The other option is upgrading the current Pacific Tsunami warning system. Tsunami10 is developing two plans along these lines. The first involves the new system being a part of the UN in oversight only. The system would be administered by the nations who signed the treaty bringing it into effect. The system would resemble:
This option has key advantages over an independent network. One entity would warn everyone who would be potentially harmed by an event, ensuring proper communication. It would also provide for more efficient use and distribution of supplies.3 A central organization would transfer materials to where they would be needed and also maintain the supply depots. NGO's would also be more effectively regulated. The central relief organization would be able to coordinate NGO efforts, directing them to where they would be needed. Anyone wishing to provide support would need to go through the central relief agency. Being a part of the UN, the NGO's would most likely follow the organization's wishes.
Such a plan also allows for the difference between the governments of Micronesia and Peru to be taken into account. Peru has a much more capable government and will therefore be able to take on responsibility. Micronesia doesn't have those same capabilities. This form of plan accounts for this by allowing Peru to have a stronger national system, which would default to the international system less often than Micronesia. In this way, both still receive the supplies and support that is necessary and are yet able to be as independent as possible. The inclusion of an overall relief system makes sense if one examines the recent Indian Ocean tsunami. The UN stepped in quickly afterward, making sure that nations had what they needed to control the situation through its numerous organizations.4 5 6 What both these plans would do would be to shift that reasonability onto a differing organization that has official control for all nations. It would also combine the efforts of the UN into one organization.
In both systems, the new system would supplant other systems that are currently in place around the world. The chief of which would be the International Tsunami Information Center.7 This organization serves as a think tank for the world's tsunami experts and also serves to develop and implement new warning and prevention systems. Though this is part of the UN, the natural place for it would be in any new, comprehensive international system. Along with this, the ITIC's parent organization, the ICG/ITSU would be removed from the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) and incorporated in the new system as well. The structure of the current system is:
Under any of these two systems, the systems in the Pacific Basin would be merged into one overall system. The leaders would be appointed by the member nations of the system and continue to represent all of the members of the system. If the system were to be created under the UN, these would be the only changes. If created under an independent treaty, the organization would be removed from the system. Integrating it into the Pacific system would change it's role slightly in the world. It could still serve as the forum for the world through a conference which would be held at least yearly where the nations would instruct the directors about the direction they would like to see the system go in over the next year. Directly prior to this, a conference would also be held where the world's intellectuals could weigh in on the system. Recommendations could then be viewed by the delegates and action can then be ordered on them. The new structure could still advocate on behalf of new systems worldwide, possibly creating one world system for tsunami warning later in the future.
The other option tsunami10 is pursuing is the creation of two independent organizations which would control the system and the relief if a tsunami occurred, basically the same as above but outside of the UN. The chief reason for this is the possibility of bureaucracy in the UN preventing the system from performing to its potential. However, it shares many of the benefits of the previous plan. NGO's may not recognize the authority of the central relief agency without the countries mandating after an event that they follow the developed plan. Until more information is gathered from Mission 2009 on the whole, tsunami10 will continue to present both plans.
Back to Top