) Dimension Physical Dimension Resilience Levels → Poor Moderate Good Best Total Study Zones within DCC (N & S) Number % of Number % of Number % of Number % of Number of Wards Wards of Wards Wards of Wards Wards of Wards Wards of Wards Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur) 00 00.00 13 86.66 02 13.34 00 00.00 15 Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) 00 00.00 06 85.71 01 14.29 00 00.00 07 Old Dhaka 00 00.00 12 63.16 07 36.84 00 00.00 19 Central Dhaka 00 00.00 23 52.27 21 47.73 00 00.00 44 DND Area 00 00.00 05 100.00 0 00.00 00 00.00 05 Total 00 00.00 59 65.56 31 34.44 00 00.00 90 Table-8: Distribution of Wards by Social Resilience in Study Zones within DCC (North & South) Dimension Social Dimension Resilience Levels → Poor Moderate Good Best Total Number Study Zones within DCC (N & S) Number % of Number % of Number % of Number % of of Wards of Wards Wards of Wards Wards of Wards Wards of Wards Wards Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur) 07 46.67 07 46.67 01 06.66 00 00.00 15 Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) 00 00.00 07 100.00 00 00.00 00 00.00 07 Old Dhaka 00 00.00 05 26.32 14 73.68 00 00.00 19 Central Dhaka 07 15.91 27 61.37 10 22.72 00 00.00 44 DND Area 00 00.00 05 100.00 00 00.00 00 00.00 05 Total 14 15.55 51 56.67 25 27.78 00 00.00 90 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I 25 I 26 Table-9: Distribution of Wards by Economic Resilience in Study Zones within DCC (North & South) Dimension Economic Dimension Resilience Levels → Poor Moderate Good Best Total Number Study Zones within DCC (N & S) Number % of Number % of Number % of Number % of of Wards of Wards Wards of Wards Wards of Wards Wards of Wards Wards Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur) 09 60.00 06 40.00 00 00.00 00 00.00 15 Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) 00 00.00 07 100.00 00 00.00 00 00.00 07 Old Dhaka 10 52.63 09 47.37 00 00.00 00 00.00 19 Central Dhaka 08 18.18 36 81.82 00 00.00 00 00.00 44 DND Area 05 100.00 00 00.00 00 00.00 00 00.00 05 Total 32 35.55 58 64.44 00 00.00 00 00.00 90 Table-10: Distribution of Wards by Institutional Resilience in Study Zones within DCC (North & South) Dimension Institutional Dimension Resilience Levels → Poor Moderate Good Best Total Number Study Zones within DCC (N & S) Number % of Number % of Number % of Number % of of Wards of Wards Wards of Wards Wards of Wards Wards of Wards Wards Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur) 09 60.00 06 40.00 00 00.00 00 00.00 15 Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) 07 100.00 00 00.00 00 00.00 00 00.00 07 Old Dhaka 00 00.00 19 100.00 00 00.00 00 00.00 19 Central Dhaka 30 68.18 14 31.82 00 00.00 00 00.00 44 DND Area 00 00.00 05 100.00 00 00.00 00 00.00 05 Total 46 51.11 44 48.89 00 00.00 00 00.00 90 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Economic Dimension Table-9 presents the distribution of wards by economic resilience. 60% of the wards have poor economic resilience and 40% of the wards have moderate economic resilience in Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur) while all the 7 wards of western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) have moderate economic resilience. In Central Dhaka performance of 36 (82%) wards is moderate and 8 (18%) wards is poor while in Old Dhaka 9 (47%) Wards have moderate performance and 10 (53%) wards have poor performance. In DND Area economic resilience of all the 5 wards is poor. Institutional Dimension Institutional performance of wards is perhaps worst of all as is evident from Table-10. Out of 90 wards 46 (51%) wards have poor institutional resilience and 44 (49%) wards have moderate resilience. In central and Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) 68% and 60% of the wards respectively have poor performance while 32% and 40% of the wards respectively have moderate performance. In Old Dhaka and DND Area all the wards perform moderately while in Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) all the wards perform poorly in institutional dimension. Natural Dimension In natural dimension also poor performance is observed in significant number of wards (Table-11). Thus, about 27% of all the wards have poor natural resilience. In some zones the situation is even worse. Thus, about 53% of the wards in DND Area have poor resilience in natural dimension. Somewhat better situation is observed in Central Dhaka, Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur) and Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari). Thus, 13 out of 15 wards in Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur), all the 7 wards in Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) and 37 out of 44 wards in Central Dhaka have moderate resilience in natural dimension. No ward has been found with good or better performance in any of the 7 zones. Table- 12 presents the distribution of 90 wards by resilience in major dimensions and enables us to obtain an overall picture at a glance. Thus, physical resilience of wards is either moderate or good with majority of the wards (65.56 %) having moderate resilience. Economic, institutional and natural resilience of wards is either poor or moderate. In economic and natural dimensions, majority of the wards (64% and 73% respectively) have moderate resilience while in institutional dimension, majority of the wards (51%) have poor resilience. Social resilience of wards may be poor, moderate or good with majority of the wards (57%) having moderate resilience followed by 28% of the wards having good resilience. Only about 16% of the wards have poor resilience in social dimension. Only a few wards have good resilience in physical (35 wards) or social dimension (25 wards) while in economic, institutional and natural dimensions, there is no ward with good or better resilience. 27 I 28 Table-11: Distribution of Wards by Natural Resilience in Study Zones within DCC (North & South) Dimension Natural Dimension Resilience Levels → Poor Moderate Good Best Total Number Study Zones within DCC (N & S) Number % of Number % of Number % of Number % of of Wards of Wards Wards of Wards Wards of Wards Wards of Wards Wards Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur) 02 13.33 13 86.67 00 00.00 00 00.00 15 Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) 00 00.00 07 100.00 00 00.00 00 00.00 07 Old Dhaka 10 52.63 09 47.37 00 00.00 00 00.00 19 Central Dhaka 07 15.91 37 84.09 00 00.00 00 00.00 44 DND Area 05 100.00 00 00.00 00 00.00 00 00.00 05 Total 24 26.67 66 73.33 00 00.00 00 00.00 90 Table-12: Distribution of Wards by Major Dimensions within DCC (North & South) Resilience Levels → Poor Moderate Good Best Total Number Major Dimensions Number % of Number % of Number % of Number % of of Wards of Wards Wards of Wards Wards of Wards Wards of Wards Wards Physical 00 00.00 59 65.56 31 34.34 00 00.00 90 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Social 14 15.55 51 56.67 25 27.78 00 00.00 90 Economic 32 35.55 58 64.44 00 00.00 00 00.00 90 Institutional 46 51.11 44 48.84 00 00.00 00 00.00 90 Natural 25 26.67 66 73.33 00 00.00 00 00.00 90 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I INTER-ZONAL VARIATIONS IN RESILIENCE LEVELS: EXPALNATIONS AND POLICY OPTIONS As we have already observed there has been significant variations in resilience levels of various zones in terms of various dimensions. What is important, however, is that these variations need to be explained if policies are to be formulated for enhancing resilience levels of various zones in order to address climate related disasters in future. Inter-zonal variations in resilience levels in various dimensions can be linked to the performance of parameters under each dimension which again is dependent on the status of variables associated with each parameter. In what follows, an attempt has been made to identify the variables influencing resilience levels of various zones in different parameters under each dimension. Explaining Inter-Zonal Variations Physical Resilience Supply of electricity is an important parameter influencing physical resilience. Resilience levels of four zones - Narayanganj, Old Dhaka, Eastern Dhaka and Goranchatbari Area of Western Dhaka fall below the city average with respect to this physical parameter (Figure-12). This can be linked to lower level of accessibility of household to electricity and lower level of supply capacity in these zones compared to other zones. In case of water supply all the zones have moderate levels of resilience although significant differences exist in their CDRI values. Lower CDRI in some zones such as old Dhaka and DND area results mainly from lower level of accessibility to piped water supply and lack of alternative capacity. In some zones households address this problem by installing such alternative capacity as shallow/deep tube-wells. 29 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Sanitation and solid waste management have important implications for inter-zonal variations in physical resilience. Poor performance of Narayanganj, Central Dhaka, Goranchatbari and Kallyanpur of Western Dhaka in sanitation and solid waste management result mainly from poor collection of waste and lack of waste treatment and recycling facilities. Lack of access to sanitation is also a major problem and cause of lower physical resilience of Narayanganj. Accessibility to roads does not vary significantly across zones while large interzonal variations could be observed in case of housing and land use. Poor status of this physical parameter in Narayanganj, DND Area, Old Dhaka and Goranchatbari Area of Western Dhaka compared to other zones may be linked to higher degree of non-compliance with building codes, higher percentage of population living in close proximity to polluted industries and higher percentage of buildings at risk due to water logging. Social Resilience In case of social parameters remarkable interzonal variations could be observed. The social parameter “Population” is influenced by such variables as growth, dependent population (population under 14 and above 64 years), population of informal settlements and population density (day and night). Figure-13 shows that four out of seven zones- Old Dhaka, DND Area, Goranchatbari and Kallyanpur Zones of Western Dhaka have CDRI values lower than the city average and this can be linked to higher density of population and larger percentage of population living in informal settlements compared to other three zones. 30 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I The city has has better resilience with respect to the social parameter “health” compared to other social parameters. The resilience levels in different zones with respect to this parameter are also more or less same except for Narayanganj which has a much lower CDRI in health. This situation in Narayanganj can be linked to lower capacity of health facilities during disaster and lower level of disaster preparedness compared to other zones. Level of education and awareness which is very important for adaptation to climate change is quite low in five out of seven zones. These are Central Dhaka, Old Dhaka, DND Area, Goranchatbari and Kallyanpur Zones of Western Dhaka. Poor status of such variables as population’s awareness about disasters, availability of public awareness programs/disaster drills and functionality of schools after disaster are mainly responsible for such a situation in these zones. In case of social capital Old Dhaka, DND Area and Narayanganj performs better than Western Dhaka, Eastern Dhaka and Central Dhaka. Variables such as people’s participation in community activities and city’s decision making processes, acceptance level of community leaders, and mixing and interlinking of social classes have important influence on social capital of various zones. Higher status of these variables in better performing zones leads to better social capital which in turn contributes to higher level of social resilience. Community preparedness during disaster is an important social parameter influencing social resilience in different zones. Important variables affecting community preparedness include city authority’s preparedness in terms of logistics, materials and management, provision of shelter for affected people, support from NGOs/CBOs and participation of people in relief works. Eastern Dhaka has the lowest level of community preparedness and Goranchatbari Area of Western Dhaka has the highest level of community preparedness while other zones perform at a moderate level with respect to this parameter. Differences in the status of above-mentioned variables are mainly responsible for the differences in resilience levels across various zones. Economic Resilience Among five economic parameters income, employment and household assets have almost same bearing on the economic resilience of the city although there are interzonal differences in terms of these parameters (figure-14). Such differences result from variables such as population below poverty line, income sources per household, income derived from informal sector, income disparity and reduction of income after a disaster. Poor status of these variables are mainly responsible for lower level of income resilience in Old Dhaka, DND Area and Goranchatbari Area of Western Dhaka compared to other zones. Employment and household assets do not account for significant variations in economic resilience across various zones except for DND Area. Economic resilience of this area is much lower than other zones mainly because of higher unemployment among youth, higher labour unemployment, child labour and lower level of household assets such as television, mobile phone and basic furniture. 