Children as Agents of Change for Disaster Risk Reduction: Lessons from El Salvador and the Philippines

This paper on children's voices in disaster risk reduction (DRR) policy uses field research on child and youth participation to challenge the assumption that children are passive victims with a limited role to play in communicating risks or preventing and responding to disasters. It examines how children’s voices are represented and heard in disaster risk reduction (DRR) policy and decision-making spaces.

The paper explores three linked areas of enquiry "that help to frame the emerging 'child-centred approach to DRR'" by: 1) examining a history of youth empowerment through children’s active participation in decision-making forums; 2) looking at whether the international human rights systems provide for children's right to protection from disasters; and 3) asking whether children can be effective as communicators of risk within their own households and communities. Field research done in El Salvador and the Philippines explored what opportunities exist for the voices of children and their groups to be heard within local and national DRR policy spaces and the experiences and capacity they have for doing so. The concluding section considers why children may be suited to the role as DRR advocates and as communicators of disaster risk, and whether this is desirable, and raises questions emerging from this research.

The authors discuss the meaning of "child and youth participation" and what it means in practice, recognising it as a contested topic. They describe youth participation through various definitions including: "Participation, then, is measured by its quality. In terms of community evaluation, youth participation is defined as the involvement of youth in knowledge development, defining problems, gathering information and using the result....By participating in community evaluation, young people can define what they perceive to be problems, rather than having to accept issues that have been identified and mediated by adults or authorities." A diagram of a ladder of participation with rungs of participation (page 9) shows stages from 'Manipulation' at the bottom to ‘Children and young people initiated, shared decision with adults' at the top. An analysis of participation follows (pointing to the need for child- and youth-related outcomes not just societal outcomes to be a focus and result of their participation). It lists the following as elements to insure this focus:

• Local - focused on the needs and issues of the local community.
  
• Transparent - aims clear to all involved.
  
• Inclusive - access for all members of the community.
  
• Interactive - children and adults talk and listen to each other.
  
• Responsive - facilitator time and flexibility so that children and young adults may voice opinions and listen to others.
  
• Relevant - combining children’s local knowledge and perspective with information and perspectives from outside the community.
  
• Educational - a learning process for all, including sponsors, officials, and facilitators.

Motivations and obstacles to child and youth participation are considered, including character, confidence, connection, competence, and contribution. Uneven motivation, particularly among youth, is identified, accompanied by suggestions for a supportive enabling environment through the facilitation of an outside group to increase participation, representation, and decision-maker commitment to listen to youth. The need to mix adult and youth participation is recognised, with the inclusion of a chart identifying common areas of conflict in this kind of communication (page 15). Methods for "getting voices heard" include: petitions, letter writing, protesting, and face-to-face contact at local authority and council meetings. Child safety protections are listed as the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the Declaration of the Rights of the Child (DRC), along with various international human rights instruments.

In field research done in the Philippines, pathways for children and youth groups to communicate their views about the disaster risks included: talking informally to their families, friends, and teachers; formal classroom discussions; a student’s seat on the Parents, Teachers, and Community Association (PTCA); official representation at youth forums and councils; theatre productions, such as Street Theatre on the Guinsaugon; newspaper articles; and art exhibitions. As a result of these pathways, for example, students were able to mount a campaign leading to the relocation of their school away from a landslide-prone area.

In research from El Salvador, young people in Petapa, El Salvador, formed an Emergency Committee following the 2001 earthquake. Exercises in risk mapping, ranking, and guided walk exercises demonstrated the ability of a children’s community emergency committee to identify and communicate risks from their own perspective. For example, "[t]he children of the Petapa Emergency Committee identified the un-regulated extraction of rocks and stones from the river as a major risk, leading to increased erosion and vulnerability to flooding of houses near the river. Signs prohibiting extraction for personal use have since been erected with the agreement of the local leaders."

"The research indicates that children and young people communicate their views about the risks they face through a suite of formal and informal pathways....Children’s families are crucial actors in the process of child-centred DRR as households are policy spaces in themselves, with the same political dynamics, the same need for advocacy and lobbying, and the same issues with influencing knowledge and action....The case of children’s emergency groups in dialogue and initiating joint programming with adult groups... can partly be explained by communication channels being opened due to family relationships...[E]xperience from El Salvador suggests that making progress with addressing low magnitude, high frequency events gives children’s groups confidence, cements their position and agency within their community and provides a launch pad to stronger relationships with other bodies.

Children’s voices on DRR in wider policy spaces, both within the community, regionally and nationally, is dependent on the existence of functioning institutions on DRR and the willingness of key actors within these institutions to value the voice of children and willingness to give them a platform to participate....At a national level, external agencies must partner children’s groups in advocacy campaigns designed to strengthen DRR institutions and to open policy spaces in which children can participate and contribute in a meaningful way. Media involvement is desirable as a way to advocate change given that children’s voices in the media are often welcomed and highlighted, but this may require external agencies to develop particular strategies in this regard. Many senior policy figures acknowledged the importance of involving children and listening and acting on their views, but almost all of those interviewed suggested this was an idealised future rather than a current practice."