NationStates Jolt Archive

During the discussion and debate on the Tsunami Warning System resolution (UN Resolution number 90), the sponsoring group of nations made a commitment to work on additional elements of a natural disaster detection and/or warning mechanism that builds upon the elements contained in the tsunami warning system, as well as reinforcing the role of the NS International Red Cross Organization (created under UN Resolution number 29). The sponsoring group of the tsunami resolution has decided to establish this thread as a working group to promote discussion and to develop language for the one or more additional proposals for UN resolutions that build upon these two resolutions.

There seems to be two primary areas on which we believe contributors’ attention should focus. One area is the expansion of existing or new national or regional land-based systems for seismic and volcanic detection and warnings; this would also seek to encourage research and development (and once developed, the utilization) of forecast systems for seismic and volcanic events. This would build on certain elements of the tsunami system. This would also permit the use of warning systems to assist efforts to protect life and property to the greatest extent possible and utilize currently existing entities and systems, including the IRCO. We would envision the seismic and volcanic warning systems would become part of a common agency within the NationStates United Nations with the Tsunami Early Warning System.

The second area of discussion is the development of a detection, forecast and warning coordinating system mechanism for weather related disasters, which include tropical cyclones (known in some regions as hurricanes or typhoons), tornados, flooding, and winter storms. This might entail the establishment of a NationStates Meteorological Organization (patterned on the real life World Meteorological Organization and the mechanisms it uses to the same end). This system would address both weather disasters on land, and tracking such weather systems on the oceans, including their impact on the transport of persons and shipment of goods over the oceans.

There is also interest in exploring whether some sort of uniform building code for public buildings, such as law enforcement, medical, and education facilities should be authorized under a resolution, solely as recommended standards. The status would only be as recommendations, whether considered as a mechanism to minimize property damage, a mechanism to provide protection or shelter to local populations in the event of a threatened disaster, or as a mechanism to permit their use to provide assistance to local populations in affected local areas following a disaster.

We invite all interested nations to participate in this working group and the discussion it seeks to entail. We encourage the use of real life information that can be utilized to develop these proposals and structure an appropriate system for the NationStates environment. Let the discussion begin!

Thank you for starting this! :)

I'd like to say that one of the things that I most appreciated out of the Tsunami Warning System draft proposal discussions that were started by Tejasdom and the process that Groot Gouda has also started with his current proposal relating to the subject of prostitution is that both are examples of people taking a very crude idea and slowly developing a resolution with input from many.

I'm optimistic that if people participate here that we can really head off most complaints before a proposal becomes a resolution.

One of the key concerns that was both telegrammed to me and brought up in the discussion for the Tsunami resolution was your first point: why aren't we doing this for all natural disasters.

I think that this is a very fair point, and as we described, the limitation of space in a resolution really meant we had to first focus on a single type of natural disaster.

But I also think that tsunami waves, not the events that trigger them, are essentially the type of thing that with better planning and cooperation we can reduce (not entirely prevent) the damage caused by them.

However, by continuing to study and share information on seismic activity, we may hopefully one day be able to actually forecast and predict earthquakes or volcanic erruptions. In particular, this fall there was an earthquake in California that hit in a location that was predicted to one day be the epicenter of a major earthquake. I'll have to research more on this event, but the reason I bring it up is because at the time I was on a conference call with other scientists and engineers, including some in the South Bay. Living over a hundred miles away, they felt the earthquake first and we could hear it on the conference phone. Not long after it passed through them, we could then feel it ... my 17 story office building was shaking throughout the aftershocks.

I don't think it would be feasible to issue warnings given a minutes or even 15-min notice for the building, but I do think we should continue to study earthquakes. In particular, the third point listed is the idea of having engineers from our countries get together in order to talk about (not enforce) a uniform building code. There is no reason why my government should keep secret construction practices that might allow your governments' the ability to build shelters and safe places.

The key here would be to consider what sort of risk different places have. An apline village, such as Miervatia City, is not in danger of a hurricane. However a winter storm could literally bury Miervatia City, and the snow could in fact be so heavy that our buildings could collapse (it has happened in the past).