31 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Finance and savings, and budget and subsidy are other important economic parameters that significantly influence economic resilience of the city as well its various zones (Figure ). Variables that are associated with finance and savings include credit facility to prevent disaster, accessibility of households to credit, accessibility to credit for urban poor, savings practice of households and insurance facilities for households’ properties. Lower status of these variables is mainly responsible for lower resilience of the city and its various zones with respect to finance and savings. The situation with respect to budget and subsidy is even worse. This parameter is the composite outcome of such variables as funding for city’s disaster risk management, city’s annual budget for DRR/CCA, availability of support/incentive to rebuild houses after disaster, alternative livelihood after disaster and healthcare facilities after disaster. All these variables have poor status in all the zones which produce lower CDRI of this parameter (budget and subsidy) and in turn lead to poor economic resilience of the city. Institutional Resilience Institutional dimension exert significant influence on the adaptive capacity of a city to deal with climate change. Various parameters that impinge on institutional resilience have varying degrees of influence on institutional resilience of various zones. Mainstreaming DRR and CCA in planning and development of a city can go a long in enhancing adaptive capacity of the city. This aspect has not been given due attention in Dhaka with the result that the city’s institutional capacity remains extremely weak and contributes to lower levels of institutional resilience in the city and its various 32 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I zones. Variables that are implicated for this situation include lack of ability and capacity to produce development plans, lack of people’s participation in planning and development process, and poor implementation of disaster management plans by the city authority. Crisis management framework of the city and its knowledge dissemination and management processes are also responsible for lower levels of institutional resilience of various zones of the city. Figure-15 presents the status of the city and its seven zones in terms of CDRI scores of crisis management framework of the city. It indicates that the crisis management framework of the city is not effective. The factors that are responsible for such a situation are poor status of existing disaster management plan, lack of effectiveness of emergency team, and very limited availability of evacuation centres during a disaster. As regards knowledge dissemination and management processes the influencing variables are availability of disaster training programs for emergency workers, existence of disaster awareness programs for communities, and capacity to disseminate disaster awareness programs. Poor status of these variables has a depressing. The resilience level of the city with respect to institutional collaboration among various organizations and stakeholders is somewhat better than other parameters although there are variations across different zones (Figure). Important factors (variables) shaping city’s capacity for institutional collaboration include cooperation between the city and the central government, cooperation of city’s ward officials for emergency management and city’s institutional collaboration with NGOs and private organizations. Interzonal differences in institutional collaboration result mainly from the performance of the ward/zone level officials/councilors in connection with these variables. Figure-15: Resilience Level (CDRI) of Institutional Parameters in Different Zones Overall ((Study Area) Good governaance Narayannganj Institutional collabboration during a DND Areea Institutional Parameters disaster Knowledge disemination and Old Dhaka management Central Dhaka Effectiveness of cities crisis management framework Eastern Dhaka Western Dhaka Mainstreaming of DRR and CCA (Kallyanpur) Western Dhaka 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 (Gorancchatbari) CDRI 33 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Good governance is an important institutional parameter which affects climate disaster resilience of a city to a large extent. Lack of good governance is a serious problem for Dhaka and is largely responsible for poor institutional capacity of the city to address climate change. Important variables that impinge on good governance include accountability and transparency of city government, promptness of city government to disseminate emergency information during a disaster and capability of city body to lead recovery process. Poor status of these variables are mainly responsible for lower levels of resilience of Eastern Dhaka, Central Dhaka and Western Dhaka (both Goranchatbari and Kallyanpur) compared to the city as a whole. Natural Resilience Present state of various parameters that define natural dimension has important implications for adaptive capacity of a city. Natural hazards, land use, ecosystem services and environmental policies play important role in shaping natural resilience of the city and its various zones. Figure-16 shows the resilience levels of these natural parameters on different zones. As a natural hazard flood affects different zones of the city differently. The effects of flood in terms of intensity and frequency are mostly felt in three zones-Eastern Dhaka, Old Dhaka and DND Area. Western Dhaka is protected from flood by the western embankment but is affected by water-logging due to rain. Central Dhaka and Narayanganj are affected when extreme flood occurs. Ecosystem services such as water bodies and land use aspects such as settlements on hazardous grounds, area vulnerable to flood, amount of urban green space, loss of urban green space etc. are important variables that influence adaptive capacity of a city significantly. Poor status of these variables makes the city less resilient in terms of natural dimension. DND Area, Old Dhaka, Central Dhaka and Kallyanpur Area of Western Dhaka are adversely affected by one or more of such variables. In Central Dhaka and Old Dhaka 34 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Existence of environmental policies and their implementation have important implications for adaptive capacity of the city. The country has environment policy, environment conservation act (2010), rules and regulations but their enforcement is very weak. These are not often reflected in development plans or activities. Poor enforcement of environment policy and efficient waste management rules affect all parts of the city in terms of environmental deterioration and thus adversely affect the natural resilience of the city. POLICY OPTIONS In this study CDRI has been used to evaluate climate disaster resilience of Dhaka city. CDRI has been computed for 25 parameters in five major zones. Some important challenges for the city that emerge from this analysis relate to all the five dimensions of this analysis-physical, social, economic, institutional and natural. Recurrent floods and water logging are the major natural events that create havoc and disrupt socio-economic life of the city. With the changing climate the intensity of rainfall has also increased in recent years and extreme events such as floods, drainage congestions, and water logging have become a regular occurrence in the rainy season. The situation is likely to deteriorate further with increased urbanization accompanied by intense industrial and commercial activities, increases in built-up zones and consequent loss of green zones and wetlands. The ability of a city to adapt to such extreme events depends largely on the level of its disaster resilience. The CDRI analysis has identified certain aspects of physical, social, economic, institutional and natural components of Dhaka city and its various parts that are least resilient or not capable of responding adequately in the event of a climate-related disaster. Physical Aspects Although most of the zones have moderate capacity in these aspects, considerable improvements would be required in various parameters. The city would remain vulnerable unless higher level of physical resilience is achieved. In case of electricity and water supply, steps are needed for improving supply capacity in different zones and making such services accessible to those households who are now outside the purview of such services. Significant improvements are also needed for facilitating access to sanitation and management of solid waste. Vigorous attempts should be made for proper enforcement of 3R (reduce, reuse and recycle) policy. Housing and land use policies also need to be reviewed in order to address problems such as housing in flood prone zones/flood flow zones, enforcement of building codes in construction of houses, polluted industries in residential zones etc. The urban poor, and particularly those in informal settlements, are uniquely vulnerable. Informal settlements are far deficient in infrastructure, including roads, drainage, water, and sewerage. In the event of flooding, mobility is reduced, shelter is put at greater risk, and public health impacts are amplified, resulting in higher morbidity and mortality rates. Policies and action programmes should be taken up to facilitate voluntary relocation and access by all people to zones that are less disaster-prone. The local authority should draw up elaborate resettlement guidelines so as to reduce the impacts on and sufficiently compensate the livelihoods of the affected people. The guidelines should also address issues of alternative resettlement sites, service provisions, transportation facilities to workplaces, gender concerns etc. All relocation/resettlement of dwellers of slums/informal settlements should be 35 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis implemented in accordance with the guidelines as prepared. Narayanganj, Old Dhaka, Eastern Dhaka and Goranchatbari Area of Western Dhaka need special attention because of their low level of resilience with respect to physical dimension. Social Aspects The problem zones in social dimension are population, health, education and awareness, and community preparedness during a disaster. In case of population, growth and density of population pose some problems in some zones, especially unplanned zones. Growth and density of population, therefore, should be restricted within certain limits through planning regulations. In some zones people living in informal settlements pose serious problems as these are mostly hazard prone zones. Housing for low-income people, therefore, should be given special attention. Health hazards such as spread of communicable diseases pose problems after a disaster and need to be tackled properly. During floods and water-logging water-borne diseases like diarrhea, dysentery, typhoid, jaundice etc. become endemic. The reduction of urban human health vulnerability can be achieved by the implementation