16 Highlights and Lessons from the Implementation of an Early …
195
16.4 Lessons Learned and Perspectives
This is the first EWS of its type implemented in Peru related to risks of glacier
lakes, and as such, it has been a source of important lessons (technical as well as
institutional) which are important for the planning of subsequent systems.
During the progress of the project, positive aspects of the implementation of the
EWS, main issues encountered as well as the working areas where supplementary
efforts or new approaches are needed to accomplish the objectives were identified.
Moreover, as the project “Glaciares 513” reached the end of its first phase, an external
and independent evaluation of the project performance identified the strengths and
weaknesses regarding the implementation and exploitation of the EWS according to
the following five criteria: pertinence, efficacy, efficiency, impact, and sustainability.
The main positive aspects are listed below:
1. An overall positive assessment of its implementation, even more so considering that the specialized focus on adaptation and risk management related to
receding glaciers could have presented limitations. The efficacy of the project
has been demonstrated as it has had the support and involvement of the population and the local authorities in activities related to glacier risk reduction (through
the design and implementation of the EWS).
2. A good reception of the project and the EWS in the public and private sectors,
academic and practical area, at the national, regional, and local level. The workshops carried out by the leaders of the project had a positive impact on the main
stakeholders involved in the GLOF’s quandary in the region. Receptivity to the
implementation of an EWS of the population has been crucial because without
their participation, its design would not have been possible.
3. A good response to test alarms and evacuation simulations performed during the past years. Population, local authorities, and civil defense organizations
assimilated the importance of established protocols and carried out them with
good results, which shows that all stakeholders appreciate the utility of such a
risk management tool.
4. The installation of the technical part of the EWS (sensors, stations, etc.) was
executed with the support of local staff and was accomplished without major
problems. Nevertheless, it is worth mentioning the lack of experience in Peru
in maintenance and operation of such systems under high-mountain conditions,
which had an effect on the correct operation of the proposed EWS.
Moreover, problems encountered and improvements to be accomplished, particularly those related to technical aspects of the EWS, are the following:
1. Some communication difficulties between the project partners and the final
users of the system (i.e., the Municipality of Carhuaz). This represents an opportunity to reinforce the crosswise strategies into communications, gender, monitoring accountability, and transparency in the future.
2. Key actors involvement during the project activities. Several factors—such as
not all the key actors being involved since the beginning of the project, or the
195
16.4 Lessons Learned and Perspectives
This is the first EWS of its type implemented in Peru related to risks of glacier
lakes, and as such, it has been a source of important lessons (technical as well as
institutional) which are important for the planning of subsequent systems.
During the progress of the project, positive aspects of the implementation of the
EWS, main issues encountered as well as the working areas where supplementary
efforts or new approaches are needed to accomplish the objectives were identified.
Moreover, as the project “Glaciares 513” reached the end of its first phase, an external
and independent evaluation of the project performance identified the strengths and
weaknesses regarding the implementation and exploitation of the EWS according to
the following five criteria: pertinence, efficacy, efficiency, impact, and sustainability.
The main positive aspects are listed below:
1. An overall positive assessment of its implementation, even more so considering that the specialized focus on adaptation and risk management related to
receding glaciers could have presented limitations. The efficacy of the project
has been demonstrated as it has had the support and involvement of the population and the local authorities in activities related to glacier risk reduction (through
the design and implementation of the EWS).
2. A good reception of the project and the EWS in the public and private sectors,
academic and practical area, at the national, regional, and local level. The workshops carried out by the leaders of the project had a positive impact on the main
stakeholders involved in the GLOF’s quandary in the region. Receptivity to the
implementation of an EWS of the population has been crucial because without
their participation, its design would not have been possible.
3. A good response to test alarms and evacuation simulations performed during the past years. Population, local authorities, and civil defense organizations
assimilated the importance of established protocols and carried out them with
good results, which shows that all stakeholders appreciate the utility of such a
risk management tool.
4. The installation of the technical part of the EWS (sensors, stations, etc.) was
executed with the support of local staff and was accomplished without major
problems. Nevertheless, it is worth mentioning the lack of experience in Peru
in maintenance and operation of such systems under high-mountain conditions,
which had an effect on the correct operation of the proposed EWS.
Moreover, problems encountered and improvements to be accomplished, particularly those related to technical aspects of the EWS, are the following:
1. Some communication difficulties between the project partners and the final
users of the system (i.e., the Municipality of Carhuaz). This represents an opportunity to reinforce the crosswise strategies into communications, gender, monitoring accountability, and transparency in the future.
2. Key actors involvement during the project activities. Several factors—such as
not all the key actors being involved since the beginning of the project, or the