Is there an interest in a universal building code conference?

Grosseschnauzer has a few preliminary comments concerning UN Resolution 90, of which it is the sponsor of record.

First, Grosseschnauzer has noted, but has stayed out of certain recent discussions in a few threads in this forum between certain nations that involved an expression of some sort of dissatisfaction concerning the language of that resolution as finally submitted and adopted. We have to admit that we are a little perplexed by proposals and arguments that were presented that sought repeal of resolution 90 and with some of the "arguments" that were included in these comments. That stems partially from a lack of technical or scientific documentation or other documented factual information from real life to support those comments that criticized the resolution, and partially because some of the comments that were made really evidences, in our considered judgment, the presence of a certain inability, unwillingness, or just plain laziness about looking at the substantial on line documentation from reliable governmental, academic, and media sources that were relied upon in the process of developing the proposal, especially the revision between the second and final drafts.

Grosseschnauzer's point is this. If there is highly reliable on line information from well recognized governmental, academic, or mass media sources that convinces Grosseschnauzer that a change is necessary in the adopted resolution, we will be the first to say so, without hesitation. The fact that we agreed to serve as the sponsor of record was based upon our understanding of the resource information that had been posted during that discussion, and that the language of the proposal was consistent with that information.

Grosseschnauzer would urge any nation that continues to hold a position that there is any defect in the UN Resolution 90, as adopted, to share the factual evidence and documentation that supports those criticisms in this working group thread. We are satisfied that based upon all available descriptions of the existing system in RL, that what was adopted is practical, and that the resolution results an appropriate, all encompassing, and cost effective mechanism to address the issue. No one has ever suggested that every possible scenario that may result in tsunami can be detected, or that no lives would be lost, or property damaged.

While foolproof earthquake prediction would be a wonderful thing to have at the moment, the reality is that the current technology is for earthquake detection, not prediction. UN Resolution 90 acknowledged that fact in the language used to draft it, and we are certain that any proposals that emerge from this working group concerning earthquake and volcano monitoring and detection will acknowledge this as well. Earthquake prediction as a serious scientific field is in its infancy; however, as has been the case with say, hurricane forecasting, where the raw data has improved, and where the models used to evaluate the data has improved, and so that over time, the quality and skill to forecast the course and intensity of tropical cyclones has improved. Likewise, given sufficient raw date, qualitative improvement in modeling earthquake location, strength, and behavior, earthquake location and strength probability forecasting would likely improve as well. There is nothing that mandates an earthquake prediction system in resolution 90, just a mechanism to collect tectonic and seismic data to apply with ocean water level behavior to detect tsunami conditions.

That said, what this working group proposes to do, as I noted before, is in part intended to focus on the expansion of the network of sensor equipment for earthquakes or volcanic activity, an appropriate technical center to coordinate and disseminate the information, and the development of models to provide guidance as necessary for prevention, precaution, or relief efforts in various nations at risk. As part of that, it would not be inappropriate for the NS UN to encourage or otherwise foster the development of the mechanisms and skills for earthquake and volcanic event prediction. In Grosseschnauzer's view, The fact that these skills have not yet been developed does not mean and does not prevent recommendations that such research and development be supported as part of a broader natural disaster detection and warning system. This does not suppose a hypothesis that such systems exist and are function, but rather that there is a recognition that this potential exists, and that this potential ought to be encourages as part of ongoing research and study.

Grosseschnauzer will have more to say about the other elements of the concepts outlined in the opening post of this thread for the working group, but for the moment, attention is directed to http://www.wmo.ch/index-en.html to serve as a model for addressing weather-related events. In addition, information that concerns tropical cyclone forecasting and prediction can be found here:
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/index.shtml and its explanation of the worldwide system of tropical cyclone forecast centers is here:
http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/aboutrsmc.shtml?
Finally, as an example last year that the current system of worldwide centers still wasn't enough to cover the first-ever hurricane ever recorded in the southern Atlantic ocean, see:
http://www.metoffice.com/sec2/sec2cyclone/catarina.html and
http://www.ssec.wisc.edu/media/spotlight/brazil_hurricane.html
The latter link has a satellite photograph of the hurricane off the short of Brazil before it went inland in March, 2004.