of measures indirectly and directly related to the health sector and service. Important measures may include Intensification of IEC (Information Education Campaigns) activities to the general public regarding what they can do to protect their health from flood-related illnesses and injuries, Institutionalize linkages and partnerships among health systems and facilities for integration of CC-DRRM in their operations, policies, and plans, Improving disease surveillance and protection, Strengthen the emergency medical systems (EMS) to mainstream climate change and disaster risk reduction management (CC-DRRM) into its functions etc. In case of education and awareness, population’s awareness about disasters is important and this underlines the need for undertaking public awareness programs with particular emphasis on disadvantaged groups and people living in hazard-prone zones. Community preparedness during disaster, especially, provision of shelter for affected people, and participation of the community in city’s decision making process are important social aspects that need special attention for enhancing social resilience of the city. Economic Aspects Economic status of the city and its various parts is extremely important from the perspective of disaster management. A city with poor economic performance is usually characterized by lower level of resilience compared to a city having a well-performing and vibrant economy. Performance or status of various economic components such as, income, employment, household assets, finance and savings, and budget and subsidy have important implications for disaster resilience of a city. Income and employment issues that are of critical importance for Dhaka and its various zones are population below poverty line, income disparity, youth unemployment, reduction of household income due to disaster, child labour etc. These are a clear manifestation of urban poverty and therefore need to be addressed through social protection policies. In order to prevent, mitigate and enhance the ability of the poor to cope with and recover from the major hazards Social Safety Net programmes should be arranged for the poor through works and income transfer programs which may include various food assisted and cash assisted programs such as VGD, FFW, old-age pension schemes, support for the female destitute etc. 36 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Economic resilience of the city also suffers from poor accessibility to credits for the urban poor, poor saving practice of households, insufficient budget for disaster risk reduction, unavailability of subsidy/incentive for residents to rebuild houses and lack of alternative livelihood. Disaster management programs, therefore, should be integrated with the economic development programs with particular emphasis on employment generation and poverty reduction. The government should make provision of calamity fund as bridging finance to stimulate disaster management activities with emphasis on CC-DRRM both at city and community levels. Steps should also be taken for institutionalizing partnerships between city and external agencies to ensure investment of resources for social protection/DRR. Institutional Aspects The city faces a number institutional and governance challenges to address the climate change. In Dhaka city, institutional resilience is poor in almost all the zones. Institutional components that need special attention are mainstreaming of DRR and CCA, crisis management framework of the city, knowledge dissemination and management, and good governance. For mainstreaming DRR and CCA it is essential to enhance the capacity of the disaster management institutions to produce and implement disaster management plans with people’s participation. This would require strengthening and expanding membership of City Disaster Management Committee (CDMC) involving other stakeholders such as the private sector, research institutes, national agencies and utility companies. Policies and programmes should be formulated for promoting close coordination and cooperation among national disaster management and environmental management agencies (i.e. Department of Environment (DoE), Department of Disaster Management (DoDM)), urban local bodies (City Corporations and Paurashavas), non-governmental and private sector organizations. The city development authority should focus on preparation and implementation of integrated, environmentally-sound urban planning and management incorporating environmental and disaster related information and reflecting environmental and disaster management policies and standards. Considerations should also be given to spatial, intersectoral, inter-temporal and environmental media related factors with special attention to key aspects of land and water-use planning. This is particularly important for Eastern Dhaka and DND area. Effectiveness of the city’s crisis management framework is largely dependent on the existence of an efficient emergency team with trained workers and efficient leadership. In the area of knowledge dissemination and management, the main focus should be on preparing and implementing disaster training programs for emergency workers and disaster awareness programs for communities. Particular emphasis should be given on improving the knowledge of the community regarding threats and impacts of disasters. This can be done through regular and continuous disaster awareness programs, including emergency drills, seminars, workshops, lectures, radio and TV programs, newspaper articles etc. Although good governance is important for strengthening disaster resilience of the city in almost all the aspects, it is of critical importance for ensuring effectiveness of early warning system, quick dissemination of emergency information and providing emergency services during disaster, and enhancing the ability of city authority to lead recovery process. More resources should be allocated 37 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis for capacity building of local government institutions. Effective disaster response requires skilled human resources and well coordinated efforts from all concerned stakeholders. Good governance in this respect can go a long way by ensuring participation of all the stakeholders, including the community at all stages of disaster preparedness and response. Natural Aspects Poor natural resilience poses a problem for the city in terms of disaster management planning. Weakening of city’s natural resilience during the last few decades can be linked to the continuous deterioration of the city’s Environment. Water and air pollution is now at an extremely high level, quality of city’s biodiversity has also fallen significantly, and human settlements on hazardous grounds have become pervasive. Loss of urban green space, wetlands and natural canals have made the city more vulnerable to natural hazards. Immediate steps, therefore, should be taken to formulate policies and action plans that would:  Create public awareness about the importance of wetlands and ponds and their role in culture fisheries, bathing and water reservoir for surface run-off during monsoon.  Designate all ponds/water bodies in Detailed Area Plan Map and protect them according to the ecological importance and public interest.  Avoid water bodies during planning of roads, housing and industrial estates.  Promote plantation and gardening to increase the natural beauty of the city.  Aware people for keeping some trees and bushes around the homesteads.  Increase tree plantation on roadsides and homesteads.  Restrict private land development activities in and around low-lying zones.  Practice green architectural/engineering design during planning of housing estates, buildings and the intersections of main roads.  Facilitate preparation of environmental bylaws that provide for green infrastructure requirements in zoning, landscaping, runoff and sediment control, parking and comprehensive rain water management. Improvement of natural resilience of the city would require formulation and implementation of appropriate environmental policies and regulations. Use of city-level hazard maps in development activities, incorporation of environmental conservation regulations in development plans, implementation of efficient waste management system (RRR), implementation of mitigation policies to reduce air pollution and proper implementation of the Detailed Area Plan of the city are important steps that need special attention. 38 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I CONCLUDING REMARKS Climate change is likely to have enormous impacts on Dhaka in terms of flooding and water- logging. As the population of the city grows and density of population increases, impervious areas also increase significantly (Annex-III) leading to water-logging on a large scale even during normal rainfall. The situation is likely to deteriorate with the changing climate. As the Annex-III shows, the percentage of impervious area in low-density residential areas of Dhaka varies from 18 percent to 34 percent as the population density increases from 10,000 people per km2 to 20,000 per km2. In high-density areas, the percentage of impervious area varies from 60 percent to 70 percent as the population density increases from 40,000 people per km2 to 50,000 per km2. The flow velocity of storm-water runoff is likely to be very high if the impervious area is quite big. Continuous increase in density of population is, therefore, a major challenge for Dhaka City. Adapting to climate change will require the city to improve its capacity to address the deficiencies in the social, economic, environmental and infrastructural aspects. This would include institutional strengthening and governance improvement to address climate change. City Corporations and urban local bodies (ULBs) need to actively coordinate and mainstream adaptation and resilience into urban planning processes to prepare their cities to deal with climate risks and impacts. The reduction of vulnerability, as well as the capacity to respond to disasters is directly related to decentralized access to information, communication and decision-making, and control of resources. Thus, disaster management capabilities at the local level can be greatly improved by strengthening urban local bodies through decentralization of power and authority, and involving all the stakeholders at all stages of planning and implementation of disaster management programmes. Thus CDRI analysis has afforded valuable information which can be fruitfully used in strategic planning or policy formulation. Analysis of seven zones by five dimensions and 25 components provides a wealth of information that can be used to identify priority zones as well as priority sectors. Moreover, the analysis provides information on such variables as can facilitate preparation of hazard and vulnerability maps in different zones. The study also identified weaknesses and potentials of different zones in various aspects. This would facilitate area-specific action planning for addressing the weaknesses and utilizing the potentials to strengthen the climate disaster resilience of the area. Since the analysis covers most of the important physical, social, economic, institutional and environmental aspects relevant for Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and Climate change Adaptation (CCA), it would be easier to integrate the Disaster Management Plan of the city with its Urban Development Plan. 39 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis REFERENCES Joerin, Joerin and Rajib Shaw (2011): “Climate and Disaster Resilience in Cities”, in Community, Environment and Disaster Risk Management, Vol. 6 Parvin, Gulsan Ara and Shaw, Rajib (2011): “Climate Disaster Resilience of Dhaka City Corporation: An Empirical Assessment at Zone Level”, in Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy, Vol. 2: Iss 2, Article 6. United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR) (2009): UNISDR Terminology on Disaster Risk Reduction, Geneva: United Nations United Nations (2010): World Urbanization Prospects: The 2009 Revisions. New York World Wide Fund (WWF) for Nature (2009): Mega-Stress for Megacities: A climate Vulnerability Ranking of Major Coastal Cities of Asia, Gland: Switzerland (http://reliefweb.int/report/ world/mega-stress-mega-cities-climate-vulnerability-ranking-major-coastal-cities-asia) 