Towards a post-2015 framework for Disaster Risk Reduction BUILDING THE RESILIENCE OF NATIONS AND COMMUNITIES TO DISASTERS

Thanks Jalil.

I too waited with bated breadth and with some disappointment that there was such a slow pace of any reaction to this question. I do hope that now that you have cast the first stone, that many others will join in.

Lets us take the broadest view of this deliberately, open ended, very broad question to think expansively and if needed, outside the HFA box to think of

i. areas or elements that were not covered very explicitly in HFA e.g. In the first round, Guro , Tesfaye/Maggie and John Scott mentioned the following were not addressed adequately i.e. children, elderly and indigenous people respectively.

ii. elements that were mentioned but inadequately, like Sanjaya mentioned on recovery in the first round

iii. areas that are inadequately highlighted and deserve elevation of some kind

iv. different ways to deal the 4 cross cutting issues namely "multi hazard approach”, “Gender perspective and cultural diversity”, ‘Community and volunteers participation’ and “capacity building and technology transfer”

As suggested in the introductory remarks on this round, we should all read the HFA document once again, either online or in hard copy. Some of us may like to comment on the other sections of the document beyond the best known “ Priorities for action 2005-2015”

a. The preamble which also talks about the Yokohama strategy lessons learning review.

b. The WCDR objectives and expected outcome of the 10 year period to 2015, and strategic Goals of HFA

c. Implementation and follow up covering the roles of states, regional organisations, international organisations and ISDR; as well as the section on Resource Mobilization

Some of you may want to suggest different ways and elements to incorporate in the new framework outside of the above structure of the current framework. I look forward to a more engaged dialogue on this subject

LOY REGO

After the SREX Report of the IPCC, it is now well established that effective integration of climate change adaptation (CCA) and disaster risk risk reduction (DRR) remains the key requirement for urgent actions. The Conference of Parties (COP) of the UNFCCC should act at the Doha meetings to effect this integration, including under the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and its stated objectives/functions/goals/targets. Often, DRR includes but not included by CCA.
Under the UNISDR-UNFCCC joint framework that could be devised with the particiaption of other important organizations such as the UNDP, an overarching policy and implementation framework along provision of resources and enabling capacities (national and international) will help achieve broad-based but specific actionable plans in a time-bound manner. The cost-effectiveness of proposed integration has already been recognized in a number of studies and documents.
Ths, the post-2015 Framework for DRR accords priority to:
1. integration of resources and strategies for the governance of CCA and DRR;
2. contributes to the enabling capacity development (national and international);
3. ensures all member countries avail National Platforms for the design and implementation of effective strategies for DRR.

Dear Loy
I had problem of “sign in”, but now solved, I hope, just in time for the dead line.
My suggestions relate to “What top three elements should be addressed in the Post 2015 Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction”, and partially to “How do we accelerate HFA implementation and enhance the momentum for DRR in the remaining three years till 2015”

The three suggestions below are all for the promotion of community DRR, which have been consistently discussed in Global Platform meetings and MTR as well as online debates. I am calling for concrete actions.

1. Setting target
Please refer to Chair’s Summary of 2nd and 3rd Global Platform and MTR report: “setting targets can help to achieve the necessary momentum” and “would be helpful in encouraging governments, civil society…towards more accelerated implementation of HFA”. Targets were suggested for risk assessment, early warning systems etc.
My suggestion is “targeting community DRR”. Each country should have a sheet to list up all high risk communities and to show achievement in the past and plan in the future for each community. Based on this country sheet, a regional sheet should be prepared by regional organization and a global sheet by UNISDR, which should be shown on the website of respective organizations so as to be accessible by any in the world. A good initiative has just been taken by CDEMA for the Caribbean Region. The Form being used will be sent to you by separate mail,which well illustrates the system.
This monitoring will be helpful for government in implementation/budgeting in a more planned manner, and will make communities eager to accelerate DRR in competition with other communities in the country.
It is suggested that an agreement will be made at Global Platform 2013 to adopt such a monitoring system and at World Conference 2015 to implement DRR in all priority communities in the time frame of post-2015 frame.