Grosseschnauzer has additional thoughts on the weather forecast/warning system concept and the suggestion for a recommended building code, but we'll address those later.

Wow, that is a very long but helpful list of links. :)

In particular the WMO links seem like a good starting point. While there I notice the following:

http://www.wmo.int/disasters/latestNews.htm#disasterReduction

World Conference for Disaster Reduction (WCDR)

January 18 – 22, 2005
Kobe, Japan

Following the Indian Ocean Tsunami I remember papers talking about this, but then it fell out of the press. I think Brad Pitt and Jennifer Antison probably stole the headlines or something. :( <--- for for Pitt and Antison, for the fact that the media's attention span always focuses on dating drama


I'd like to suggest that we consider adopting the same goals of that conference:

At the World Conference on Disaster Reduction, WMO urges the following goals:

1. Promotion of a culture of prevention by emphasizing the need for disaster prevention and risk reduction;
2. Raising awareness of the benefits of investing in pre-disaster proactive strategies, based on risk assessment and early warning systems;
3. Strengthening of risk assessment capabilities and seamless early warning systems from next hour to longer climate timescales for all hazards related to weather, climate, and water;
4. Strengthening the role of National Meteorological and Hydrological Services as a critical component of multi-sectoral national disaster reduction platforms;
5. Building strong partnerships for disaster risk reduction and management at international, regional, national and local levels


We've including prevention based clauses in both the Tracking Near Earth Objects and Tsunami Warning Systems resolutions. On that first point, maybe one of the things would be for us to address this as a more general concept in its own resolution? Is thee a way we can do this through our UN and existing infrastructure?

I've felt that the IRCO is a disaster response agency, but that we have no long-term disaster recovery groups. I also think that long-term disaster recovery plans should include concepts to avoid repeating the same mistake. I think the UBC I talked about is one part of disaster prevention or mitigation. I also would like to now suggest that if we had a United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), that this body could come into nations and issue grants and expertise on how to build an infrastructure that will assist in moving people out of harms way and easing the job of emergency response crews.

I think a UNDP would be a "social justice" based group, because unlike the tsunami system, it would not have a cheap price tag. Giving grants to those in need, is still a good idea though. It would reduce the operating costs of the IRCO and regional disaster assistance groups.


On the UN page I linked above, I found it very interesting that Wiki was actually being quoted and used as a reference. :) It seems to me that information is much more important today than it was even a year ago. More important is the fact that Wiki is not a national program, but a community project.


Now getting back to forecasting and warning, the WMO had this link:

http://www.wmo.int/disasters/disasterRiskReduction.htm
http://www.wmo.int/disasters/disasterEarlyWarningSystems.htm

I like how the centers are specialized regionally.

Also I found the following interesting ...


For example, WMO’s network proved to be highly effective during the 2004 intense hurricane seasons in the Atlantic and Caribbean regions. Atmospheric data collected via in situ and space-based instruments were transmitted to the United States National Hurricane Center, one of WMO’s RSMCs (RSMC-Miami), where forecasts and hurricane advisories were developed around the clock. These advisories were transmitted through the GTS, facsimile and Internet at intervals of three to six hours to the NMHSs of countries at risk. The forecasters at the NMHSs used these hurricane advisories to produce their national hurricane warnings, which were dispatched immediately to newspapers, radio and television stations, emergency services and other users. In response to this information, many lives were spared through timely evacuations.

So interesting, that I'd like to add this to my government's wish list. We want this! :)

Being very busy with prostitution in the UN (isn't that great to be able to say seriously?), I will suffice by repeating my proposal that I wrote because I didn't like the limited scope of the Tsunami proposal, without wanting to interfere with it.


Natural Disaster System
A resolution to improve world security by boosting police and military budgets.