40 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I ANNEX-I Tables on Importance and Status of Variables Under Major Dimensions 41 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis 42 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Table-1: Status and Importance of Variables under Physical Dimension Parameter Variable Rating Status (current Weight Level of condition) Importance Access 3.68 Good 4.50 High Availability 2.91 Moderate 4.25 High Electricity Supply capacity 2.17 Poor 3.50 Moderate Dependence on external supply 2.86 Moderate 2.62 Moderate Alternative capacity 2.85 Moderate 3.62 High Access 2.97 Moderate 4.62 Highest Availability 2.64 Moderate 4.62 Highest Supply capacity 2.15 Poor 3.62 High Dependence on external supply 2.05 Poor 3.12 Moderate Water Alternative capacity 2.57 Moderate 3.50 Moderate Access to sanitation 2.64 Moderate 4.62 Highest Toilets 4.22 Good 4.00 High Sanitation and Collection of wastes 2.58 Moderate 3.75 High solid waste disposal Waste treatment 2.35 Poor 3.62 High Recycling 1.90 Poor 3.00 Moderate Percentage of land transportation network 3.35 Moderate 3.75 High Paved roads 3.33 Moderate 3.62 High Accessibility of Accessibility during flooding 3.33 Moderate 4.25 High Status of interruption after intense rainfall 3.33 Moderate 3.87 High roads Roadside covered drain 2.61 Moderate 3.00 Moderate Building code 3.03 Moderate 4.37 High Buildings with nonpermanent structure, 3.78 Good 3.12 Moderate Housing and land Buildings above water logging 2.79 Moderate 4.50 High Ownership 1.71 Poor 2.50 Low Population living in proximity to polluting 2.42 Poor 3.75 High use industries Status according to Rating are: 1 - 1.5 = Worst, 1.51 – 2.5 = Poor, 2.51 – 3.5 = Moderate, 3.51 – 4.5 = Good, More than 4.5 = Best * Importance according to Weight: 1 - 1.5 = Least, 1.51 – 2.5 = Low, 2.51 – 3.5 = Moderate, 3.51 – 4.5 = High, More than 4.5 = * Highest 43 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Table-2: Status and Importance of Variables under Social Dimension Parameter Variable Rating Status Weight Level of Importance Population growth 3.32 Moderate 2.75 Moderate Population under 14 and above 64 3.00 Moderate 4.12 High Population Population of informal settlers 2.32 Poor 4.00 High Population density – day 1.53 Poor 4.25 High Population density – night 1.53 Poor 4.25 High Population suffering from waterborne/ 3.74 Good 3.87 High vector-borne diseases Population suffering from waterborne 3.74 Good 4.00 High diseases after a disaster Access to primary health facilities 3.26 Moderate 4.37 High Capacity of health facilities during a 3.49 Moderate 4.75 Highest Health disaster Preparedness for disaster 3.17 Moderate 4.25 High Literacy rate 2.16 Poor 3.12 Moderate Population’s awareness about disasters 2.71 Poor 4.37 High Education and Availability of public awareness programs/ 2.02 Poor 3.75 High disaster drills awareness Access to Internet 1.42 Worst 2.00 Low Functionality of schools after disaster 2.14 Poor 3.75 High Population participating in community 2.41 Poor 3.62 High activities/clubs, Acceptance level of community leader [in 3.08 Moderate 4.37 High ward] Ability of communities to build consensus 2.49 Poor 3.87 High Social capital Ability of communities to participate in 2.74 Moderate 3.87 High city’s decision-making process Mixing and interlinking of social class 2.40 Poor 3.50 Moderate Preparedness [logistics, materials, and 3.22 Moderate 4.50 High management] Provision of shelter for affected people 3.15 Moderate 4.37 High preparedness Community Support from NGOs/CBOs 2.25 Poor 3.62 High Population evacuating voluntarily 2.01 Poor 3.00 Moderate Population participating in relief works) 3.23 Moderate 3.25 Moderate 44 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Table-3: Status and Importance of Variables under Economic Dimension Parameter Variable Rating Status Weight Level of Importance Population below poverty line 3.05 Moderate 4.87 Highest Number of income sources per household 2.09 Poor 3.12 Moderate Income Income derived in informal sector 2.53 Moderate 3.50 Moderate Income disparity 2.28 Poor 3.25 Moderate Percentage of households have reduced 2.70 Moderate 4.12 High income due to a disaster Formal sector: percentage of labor 2.83 Moderate 4.25 High unemployed Percentage of youth unemployed 2.32 Poor 3.62 High Percentage of women employed 1.97 Poor 3.37 Moderate Employment Percentage of employees who come from 2.90 Moderate 3.50 Moderate outside the city Percentage of child labor in city 2.89 Moderate 3.00 Moderate Households have television 3.22 Moderate 3.12 Moderate Mobile phone 3.21 Moderate 4.25 High Household asset Motorized vehicle 1.56 Poor 2.25 Low Nonmotorized vehicle 1.57 Poor 2.62 Moderate Basic furniture 3.18 Moderate 3.50 Moderate Availability of credit facility to prevent 1.77 Poor 3.87 High Finance and savings disaster Accessibility to credits 1.96 Poor 4.12 High Accessibility to credits for urban poor 1.94 Poor 4.12 High Saving practice of households 2.08 Poor 4.37 High Household’s properties insured 1.38 Poor 2.87 Moderate Funding for city’s disaster risk 1.90 Poor 4.37 High management Budget and subsidy City’s annual budget for DRR and CCA 1.86 Poor 4.37 High Availability of subsidy/incentive to rebuild 1.46 Poor 4.00 High houses Alternative livelihood 1.14 Worst 3.50 Moderate Health care after a disaster 1.49 Worst 4.12 High 45 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Table-4: Status and Importance of Variables under Institutional Dimension Parameter Variable Rating Status Weight Level of Importance Mainstreaming of CCA and DRR in cities 2.21 Poor 4.87 Highest Mainstreaming of DRR development plans, Mainstreaming of CCA and DRR in housing and 2.04 Poor 4.50 High transport policies, and CCA Ability [manpower] and capacity [technical] to 1.82 Poor 4.00 High produce development plans, Extent of community participation in plan 2.02 Poor 4.37 High preparation process, Implementation of disaster management plan 2.20 Poor 4.87 Highest Existence of disaster management plan, 2.57 Moderate 4.50 High Existence and effectiveness of an emergency team 2.25 Poor 3.87 High during a disaster of cities crisis Effectiveness management Availability of evacuation centers, 2.16 Poor 3.75 High framework Efficiency of trained emergency workers during a 2.29 Poor 3.87 High disaster, Existence of alternative decision-making personnel 1.55 Poor 2.62 Moderate Effectiveness to learn from previous disasters, 1.61 Poor 4.00 High Availability of disaster training programs for 2.01 Poor 4.25 High emergency workers dissemination and Existence of disaster awareness programs for 1.50 Worst 3.87 High communities management Knowledge Capacity to disseminate disaster awareness 1.32 Worst 3.37 Moderate programs Extent of community satisfaction from disaster 1.13 Worst 2.87 Moderate awareness programs Cities dependency on external institutions/support 1.95 Poor 3.12 Moderate Institutional collaboration and stakeholders, during Collaboration and interconnectedness with 2.19 Poor 3.50 High with other organizations neighboring cities City’s cooperation with central department for 2.50 Poor 4.00 High emergency management Cooperation of city’s ward officials for emergency 3.15 Moderate 5.00 Highest a disaster management City’s institutional collaboration with NGOs and 2.58 Moderate 4.12 High private organizations Effectiveness of early warning systems 2.27 Poor 4.62 Highest Accountability and transparency of city 1.66 Poor 3.37 High Good governance government Existence of disaster drills 1.52 Poor 3.12 High Promptness of city body to disseminate emergency 1.85 Poor 3.75 High information Capability of city body to lead recovery process 1.83 Poor 3.75 High 46 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Table-5: Status and Importance of Variables under Natural Dimension Parameter Variable Rating Status Weight Level of Importance Intensity/severity of natural hazards 3.59 Good 5.00 Highest of natural hazards Intensity/severity Cyclones, 3.59 Good 4.50 High Heat waves, 3.60 Good 2.75 Moderate Droughts [water scarcity], 3.61 Good 3.25 Moderate Tornados 3.58 Good 3.87 High Floods, 2.73 Moderate 4.50 High Cyclones, 2.79 Moderate 4.00 High natural hazards Frequency of Heat waves, 2.80 Moderate 2.62 Moderate Droughts [water scarcity], 2.79 Moderate 3.12 Moderate Tornados) 2.79 Moderate 2.87 Moderate Quality of city’s biodiversity 2.18 Poor 3.50 Moderate Soils, 2.21 Poor 3.87 High Air, 1.61 Poor 3.37 Moderate Ecosystem services Water bodies, 1.66 Poor 4.00 High Urban salinity 2.35 Poor 2.87 Moderate Area vulnerable to climate-related hazards, 2.31 Poor 4.50 High Land use in natural Urban morphology, 2.02 Poor 3.75 High Settlements on hazardous ground, 2.09 Poor 4.25 High Amount of Urban Green Space [UGS], 1.60 Poor 3.62 High terms Loss of UGS) 1.56 Poor 3.62 High Use of city-level hazard maps in development 2.01 Poor 4.62 Highest activities, Extent of environmental regulations reflected 1.97 Poor 4.50 High Environmental policies in urban plans, Extent of implementation of environmental 1.88 Poor 4.25 High conservation policies, Implementation of efficient waste 2.05 Poor 4.25 High management system [RRR], Implementation of mitigation policies to 2.03 Poor 3.50 Moderate reduce air pollution) 47 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis 48 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I ANNEX-II Tables on CDRI values and Resilience Levels of Wards for parameters under Major Dimensions 49 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis 50 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Table 1: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of physical dimension of central Dhaka area PHYSICAL DIMENSION Sanitation and Accessibility of Housing and Electricity Water solid waste Ward roads land use disposal No. Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience W-16 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.2 Good W-17 3.8 Good 3.4 Good 2.8 Moderate 4.0 Good 3.2 Good W-18 3.8 Good 3.4 Good 3.4 Good 4.0 Good 3.2 Good W-19 3.2 Good 2.8 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 3.8 Good 3.2 Good W-20 3.8 Good 3.2 Good 2.8 Moderate 3.8 Good 3.2 Good W-21 3.8 Good 3.4 Good 3.0 Moderate 4.0 Good 3.2 Good W-22 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate W-23 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.6 Moderate W-24 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.8 Moderate W-25 3.0 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.8 Moderate W-26 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.0 Poor 2.4 Moderate W-27 3.0 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.8 Poor 2.8 Moderate W-28 3.0 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.8 Moderate W-29 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 2.8 Moderate W-30 3.0 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.8 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-31 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor 2.8 Moderate W-32 3.0 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 3.0 Moderate W-33 3.0 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.4 Moderate 3.0 Moderate W-34 3.0 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 2.8 Moderate W-35 3.0 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate W-36 3.0 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.0 Moderate W-37 3.8 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.4 Good 3.0 Moderate W-38 3.8 Good 3.2 Good 3.0 Moderate 3.4 Good 3.4 Good W-39 3.0 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.6 Good 3.4 Good 51 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis PHYSICAL DIMENSION Sanitation and Accessibility of Housing and Electricity Water solid waste Ward roads land use disposal No. Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience W-40 3.0 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 3.4 Good 3.4 Good W-44 3.0 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 3.4 Good 3.8 Good 3.6 Good W-45 3.0 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 3.6 Good 3.4 Good W-49 2.4 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 4.1 Best 3.4 Good W-50 2.4 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 4.2 Best 3.4 Good W-51 2.4 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 4.2 Best 3.4 Good W-52 2.2 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 4.4 Best 3.4 Good W-53 2.4 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 5.0 Best 3.4 Good W-54 2.4 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 4.6 Best 3.2 Good W-55 2.4 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 5.0 Best 3.0 Moderate W-56 2.4 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 5.0 Best 3.2 Good W-57 2.2 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 5.0 Best 3.4 Good W-62 2.8 Moderate 2.0 Poor 3.3 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 2.4 Moderate W-70 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate W-74 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate W-75 2.8 Moderate 2.0 Poor 3.0 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 2.4 Moderate W-76 2.8 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 2.2 Moderate W-77 2.8 Moderate 2.0 Poor 3.4 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 2.4 Moderate W-84 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 2.2 Moderate W-85 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor Resilience levels according to CDRI Scores are: 1 – 2 = Poor, 2.1 – 3.0 = Moderate, 3.1 – 4.0 = Good, 4.1 – 5.0 = Best * Table 2: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of social dimension of central Dhaka area 52 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I SOCIAL DIMENSION Education and Community Ward Population Health Social Capital awareness preparedness No. Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience W-16 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.4 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.6 Moderate W-17 2.2 Moderate 3.4 Good 2.6 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.6 Moderate W-18 2.2 Moderate 3.4 Good 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.6 Moderate W-19 3.2 Moderate 3.4 Good 2.4 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.6 Moderate W-20 3.4 Good 3.4 Good 2.6 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.6 Moderate W-21 2.2 Moderate 3.4 Good 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.6 Moderate W-22 1.6 Poor 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-23 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 1.4 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-24 2.2 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.4 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-25 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 1.4 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-26 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 1.2 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-27 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 1.4 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-28 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 1.4 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-29 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 1.4 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-30 1.4 Poor 4.0 Good 1.6 Poor 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-31 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate 1.4 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-32 2.6 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.4 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-33 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-34 2.4 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.4 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-35 2.4 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.4 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-36 2.6 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-37 3.4 Good 3.4 Good 2.4 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.6 Moderate W-38 2.0 Poor 3.4 Good 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.6 Moderate W-39 1.6 Poor 3.6 Good 2.0 Poor 3.0 Moderate 3.4 Good W-40 3.0 Moderate 3.6 Good 2.2 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 3.4 Good W-44 2.0 Poor 3.6 Good 2.2 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 3.4 Good W-45 1.8 Poor 3.6 Good 2.0 Poor 3.0 Moderate 3.4 Good 53 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis SOCIAL DIMENSION Education and Community Ward Population Health Social Capital awareness preparedness No. Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience W-49 3.0 Moderate 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-50 2.6 Moderate 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-51 2.6 Moderate 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-52 3.8 Good 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-53 3.0 Moderate 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-54 2.4 Moderate 4.0 Good 2.8 Moderate 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-55 2.4 Moderate 4.0 Good 2.8 Moderate 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-56 4.2 Best 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-57 3.8 Good 4.0 Good 3.2 Good 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-62 3.0 Moderate 4.6 Best 2.2 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 3.4 Good W-70 2.6 Moderate 4.4 Best 2.6 Moderate 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-74 2.6 Moderate 4.4 Best 2.8 Moderate 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-75 2.2 Moderate 4.0 Good 2.0 Poor 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-76 2.2 Moderate 4.0 Good 1.8 Poor 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-77 2.2 Moderate 4.0 Good 1.8 Poor 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-84 1.8 Poor 4.0 Good 1.8 Poor 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-85 1.8 Poor 4.0 Good 1.6 Poor 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate 54 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Table 3: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of economic dimension of central Dhaka area ECONOMIC DIMENSION Households Finance and Budget and Ward Income Employment assets savings subsidy No. Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience W-16 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 1.4 Poor W-17 3.2 Good 3.6 Good 3.2 Good 2.0 Poor 1.2 Poor W-18 3.2 Good 3.6 Good 3.2 Good 2.0 Poor 1.2 Poor W-19 3.2 Good 3.6 Good 3.2 Good 2.0 Poor 1.2 Poor W-20 3.2 Good 3.6 Good 3.2 Good 2.0 Poor 1.2 Poor W-21 3.2 Good 3.6 Good 3.2 Good 2.0 Poor 1.2 Poor W-22 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-23 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-24 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-25 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-26 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-27 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-28 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-29 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-30 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.4 Poor W-31 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-32 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-33 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-34 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-35 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-36 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-37 3.2 Good 3.6 Good 3.2 Good 2.0 Poor 1.2 Poor W-38 3.2 Good 3.6 Good 3.2 Good 2.0 Poor 1.2 Poor W-39 2.8 Moderate 3.6 Good 3.2 Good 1.8 Poor 1.4 Poor W-40 2.8 Moderate 3.6 Good 3.2 Good 1.8 Poor 1.4 Poor W-44 2.8 Moderate 3.6 Good 3.2 Good 1.8 Poor 1.4 Poor 55 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis ECONOMIC DIMENSION Households Finance and Budget and Ward Income Employment assets savings subsidy No. Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience W-45 2.8 Moderate 3.6 Good 3.2 Good 1.8 Poor 1.4 Poor W-49 3.4 Good 3.4 Good 3.2 Good 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor W-50 3.4 Good 3.4 Good 3.2 Good 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor W-51 3.4 Good 3.4 Good 3.2 Good 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor W-52 3.4 Good 3.4 Good 3.2 Good 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor W-53 3.4 Good 3.4 Good 3.2 Good 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor W-54 3.4 Good 3.4 Good 3.2 Good 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor W-55 3.4 Good 3.4 Good 3.2 Good 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor W-56 3.4 Good 3.4 Good 3.2 Good 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor W-57 3.4 Good 3.4 Good 3.2 Good 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor W-62 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 1.8 Poor 1.4 Poor W-70 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-74 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-75 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.4 Poor W-76 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.4 Poor W-77 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.4 Poor W-84 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.4 Poor W-85 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.4 Poor 56 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Table 4: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of institutional dimension of central Dhaka area INSTITUTIONAL DIMENSION Knowledge Mainstreaming Institutional Ward of DRR and CCA Effectiveness dissemination Good governance collaboration No. and management Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience W-16 1.5 Poor 1.5 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.5 Poor W-17 2.2 Moderate 1.9 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.9 Moderate 2.3 Moderate W-18 2.2 Moderate 1.9 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.9 Moderate 2.3 Moderate W-19 2.2 Moderate 1.9 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.9 Moderate 2.3 Moderate W-20 2.2 Moderate 1.9 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.9 Moderate 2.3 Moderate W-21 2.2 Moderate 1.9 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.9 Moderate 2.3 Moderate W-22 2.2 Moderate 1.5 Poor 1.9 Poor 2.5 Moderate 1.4 Poor W-23 2.2 Moderate 1.5 Poor 1.9 Poor 2.5 Moderate 1.4 Poor W-24 2.2 Moderate 1.5 Poor 1.9 Poor 2.5 Moderate 1.4 Poor W-25 2.2 Moderate 1.5 Poor 1.9 Poor 2.5 Moderate 1.4 Poor W-26 2.2 Moderate 1.5 Poor 1.9 Poor 2.5 Moderate 1.4 Poor W-27 2.2 Moderate 1.5 Poor 1.9 Poor 2.5 Moderate 1.4 Poor W-28 2.2 Moderate 1.5 Poor 1.9 Poor 2.5 Moderate 1.4 Poor W-29 2.2 Moderate 1.5 Poor 1.9 Poor 2.5 Moderate 1.4 Poor W-30 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate 2.3 Moderate W-31 2.2 Moderate 1.5 Poor 1.9 Poor 2.5 Moderate 1.4 Poor W-32 2.2 Moderate 1.5 Poor 1.9 Poor 2.5 Moderate 1.4 Poor W-33 2.2 Moderate 1.5 Poor 1.9 Poor 2.5 Moderate 1.4 Poor W-34 2.2 Moderate 1.5 Poor 1.9 Poor 2.5 Moderate 1.4 Poor W-35 2.2 Moderate 1.5 Poor 1.9 Poor 2.5 Moderate 1.4 Poor W-36 2.2 Moderate 1.5 Poor 1.9 Poor 2.5 Moderate 1.4 Poor W-37 2.2 Moderate 1.9 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.9 Moderate 2.3 Moderate W-38 2.2 Moderate 1.9 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.9 Moderate 2.3 Moderate W-39 2.8 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.3 Moderate 1.7 Poor W-40 2.8 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.3 Moderate 1.7 Poor 57 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis INSTITUTIONAL DIMENSION Knowledge Mainstreaming Institutional Ward of DRR and CCA Effectiveness dissemination Good governance collaboration No. and management Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience W-44 2.8 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.3 Moderate 1.7 Poor W-45 2.8 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.3 Moderate 1.7 Poor W-49 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.1 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 1.9 Poor W-50 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.1 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 1.9 Poor W-51 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.1 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 1.9 Poor W-52 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.1 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 1.9 Poor W-53 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.1 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 1.9 Poor W-54 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.1 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 1.9 Poor W-55 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.1 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 1.9 Poor W-56 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.1 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 1.9 Poor W-57 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.1 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 1.9 Poor W-62 2.0 Poor 2.4 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate W-70 2.4 Moderate 3.4 Good 2.1 Moderate 2.3 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-74 2.4 Moderate 3.4 Good 2.1 Moderate 2.3 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-75 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate 2.3 Moderate W-76 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate 2.3 Moderate W-77 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate 2.3 Moderate W-84 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate 2.3 Moderate W-85 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate 2.3 Moderate 58 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Table 5: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of natural dimension of central Dhaka area NATURAL DIMENSION Intensity of Frequency of Ecosystem Land use in Environmental Ward natural hazards natural hazards services natural terms policies No. Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience W-16 5.0 Best 4.0 Good 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor W-17 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-18 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-19 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-20 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-21 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-22 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor W-23 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor W-24 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor W-25 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor W-26 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor W-27 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor W-28 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor W-29 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor W-30 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate W-31 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor W-32 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor W-33 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor W-34 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor W-35 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor W-36 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor W-37 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor W-38 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor W-39 4.0 Good 4.0 Good 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-40 4.0 Good 4.0 Good 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-44 4.0 Good 4.0 Good 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.0 Poor 59 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis NATURAL DIMENSION Intensity of Frequency of Ecosystem Land use in Environmental Ward natural hazards natural hazards services natural terms policies No. Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience W-45 4.0 Good 4.0 Good 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-49 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-50 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-51 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-52 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-53 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-54 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-55 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-56 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-57 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-62 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor W-70 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor W-74 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor W-75 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-76 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-77 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-84 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-85 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 60 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Table 6: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of physical dimension of DND area PHYSICAL DIMENSION Sanitation and Ward Accessibility of Housing and Electricity Water solid waste No./ roads land use disposal Region Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience Outside DCC 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.8 Poor 2.4 Moderate 3.2 Good (South) Area W-86 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-87 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-88 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-89 3.0 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 3.2 Good 3.4 Good 2.0 Poor W-90 2.8 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 1.8 Poor Table 7: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of social dimension of DND area SOCIAL DIMENSION Ward Education and Community Population Health Social Capital No./ awareness preparedness Region Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience Outside DCC 3.2 Good 2.2 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 2.4 Moderate (South) Area W-86 2.0 Poor 4.0 Good 1.8 Poor 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-87 1.8 Poor 4.0 Good 1.6 Poor 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-88 1.8 Poor 4.0 Good 1.6 Poor 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-89 2.0 Poor 4.0 Good 1.8 Poor 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-90 1.8 Poor 4.0 Good 1.6 Poor 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate 61 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Table 8: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of economic dimension of DND area ECONOMIC DIMENSION Ward Households Finance and Budget and Income Employment No./ assets savings subsidy Region Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience Outside DCC 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.2 Poor (South) Area W-86 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.2 Poor W-87 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.2 Poor W-88 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.2 Poor W-89 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.2 Poor W-90 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.2 Poor Table 9: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of institutional dimension of DND area INSTITUTIONAL DIMENSION Mainstreaming Knowledge Ward Institutional Good of DRR and Effectiveness dissemination No./ collaboration governance CCA and management Region Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience Outside DCC 1.2 Poor 1.6 Poor 1.4 Poor 1.8 Poor 1.6 Poor (South) Area W-86 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate 2.3 Moderate W-87 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate 2.3 Moderate W-88 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate 2.3 Moderate W-89 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate 2.3 Moderate W-90 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate 2.3 Moderate 62 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Table 10: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of natural dimension of DND area NATURAL DIMENSION Ward Intensity of Frequency of Ecosystem Land use in Environmental No./ natural hazards natural hazards services natural terms policies Region Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience Outside DCC 3.6 Good 4.0 Good 2.6 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor (South) Area W-86 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-87 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-88 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-89 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-90 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate Table 11: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of physical dimension of Eastern Dhaka area PHYSICAL DIMENSION Sanitation and Accessibility of Housing and Electricity Water solid waste Region roads land use disposal Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience Badda (Outside 3.4 Good 3.4 Good 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate DCC North) Khilgao (Outside 3.0 Moderate 3.4 Good 3.4 Good 3.8 Good 3.2 Good DCC North) 63 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Table 12: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of social dimension of Eastern Dhaka area SOCIAL DIMENSION Education and Community Population Health Social Capital Region awareness preparedness Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience Badda (Outside 2.4 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 1.6 Poor DCC North) Khilgao (Outside 2.2 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.2 Poor DCC North) Table 13: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of economic dimension of Eastern Dhaka area ECONOMIC DIMENSION Households Finance and Budget and Income Employment Region assets savings subsidy Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience Badda (Outside 2.8 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 3.2 Good 1.8 Poor 1.6 Poor DCC North) Khilgao (Outside 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 3.6 Good 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor DCC North) 64 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Table 14: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of institutional dimension of Eastern Dhaka area INSTITUTIONAL DIMENSION Knowledge Mainstreaming dissemination Institutional Good of DRR and Effectiveness Region and collaboration governance CCA management Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience Badda (Outside 1.6 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.2 Poor 2.4 Moderate 1.2 Poor DCC North) Khilgao (Outside 2.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.4 Poor 1.0 Poor DCC North) Table 15: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of natural dimension of Eastern Dhaka area NATURAL DIMENSION Intensity of Frequency of Ecosystem Land use in Environmental Region natural hazards natural hazards services natural terms policies Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience Badda (Outside 1.8 Poor 3.6 Good 3.0 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor DCC North) Khilgao (Outside 2.0 Poor 3.2 Good 1.2 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.6 Poor DCC North) 65 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Table 16: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of physical dimension of Narayanganj area PHYSICAL DIMENSION Sanitation and Accessibility of Housing and Electricity Water solid waste Region roads land use disposal Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience Outside DCC (South) Area_ 3.0 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 3.6 Good 2.6 Moderate Narayanganj pourashava Outside DCC (South) Area_ 2.8 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.8 Poor Narayanganj sadar Table 17: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of social dimension of Narayanganj area SOCIAL DIMENSION Education and Community Population Health Social Capital Region awareness preparedness Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience Outside DCC (South) Area_ 3.2 Good 2.4 Moderate 3.4 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.2 Moderate Narayanganj pourashava Outside DCC (South) Area_ 2.8 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.4 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 2.4 Moderate Narayanganj sadar 66 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Table 18: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of economic dimension of Narayanganj area ECONOMIC DIMENSION Households Finance and Budget and Income Employment Region assets savings subsidy Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience Outside DCC (South) Area_ 3.0 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 3.2 Good 2 Poor 1.2 Poor Narayanganj pourashava Outside DCC (South) Area_ 3.0 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 3.2 Good 2 Poor 1.2 Poor Narayanganj sadar Table 19: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of