This seems like an easy question, and a good start to any conversation about disasters. What problem are we solving? One would think that the answer must be “improving our approach to disasters”, right? Yes, but not so fast. That’s not our only problem. What we must ultimately solve is how to build a better support structure for the sovereign nations who so desperately need our help; a support structure which gives them more control of how they handle their disasters. The real problem is this: how do we design a global disaster response system that will be built for todays’ and tomorrow’s disasters? To answer this, we must first understand how these nations are currently supported.

Disaster management, in most undeveloped nations, is supported for the most part through non-governmental organizations and nonprofits who themselves are dependent on charitable donations and foundation grants. The good news is that the kindness of these donors is critical in saving lives and providing aid to areas that may otherwise never have seen aid. However, the more problematic aspect of the disaster donor model is that non-governmental organizations will often approach the partner nation with ideas and donor funds that may be earmarked for a special task or area where the donors would like to see their money spent. More often than not the partner nation does not have the luxury of turning down aid such as this, even when it is earmarked for tasks that the country would not ordinarily prioritize or doesn’t fit with their current disaster response plans.

So, how do we design a global disaster response system that’s built for tomorrow’s disasters? We empower each sovereign nation with the authority to design a plan and a strategy for controlling who comes to their aid and when. The donor organizations should be accountable to and serve the partner nation, not primarily their donors. Responses shouldn’t depend on how donors want their funds spent, but on how their skills and capabilities fit with the overall strategy of the partner nation.

Since partner nations are the most critical players in this equation, how can we ensure their future success? First, only they can assume ownership of their emergency management program, and not abrogate their responsibilities in designing this program. Only they have access to the full spectrum of their own capabilities and weaknesses in a way that no external organization can. Assuming ownership includes earmarking a part of their budget for disaster response activities. Through this one action, they ensure that they have skin in the game regarding their assessments and planning process. Secondly, it is not the role of an external organization to tell a partner nation what their problems are. In fact, with the right assessments and plans, the partner nation can not only become more efficient in assigning tasks to its support organizations, but they can better address which organizations can best serve them! 

And finally, sharing these assessments and plans with their external partners and donors will help these partners with their own annual budgets. So rather than approach the partner nation with individual one-off tasks, they would now have the country’s overall disaster response plan to better guide them as they determine how their specific capabilities can best be of service to the nation.