Category: International Security
Strength: Mild

DEEPLY REGRETTING loss of life and material damages as a result of natural disasters such as earthquakes, landslides, volcanic eruptions, hurricanes, floods, etc,

NOTING that these disasters do not stop at national borders,

OBSERVING the Tsunami Emergency Warning Centre as instituted by the Tsunami Warning System,

NOTING that this resolution has limited effect for other natural disasters,

ALSO NOTING that the measures implemented by this resolution can and should be used for further research and development of natural disaster warning systems,

1. ESTABLISHES a Natural Disaster Assessment Organization (NDAO) which has the following tasks:
a. Conduct research on natural disasters such as earthquakes, landslides, volcanic eruptions, hurricanes, floods, etc
b. Coordinate international cooperation on this field, in scientific research and in practical solutions
c. Creates protocols for warning about possible disasters and evacuation plans
d. Maintains contacts with local authorities and local organisations in order to improve communication of information about possible natural disasters and how to respond to these.

2. URGES all nations to contribute financially to the NDAO,

3. URGES all nations to establish and fund a National Geological Survey which can conduct research and create warning systems,

4. REQUESTS that member nations share their geological and other relevant data with other countries and the NDAO,

5. CALLS UPON all nations to provide care and assistance in case of a natural disaster, by themselves or through recognized UN organisations such as the International Red Cross


I now realise that meteological (is that the word? the weather guys, basically) offices need to be involved as well, but that could be done by adding a few words.

I'm offering this for further improvements; I won't even insist on having my name on it if people improve and alter this resolution. After the prostitution resolution I was planning to put my efforts into this resolution but the main thing is that the objectives are implemented.

International cooperation and international disasters, those (I think) should be our focus.

And even there, perhaps some things are better done at the regional level. Why involve Vastiva (in Antarctica) in a tropical hurricane warning system, for instance? Why involve nations from fantasy worlds or space empires?

Earthquakes, floods, and volcano eruptions tend to be fairly localized phenomena, once you've separated out and dealt with things like the tsunamis they can spawn. It is the responsibility of individual nationstates, imho, to do what they can to monitor and/or predict them. The NSUN could be a good source of information and a good place to coordinate research on these things. Coordinate, not fund.

Uniform building codes are tricky. I don't know how they're done in RL Earth, but it seems to me a daunting challenge to cover dragon-infested castles, moon bases and undersea cities, tropical beachfront property, and highrises on fault lines, and still be able to call it uniform. Still, I think that's exactly the kind of thing NSUN should be addressing. The building codes need not be mandatory, but the best practices should be available for reference.

Still thinking out loud, maybe the way to tie these things together would be a NSUN Science And Technology Agency. NSUNSATA? Maybe a better acronym could be found.

An agency mandated not to fund, but to coordinate research and standards.

The reason it should be done with every nation is the butterfly effect. Vastiva might not be affected by tropical storms, but the artic might be the region they first form in (okay - not likely, but it might happen).

The reason it should be done with every nation is the butterfly effect. Vastiva might not be affected by tropical storms, but the artic might be the region they first form in (okay - not likely, but it might happen).
I like the argument, but I think the butterfly effect has been disproven.

I like the argument, but I think the butterfly effect has been disproven.

Eh. I am still going to call it that, cause there is little doubt that one tiny change somewhere in the world can have a HUGE effect elsewhere.

Fellow UN members,

For one nation to know of a disaster, invasion force, etc. immediately threatening one of its neighbors, and for that nation to refuse to make a good faith attempt at warning the nation(s) in threat, is a terrible tragedy.
I believe it should be made mandatory that UN nations make an effort to warn their neighbors and allies of danger. We are here as a cooperative body, and this cannot be done if we are refusing to look out for one another's backsides, due to stingy funding issues and the like.

Uniform building codes are tricky. I don't know how they're done in RL Earth, but it seems to me a daunting challenge to cover dragon-infested castles, moon bases and undersea cities, tropical beachfront property, and highrises on fault lines, and still be able to call it uniform. Still, I think that's exactly the kind of thing NSUN should be addressing. The building codes need not be mandatory, but the best practices should be available for reference.