institutional dimension of Narayanganj area INSTITUTIONAL DIMENSION Knowledge Mainstreaming dissemination Institutional Good of DRR and Effectiveness Region and collaboration governance CCA management Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience Outside DCC (South) Area_ 1.2 Poor 1.6 Poor 1.2 Poor 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor Narayanganj pourashava Outside DCC (South) Area_ 1.2 Poor 1.4 Poor 1.4 Poor 2.4 Moderate 1.8 Poor Narayanganj sadar 67 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Table 20: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of natural dimension of Narayanganj area NATURAL DIMENSION Intensity of Frequency of Ecosystem Land use in Environmental Region natural hazards natural hazards services natural terms policies Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience Outside DCC (South) Area_ 3.8 Good 4.2 Best 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.6 Poor Narayanganj pourashava Outside DCC (South) Area_ 3.6 Good 4.0 Good 2.4 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 1.6 Poor Narayanganj sadar Table 21: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of physical dimension of Old Dhaka area PHYSICAL DIMENSION Sanitation and Accessibility of Housing and Ward Electricity Water solid waste roads land use No. disposal Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience W-59 2.8 Moderate 2.0 Poor 3.1 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.2 Moderate W-60 2.8 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.9 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-61 2.8 Moderate 2.0 Poor 3.3 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.2 Moderate W-63 2.8 Moderate 2.0 Poor 3.3 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.4 Moderate W-64 2.8 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.7 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 2.4 Moderate W-65 2.8 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.9 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 2.2 Moderate W-66 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.2 Good 4.0 Good 2.8 Moderate W-67 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.0 Good 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate W-68 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.2 Good 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate W-69 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.2 Good 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate W-71 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate W-72 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate W-73 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.0 Good 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate W-78 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.4 Good 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate W-79 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.4 Good 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate W-80 2.8 Moderate 2.0 Poor 3.2 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.4 Moderate W-81 2.8 Moderate 2.0 Poor 3.4 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.2 Moderate W-82 2.8 Moderate 2.0 Poor 3.2 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.2 Moderate W-83 2.8 Moderate 2.0 Poor 3.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 68 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Table 22: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of social dimension of Old Dhaka area SOCIAL DIMENSION Education and Community Ward Population Health Social Capital awareness preparedness No. Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience W-59 2.2 Moderate 4.6 Best 2.2 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 3.4 Good W-60 2.0 Poor 4.6 Best 1.8 Poor 3.0 Moderate 3.4 Good W-61 2.2 Moderate 4.6 Best 2.2 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 3.4 Good W-63 2.4 Moderate 4.6 Best 2.0 Poor 3.0 Moderate 3.4 Good W-64 2.4 Moderate 4.6 Best 2.0 Poor 3.0 Moderate 3.4 Good W-65 2.4 Moderate 4.6 Best 1.8 Poor 3.0 Moderate 3.4 Good W-66 2.8 Moderate 4.4 Best 2.6 Moderate 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-67 2.6 Moderate 4.4 Best 2.8 Moderate 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-68 2.6 Moderate 4.4 Best 2.8 Moderate 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-69 2.4 Moderate 4.4 Best 2.8 Moderate 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-71 2.6 Moderate 4.4 Best 2.8 Moderate 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-72 2.6 Moderate 4.4 Best 2.8 Moderate 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-73 3.2 Good 4.4 Best 2.6 Moderate 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-78 2.4 Moderate 4.4 Best 3.0 Moderate 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-79 2.6 Moderate 4.4 Best 3.0 Moderate 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-80 2.4 Moderate 4.0 Good 1.8 Poor 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-81 2.2 Moderate 4.0 Good 1.8 Poor 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-82 2.2 Moderate 4.0 Good 1.8 Poor 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate W-83 2.0 Poor 4.0 Good 1.8 Poor 3.2 Good 2.6 Moderate 69 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Table 23: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of economic dimension of Old Dhaka area ECONOMIC DIMENSION Households Finance and Budget and Ward Income Employment assets savings subsidy No. Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience W-59 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 2 Poor 1.4 Poor W-60 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 2 Poor 1.4 Poor W-61 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 2 Poor 1.4 Poor W-63 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 2 Poor 1.4 Poor W-64 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 2 Poor 1.4 Poor W-65 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 2 Poor 1.4 Poor W-66 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.2 Good 3 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-67 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.2 Good 3 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-68 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.2 Good 3 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-69 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.2 Good 3 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-71 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.2 Good 3 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-72 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.2 Good 3 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-73 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.2 Good 3 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-78 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.2 Good 3 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-79 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.2 Good 3 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-80 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 1 Poor 1.4 Poor W-81 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 1 Poor 1.4 Poor W-82 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 1 Poor 1.4 Poor W-83 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 1 Poor 1.4 Poor 70 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Table 24: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of institutional dimension of Old Dhaka area INSTITUTIONAL DIMENSION Mainstreaming Knowledge Institutional Ward of DRR and Effectiveness dissemination Good governance collaboration No. CCA and management Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience W-59 2.0 Poor 2.4 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate W-60 2.0 Poor 2.4 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate W-61 2.0 Poor 2.4 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate W-63 2.0 Poor 2.4 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate W-64 2.0 Poor 2.4 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate W-65 2.0 Poor 2.4 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate W-66 2.4 Moderate 3.4 Good 2.1 Moderate 2.3 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-67 2.4 Moderate 3.4 Good 2.1 Moderate 2.3 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-68 2.4 Moderate 3.4 Good 2.1 Moderate 2.3 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-69 2.4 Moderate 3.4 Good 2.1 Moderate 2.3 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-71 2.4 Moderate 3.4 Good 2.1 Moderate 2.3 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-72 2.4 Moderate 3.4 Good 2.1 Moderate 2.3 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-73 2.4 Moderate 3.4 Good 2.1 Moderate 2.3 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-78 2.4 Moderate 3.4 Good 2.1 Moderate 2.3 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-79 2.4 Moderate 3.4 Good 2.1 Moderate 2.3 Moderate 1.8 Poor W-80 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate 2.3 Moderate W-81 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate 2.3 Moderate W-82 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate 2.3 Moderate W-83 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate 2.3 Moderate 71 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Table 25: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of natural dimension of Old Dhaka area NATURAL DIMENSION Intensity of Frequency of Ecosystem Land use in Environmental Ward natural hazards natural hazards services natural terms policies No. Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience W-59 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor W-60 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor W-61 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor W-63 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor W-64 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor W-65 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor W-66 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor W-67 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor W-68 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor W-69 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor W-71 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor W-72 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor W-73 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor W-78 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor W-79 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor W-80 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-81 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-82 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-83 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 72 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Table 26: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of physical dimension of Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) PHYSICAL DIMENSION Sanitation and Ward Accessibility of Housing and Electricity Water solid waste No./ roads land use disposal Region Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience Uttara 3.6 Good 3.4 Good 3.8 Good 3.8 Good 3.4 Good W-01 3.8 Good 2.6 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 4.0 Good 3.4 Good W-02 2.4 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.4 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 2.2 Moderate W-03 2.4 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate W-04 2.4 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate W-05 2.4 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate W-06 2.4 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 2.2 Moderate W-15 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 2.4 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 2.2 Moderate Table 27: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of social dimension of Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) SOCIAL DIMENSION Ward Education and Community Population Health Social Capital No./ awareness preparedness Region Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience Uttara 3.2 Good 3.2 Good 3.2 Good 3.4 Good 3.0 Moderate W-01 3.0 Moderate 3.6 Good 1.8 Poor 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-02 1.8 Poor 3.0 Moderate 1.6 Poor 1.8 Poor 3.4 Good W-03 1.4 Poor 3.0 Moderate 