I wouldn't suggest we apply any UBC to things like gnome caves or spock's house. But I do think that we can come up with a conference where engineers from around the world get together and talk about two things:

1) What sort of physical requirements do shelters: hospitals, schools, and police stations, require in order to still function locally.

2) What experience do different societies have with building failures and materials science and how can this aid in answering #1.

If international aid is going to be given, I think that by encouraging local governments to look to the gnome caves or Mr. Spock's home, they might learn something that really can help minimize damage caused by natural diasters.

In the real world building codes are local to regional in their implementation. It would make little economic sense for a Houston building to be designed for peak ground accelerations, when south Texas is fairly seismically inactive, while San Francisco rarely experiences significant storm events.

In fact, an earthquake based dampening system on a San Francisco hospital, *could* be problematic if transfered to a Miami based hospital. Could, I'm not sure. But the point would be to have experts from our nations discuss this in more detail.

I had posted some comments in another thread that should be included here, so if no one objects, I'm just going to go ahead and quote myself:

I think it is fair to say that the sponsors plan to use the working group to llook at how to provide additional precautionary actions to save lives and protect property. However, the language most likely would be general and not specific; conditions vary from country to country and what is best for one place may not be the best for another. As a matter for reference, in the recent RL Indian Ocean tsunamis, some buildings survived the tsunami impact, especially buildings with upper floors that were above the reported height of the tsunami waves (as illustrated by the amatuer video footage aired by media organizations worldwide). In some places, the effect of the waves went inland from one to two kilometers from the coastline, which points to two ways of protecting life (go up to higher floors or moving sufficiently inland), and supports minimum building standards to protect life. THe fact that the primary construction in major mosques survived the impact of tsunami waves, as well as multi-story hotels, esepcially on floors that remained unsubmerged points to the potential of building codes to protect life and property, as is the case with earthquakes and tropical cyclones.

In the debate there was a link posted that had some images before and after. I was surprised to see how many large buildings did survive.

Essentially I agree with what you've posted above here. :)

So to sum up, we are talking about looking at ways of encouraging disaster managment techniques? (Just wanted to make sure that I hadn't got the wrong end of the stick)

So to sum up, we are talking about looking at ways of encouraging disaster managment techniques? (Just wanted to make sure that I hadn't got the wrong end of the stick)

Grand Teton, ways of encouraging disaster management techniques is a part of the topics we're discussing, but as we've indicated, the topic for this working group is far wider than just that issue. The question was touched upon in the following clause of UN Resolution 90:

8. REITERATES the need for member nations to develop evacuation and response plans in the event of a tsunami warning by ensuring that adequate emergency response teams and equipment is available to deal with the likely damages associated with a tsunami appropriate for that nation;

The question of recommended uniform building codes is also part of this aspect of the thread topic. We hope that clarifies the matter for you. Feel free to jump in and contribute!

It hasn't been mentioned that much, but one of the other natural disaster categories that needs to be touched upon would be landslides. They can cause tsunamis, they can be caused by weather, volcanoes, earthquakes, or other geologic forces. There does appear to be a way to monitor potential landslide locations and the circumstanes under which they can be triggered.

There was a program on The Learning Channel last night, apparently that originated on the Discovery network, that indicates that a group of scientists have developed a earthquake prediction scheme that, supposedly has been 90 percent accurate, and predicted the underseas earthquake in the Indian Ocean that caused the tsunami in December.

I do not like this!!!!!! :mp5: :sniper: :headbang: :gundge: :mad:

I do not like this!!!!!! :mp5: :sniper: :headbang: :gundge: :mad:
There isn't even a proposal yet, so how do you know that you don't like it?:confused:

Oooh! Smiley abuse.
Landslides can also be caused by deforestation and the like. The problem with them is that maybe taking into account them would require legislation on afforestation?
OOC:I'm thinking of local scale landslides above, which tend to have a fairly limited impact. If the Canary Islands decide to go shwooomph, then there's not a blind thing we can do about preventing it, and it would be covered under Tsunamis, surely?

While this article is primarily about the RL expansion into a global tsunami warning system, the last paragraph is relevant for its discussion of building codes to withstand tsunami impacts:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=585&e=4&u=/nm/20050208/sc_nm/quake_warning_dc

While this article is primarily about the RL expansion into a global tsunami warning system, the last paragraph is relevant for its discussion of building codes to withstand tsunami impacts:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=585&e=4&u=/nm/20050208/sc_nm/quake_warning_dc

That is an interesting article. As for designing structures to withstand significant waves, it really is my honest professional opinion that we can design these structures. And I don't think it is unrealistic to expect the cost of these buildings to actually be affordable.

I think the trick is to first to risk analysis of various locations and then to tailor building codes around probable events, in not just a risk adverse methodology, but a hazard mitigation approach.

Not all buildings need to be designed to code. Risk based approaches focus just on the probability of an outcome, but hazard mitigation is the methodology where risk and cost are factored together. The loss of a dog house is not really a big deal. The loss of a firestation or hospital or kindergarden is.

Groot Gouda's proposal focuses on the events, but does include what I consider the next step ... the disemination of information. Then using that I'd like to actually talk about a UN resolution (unfortunately in the dreaded environmental category) that would talk about a uniform building code.

Now as for the rest of the article, the Dec. 26, 2004 Indian Ocean Earthquake did more than just ...

The magnitude 9 earthquake off the coast of the Indonesian island of Sumatra lifted the sea floor 15 feet and displaced trillions of gallons of water, causing the monster wave that swamped coastlines as far away as Somalia.

My local paper was quoting NASA estimates that the earthquake actually moved the Earth. The Earth's axis of rotation / north pole sounded like it moved either centimeters or millimeters *and* the rotation of the Earth slowed fractions of a millisecond (not a good thing considering this is already happening).

The most reassuring thing from this is a reminder that our civilization is not in total control. I say this, because if we were, I'd fear for the future a bit more. :(

My local paper was quoting NASA estimates that the earthquake actually moved the Earth. The Earth's axis of rotation / north pole sounded like it moved either centimeters or millimeters *and* the rotation of the Earth slowed fractions of a millisecond (not a good thing considering this is already happening).

I like all the other stuff you are saying, but at least the rotation slowing, while possibly true, is not Proper Science. It is impossible to measure that with all the other disturbing factors that influence the rotation speed all the time. It sounds nice, but is scientifically mostly worthless.

I like all the other stuff you are saying, but at least the rotation slowing, while possibly true, is not Proper Science. It is impossible to measure that with all the other disturbing factors that influence the rotation speed all the time. It sounds nice, but is scientifically mostly worthless.

It sounded odd to me too, but the paper did point out that the shape of the Earth changed ... I can't remember if it became more or less eliptical. I'll dig around some boards and NASA pages today to see if I can find anything more on this.

As far as resolutions are concerned, I think there will end up being three (unless there's a way to combine the first two):

1 - The Natural Diaster resolution Groot Gouda is working up for discussion;
2 - Establishment of a global meterological organization or agency to coordinate weather data to and from all national agencies, coordinate or issue advisories or warnings for weather systems having potential multinational impact (including recommended standardized formats for advisories and warnings), and to research and develop forecast modeling and other techniques, software, and hardware for data collection, analysis and forecasting.
3- Uniform building codes for essential public facilities.

Any thoughts?

This one is from NASA:
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2005-009


"Any worldly event that involves the movement of mass affects the Earth's rotation, from seasonal weather down to driving a car," Chao said.

Gross and Chao have been routinely calculating earthquakes' effects in changing the Earth's rotation in both length-of- day as well as changes in Earth's gravitational field. They also study changes in polar motion that is shifting the North Pole. The "mean North pole" was shifted by about 2.5 centimeters (1 inch) in the direction of 145 degrees East Longitude. This shift east is continuing a long-term seismic trend identified in previous studies.

They also found the earthquake decreased the length of day by 2.68 microseconds. Physically this is like a spinning skater drawing arms closer to the body resulting in a faster spin. The quake also affected the Earth's shape. They found Earth's oblateness (flattening on the top and bulging at the equator) decreased by a small amount. It decreased about one part in 10 billion, continuing the trend of earthquakes making Earth less oblate.