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor 3.4 Good W-04 1.6 Poor 3.0 Moderate 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor 3.4 Good W-05 1.4 Poor 3.0 Moderate 1.6 Poor 1.8 Poor 3.4 Good W-06 1.8 Poor 3.0 Moderate 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor 3.4 Good W-15 2.0 Poor 3.0 Moderate 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor 3.4 Good 73 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Table 28: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of economic dimension of Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) ECONOMIC DIMENSION Ward Households Finance and Budget and Income Employment No./ assets savings subsidy Region Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience Uttara 3.2 Good 3.2 Good 3.4 Good 3 Moderate 2.2 Moderate W-01 3.2 Good 3.4 Good 3.2 Good 1 Poor 1.2 Poor W-02 2.4 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 1 Poor 2.0 Poor W-03 2.4 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 1 Poor 2.0 Poor W-04 2.4 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 1 Poor 2.0 Poor W-05 2.4 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 1 Poor 2.0 Poor W-06 2.4 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 1 Poor 2.0 Poor W-15 2.6 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 1 Poor 2.0 Poor Table 29: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of institutional dimension of Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) INSTITUTIONAL DIMENSION Mainstreaming Knowledge Ward Institutional of DRR and Effectiveness dissemination Good governance No./ collaboration CCA and management Region Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience Uttara 3.6 Good 2.6 Moderate 3.2 Good 3.8 Good 2.6 Moderate W-01 1.2 Poor 1.4 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate W-02 1.8 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.1 Moderate 2.3 Moderate 1.3 Poor W-03 1.8 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.1 Moderate 2.3 Moderate 1.3 Poor W-04 1.8 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.1 Moderate 2.3 Moderate 1.3 Poor W-05 1.8 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.1 Moderate 2.3 Moderate 1.3 Poor W-06 1.8 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.1 Moderate 2.3 Moderate 1.3 Poor W-15 1.8 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.1 Moderate 2.3 Moderate 1.3 Poor 74 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Table 30: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of natural dimension of Western Dhaka (Goranchatbari) NATURAL DIMENSION Ward Intensity of Frequency of Ecosystem Land use in Environmental No./ natural hazards natural hazards services natural terms policies Region Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience Uttara 3.6 Good 4.0 Good 2.6 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 2.8 Moderate W-01 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.6 Good 1.0 Poor W-02 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-03 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-04 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-05 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-06 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-15 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor Table 31: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of physical dimension of Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur) PHYSICAL DIMENSION Sanitation and Accessibility of Housing and Ward Electricity Water solid waste roads land use No. disposal Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience W-07 2.4 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate W-08 2.4 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 2.2 Moderate W-09 2.8 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate W-10 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate W-11 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate W-12 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.2 Good W-13 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.2 Good W-14 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 3.2 Good W-41 3.0 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 3.0 Moderate W-42 3.0 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 3.0 Good 3.6 Good 3.4 Good W-43 3.0 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 3.6 Good 3.2 Good W-46 3.0 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 3.6 Good 3.4 Good W-47 3.0 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 4.6 Best 3.0 Moderate W-48 3.0 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 3.1 Good 2.8 Moderate 2.2 Moderate W-58 3.0 Moderate 2.4 Moderate 3.3 Good 2.8 Moderate 2.0 Poor 75 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Table 32: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of social dimension of Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur) SOCIAL DIMENSION Education and Community Ward Population Health Social Capital awareness preparedness No. Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience W-07 1.6 Poor 3.0 Moderate 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor 3.4 Good W-08 1.6 Poor 3.0 Moderate 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor 3.4 Good W-09 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.2 Poor 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-10 2.4 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.2 Poor 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-11 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.4 Poor 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-12 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-13 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.4 Poor 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-14 1.8 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-41 2.4 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.4 Poor 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate W-42 2.4 Moderate 3.6 Good 2.2 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 3.4 Good W-43 1.6 Poor 3.6 Good 1.8 Poor 2.8 Moderate 3.4 Good W-46 2.6 Moderate 3.6 Good 2.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate 3.4 Good W-47 2.2 Moderate 4.0 Good 2.6 Moderate 3.0 Moderate 2.6 Moderate W-48 3.0 Moderate 4.6 Best 2.0 Poor 2.8 Moderate 3.4 Good W-58 2.0 Poor 4.6 Best 1.8 Poor 2.8 Moderate 3.4 Good 76 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Table 33: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of economic dimension of Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur) ECONOMIC DIMENSION Households Finance and Budget and Ward Income Employment assets savings subsidy No. Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience W-07 2.4 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 1.2 Poor 2.0 Poor W-08 2.4 Moderate 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 1.2 Poor 2.0 Poor W-09 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 1.4 Poor W-10 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 1.4 Poor W-11 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 1.4 Poor W-12 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 1.4 Poor W-13 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 1.4 Poor W-14 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 1.4 Poor W-41 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.0 Poor 1.4 Poor W-42 2.8 Moderate 3.6 Good 3.2 Good 1.8 Poor 1.4 Poor W-43 2.8 Moderate 3.6 Good 3.2 Good 1.8 Poor 1.4 Poor W-46 2.8 Moderate 3.6 Good 3.2 Good 1.8 Poor 1.4 Poor W-47 3.4 Good 3.4 Good 3.2 Good 1.8 Poor 1.8 Poor W-48 2.2 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.6 Poor 1.8 Poor 1.4 Poor W-58 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 1.6 Poor 1.8 Poor 1.4 Poor 77 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis Table 34: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of institutional dimension of Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur) INSTITUTIONAL DIMENSION Mainstreaming Knowledge Institutional Ward of DRR and Effectiveness dissemination Good governance collaboration No. CCA and management Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience W-07 1.8 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.1 Moderate 2.3 Moderate 1.3 Poor W-08 1.8 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.1 Moderate 2.3 Moderate 1.3 Poor W-09 1.5 Poor 1.5 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.5 Poor W-10 1.5 Poor 1.5 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.5 Poor W-11 1.5 Poor 1.5 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.5 Poor W-12 1.5 Poor 1.5 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.5 Poor W-13 1.5 Poor 1.5 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.5 Poor W-14 1.5 Poor 1.5 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.5 Poor W-41 1.5 Poor 1.5 Poor 1.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 1.5 Poor W-42 2.8 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.3 Moderate 1.7 Poor W-43 2.8 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.3 Moderate 1.7 Poor W-46 2.8 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.3 Moderate 1.7 Poor W-47 2.0 Poor 2.2 Moderate 2.1 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 1.9 Poor W-48 2.0 Poor 2.4 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate W-58 2.0 Poor 2.4 Moderate 1.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.8 Moderate 78 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I Table 35: CDRI values and Resilience Levels for components of natural dimension of Western Dhaka (Kallyanpur) NATURAL DIMENSION Intensity of Frequency of Ecosystem Land use in Environmental Ward natural hazards natural hazards services natural terms policies No. Level of Level of Level of Level of Level of CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI CDRI resilience resilience resilience resilience resilience W-07 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-08 4.0 Good 3.0 Moderate 1.8 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-09 5.0 Best 4.0 Good 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor W-10 5.0 Best 4.0 Good 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor W-11 5.0 Best 4.0 Good 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor W-12 5.0 Best 4.0 Good 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor W-13 5.0 Best 4.0 Good 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor W-14 5.0 Best 4.0 Good 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor W-41 5.0 Best 4.0 Good 2.0 Poor 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor W-42 4.0 Good 4.0 Good 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-43 4.0 Good 4.0 Good 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-46 4.0 Good 4.0 Good 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-47 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 2.6 Moderate 2.2 Moderate 2.0 Poor W-48 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor W-58 3.0 Moderate 2.0 Poor 1.0 Poor 1.6 Poor 2.0 Poor 79 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis 80 Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis I ANNEX-III Table on Percentage of Impervious Area for Various Land Uses in Dhaka City Population density (thousand people/km2) 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 DAP land type Low density Moderate density High density Impervious area by land type (%) Agriculture 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Circulation network 2 3 4 4 5 6 6 7 7 Commercial activity 19 27 35 44 50 56 63 68 73 Community service 21 30 39 48 55 62 69 74 80 Diplomatic 9 14 18 22 25 28 31 34 36 Education and research 11 16 21 26 30 34 38 41 44 Governmental services 9 14 18 22 25 28 31 34 36 Manufacturing and 15 22 28 35 40 45 50 54 58 processing activity Mixed use 21 30 39 48 55 62 69 74 80 Recreational facilities 4 5 7 9 10 11 13 14 15 Residential 18 26 34 42 48 54 60 65 70 Restricted area 2 3 4 4 5 6 6 7 7 Service activity 9 14 18 22 25 28 31 34 36 Transport and 8 11 14 18 20 23 25 27 29 communication Vacant land 2 3 4 4 5 6 6 7 7 Water body not 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 connected to drains Water body connected to 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 drains Source: Author’s calculation 81 I Climate and Disaster Resilience of Greater Dhaka Area: A Micro Level Analysis 82