Translation / Recap, Groot was right. I was wrong when I said:

The Earth's axis of rotation / north pole sounded like it moved either centimeters or millimeters *and* the rotation of the Earth slowed fractions of a millisecond (not a good thing considering this is already happening).


Shorter days mean a faster rotation. :)

How about this?

Natural Disaster Warning and Monitoring
A resolution to improve world security by boosting police and military budgets.

Category: International Security
Strength: Mild

DEEPLY REGRETTING loss of life and material damages as a result of natural disasters such as earthquakes, landslides, volcanic eruptions, typhoons, floods, blizzards, etc;

NOTING that these disasters do not stop at national borders;

OBSERVING the Tsunami Emergency Warning Center as instituted by the Tsunami Warning System (Resolution #90);

NOTING that the aforementioned Resolution #90 has limited effect for other natural disasters;

ALSO NOTING that the measures implemented by this resolution can and should be used for further research and development of natural disaster warning systems;

1. DEFINES "natural disaster" as any disaster caused by (physical) geographical, geological or meteorological processes, including but not limited to earthquakes, landslides, volcanic eruptions, tropical cyclones, floods, blizzards, etc;

2. ESTABLISHES a Natural Disaster Assessment Organisation (NDAO) which has the following tasks:
a. Conduct research on natural disasters, preventative methods and monitoring systems,
b. Coordinate international cooperation on this field, in scientific research and in practical solutions,
c. Create protocols for warning about possible disasters, evacuation plans and local disaster awareness programmes,
d. Maintain contacts with local authorities and local organisations in order to improve communication of information about possible natural disasters and how to respond to them,
e. Maintain contacts with national governments participating in the NDAO, the Tsunami Warning Center, and the UN;

3. EMPHASIZES that the NDAO is meant primarily for natural disasters with an international impact;

4. REQUESTS that member nations collect and share geological, meteorological and other relevant data with other countries and the NDAO to assist in monitoring, forecasting and researching natural disasters;

5. URGES all nations to establish and fund a National Geological Survey and a National Meteorological Office which can colelct data, contribute to the NDAO as well as work on a national or regional level on the monitoring of potentially dangerous sites and conduct research;

6. EMPHASIZES that technology alone is not enough, but warning and evacuating the population efficiently is just as important, as well as having plans for dealing with a disaster and the rebuilding of the affected region;

7. URGES all nations to contribute financially, organisationally or otherwise to the NDAO;

8. CALLS UPON all nations to provide care and assistance in case of a natural disaster, by themselves or through recognized UN organisations such as the International Red Cross;

The People's Republic of Groot Gouda would like to thank Grosseschnauzer, Mikitivity and the Nederland region for their input.

1. DEFINES "natural disaster" as any disaster caused by (physical) geographical, geological or meteorological processes, including but not limited to earthquakes, landslides, volcanic eruptions, typhoons, typhoons, floods, blizzards, etc;
I'm assuming that landslides caused by say, deforestation, still count as a natural disaster. Apart from clarifying that, I really can't find anything to change. Good work.

In Grosseschnauzer's view there is a logical reason why the Tsunami Warning System resolution specifically included establishment of a global network of sensors for use in connection with tsunami warnings. In that situation, the sensors and other equioment would have to be placed in international waters beyond the legal jurisdiction of any nation (and perhaps, regions) so it was much more likely that there was no existing system that could be utilized in specific locations.

It may be a question to consider whether a similar authority should be granted to the Natural Disaster Assessment Organisation for deep ocean and space based meteorological reporting stations and equipment that might not otherwise be available through participating nations, or whether that should be a subject of a later resolution.

Grant Teton, my impression is that so long as the natural disaster is of a type that might have an impact that crosses national borders, then it would come within the purview of the Natural Disaster Assessment Organisation.

I wanted to pass on this quoted sentence from an article I just saw at Yahoo.com concerning the real life worldwide death toll in 2004 from all natural disasters:

An earthquake and killer waves, which struck 12 Indian Ocean countries on December 26, took the lives of some 304,200 people, with the most victims in Indonesia, according to the group, part of the Catholic University in Louvain, Brussels.

The total from all natural diasters was about 350,000 last year. The total for the tsunami disaster just about makes it the most deadly natural diaster in recorded history. (The highest numbers I can recall hearing of were estimates of about 250,000 for different earthqualkes in different regions of the world, particularly China at different times in the last two or three centuries.

How about this?

Natural Disaster Warning and Monitoring
A resolution to improve world security by boosting police and military budgets.

Category: International Security
Strength: Mild

DEEPLY REGRETTING loss of life and material damages as a result of natural disasters such as earthquakes, landslides, volcanic eruptions, typhoons, floods, blizzards, etc;

NOTING that these disasters do not stop at national borders;

OBSERVING the Tsunami Emergency Warning Center as instituted by the Tsunami Warning System (Resolution #90);

NOTING that the aforementioned Resolution #90 has limited effect for other natural disasters;

ALSO NOTING that the measures implemented by this resolution can and should be used for further research and development of natural disaster warning systems;

1. DEFINES "natural disaster" as any disaster caused by (physical) geographical, geological or meteorological processes, including but not limited to earthquakes, landslides, volcanic eruptions, tropical cyclones, floods, blizzards, etc;

2. ESTABLISHES a Natural Disaster Assessment Organisation (NDAO) which has the following tasks:
a. Conduct research on natural disasters, preventative methods and monitoring systems,
b. Coordinate international cooperation on this field, in scientific research and in practical solutions,
c. Create protocols for warning about possible disasters, evacuation plans and local disaster awareness programmes,
d. Maintain contacts with local authorities and local organisations in order to improve communication of information about possible natural disasters and how to respond to them,
e. Maintain contacts with national governments participating in the NDAO, the Tsunami Warning Center, and the UN;

3. EMPHASIZES that the NDAO is meant primarily for natural disasters with an international impact;

4. REQUESTS that member nations collect and share geological, meteorological and other relevant data with other countries and the NDAO to assist in monitoring, forecasting and researching natural disasters;

5. URGES all nations to establish and fund a National Geological Survey and a National Meteorological Office which can colelct data, contribute to the NDAO as well as work on a national or regional level on the monitoring of potentially dangerous sites and conduct research;

6. EMPHASIZES that technology alone is not enough, but warning and evacuating the population efficiently is just as important, as well as having plans for dealing with a disaster and the rebuilding of the affected region;

7. URGES all nations to contribute financially, organisationally or otherwise to the NDAO;

8. CALLS UPON all nations to provide care and assistance in case of a natural disaster, by themselves or through recognized UN organisations such as the International Red Cross;

The People's Republic of Groot Gouda would like to thank Grosseschnauzer, Mikitivity and the Nederland region for their input.

Now that my government has resolved its power supply issues and is slowly getting back on track (OOC: had to buy a new power supply for the home machine), we felt the need to say that from its onset, my government is completely behind this proposal.

Furthermore, we will be available for limited aid in telegramming. The limitation is that my government will be "busy" the 19-21 and then again on the 1-4. After that time, we'd be happy to coordinate and/or participate in any telegramming campaign.

It may be a question to consider whether a similar authority should be granted to the Natural Disaster Assessment Organisation for deep ocean and space based meteorological reporting stations and equipment that might not otherwise be available through participating nations, or whether that should be a subject of a later resolution.

The specific details on how to gather data are irrelevant for this resolution. That's up to nations themselves who might be affected by a disaster. As long as the information is gathered, this resolution does not care how.

(I prefer resolutions that put down the big picture and let the nations fill in the details. That's how the UN should work, IMO.)

I think my question was addressed to areas of deep ocean not covered by a natiion's system, as well as gaps in coverage that may exist in satellite networks from space.

Certain weather systems can develop to dangerous levels in the deep ocean away from land areas, or in uninhabitable land areas, and national weather data infomration collection systems may not provide sufficient coverage. All I'm urging is that there be explicit flexibility in this regard so that the Natural Disaster Assessment Organisation can do so directly if the absence of national systems warrant, just as the case was with the tsunami warning system.