2. Measurement of effectiveness of community DRR
In order to obtain budget for DRR projects as required, it is necessary to explain their effectiveness to financial/planning authorities. We sometimes experience that we have no answer to the question from those authorities :“How effective are they?” Only saying “DRR is important” is not successful in view of many sectors competing for budget. This is particularly so for community DRR projects.
I would suggest development of standards and indicators for numerical measurement applicable commonly to community projects in the world. It should not be very complicated. The methodologies of IFRC and other donors will be good references. CEPREDENAC tried to develop methodologies in 2007 but has not completed yet. This should be carried out as an action in post 2015 frame led by international organizations.
Cost benefit analysis has been a topic of discussion in the past, but my suggestion is a part of that particularly on community DRR.

3. Sharing knowledge and experiences
“Indigenous Knowledge for Disaster Risk Reduction” presented at a special event of Global Platform 2009 is very useful, being referred to by many community projects. It contains 18 good practices of 14 Asian countries.
Communities and assistance agencies have their own knowledge and experiences, and are pursuing further to develop them in new projects. They should be shared for wider application, however, as far as I know, no organization is willing to continue this activity. I would propose documentation of knowledge and experience at the moment, which should be updated with new information from time to time.

Dear colleagues registered in the dialogue and all visitors,

Thanks to Jalil, Himadri, Krishna, Oi san, Marcus and Tomoko, we now have six distinct viewpoints, with some harmony, on what are three top elements to be considered in our next global framework.

The past fortnight has been a post 2015 fortnight with the first week having the start of the 67th UN GA and the first meeting of the SG’s High Level Panel on the post 2015 Development Agenda. We had rich discussions in this week in Lao, Croatia and other parts of the world on the subject in regional (Asia and Europe) and national consultations on DRR and the post HFA. Next week large meetings of African civil society and academia on DRR and large CSOs in Washington DC will also discuss the subject of our current implementation of DRR and in the context of its future. The Global Network of Civil society on DRR (GNDR) will launch their own civil society online debate on post HFA. I have invited the organizers of these meetings to share information on the meetings themselves and encourage cross fertilization of thoughts and ideas across the meetings and this dialogue.

We will keep several of these threads open for the next few days to receive additional posts on the three forward looking action oriented questions in this round. These are recurrent questions which will be asked and answered in different ways throughout the first phase of this consultative process, and we like to feel proud that the writers in this round, who are a healthy mix of fresh new voices and seasoned veterans; have been pioneers in igniting the discussion. I will continue my work on preparing summaries and planning ahead.

As you can see from the bar on the title page, the next three rounds have also been announced. So too, mini dialogues on specialized themes are being planned by a wide and interesting range of partners, UN Agencies, NGOs, donor countries and activists who are represented on this page. If you would like to join any particular group in organising a mini dialogue, or propose one yourself, please write in on the forum or to me at [email protected] or to UNISDR.

Like always, looking forward to the views of others and reactions to the ideas expressed.

Warmly,

LOY

Dear colleagues,

I believe my comments are consistent with the earlier posts and the current framework. My top three elements are:

1. The integration of climate change adaptation into the DRR framework. This is consistent with the current Priority 2, Identify, assess and monitor disaster risks and enhance early warning, since climate change will have such a major impact on the frequency, severity and geography of future disasters,

2. Investment in community-based DRR, and disseminate information on best practices. Again this is consistent with Priority 5, Strengthen disaster preparedness for effective response at all levels, but I think there needs to be a more explicit recognition of local action to ensure community resilience.

3. Place a higher priority on the importance ecosystem services and the value of natural capital in reducing the risk of disasters (Priority 4, Reduce underlying risk). Environmental protection and restoration, and the use of green infrastructure, also offer important co-benefits that can help justify the investment.

Thanks,
Bradley
Los Angeles, CA

Dear Friends,
To day is 8th October, it reminds the great earthquake of Pakistan which was worsely affected the nine districts of the northern part. The lives losses were beyond man imagination. This was also one of the mega disaster in the world history. The children, women and aged people were main victim of this catastrophe. What we learnt from that? Whether after that adverse situation there is some change for Disaster Management or still the conventional approach is there? I want to relate it with the question which is asked above; we have to make such strong arrangements setting Post 2015 DRR top priorities which enable us to reduce the impacts of such events in future.

In this occasion I appeal all the international regional DRR Practitioners/Experts make sure transparency , merit, justice and commitment for DRR initiatives. So that we may help the planet most vulnerable people.

Dear Community Members,

Of the many initiatives and activities outlined under the Priorities of Action, some elements that should be considered with renewed emphasis are:

a. Social Demand for DRR: 01 is about ensuring DRR as a national and local priority. Most of these initiatives, including the regular monitoring of progress towards HFA, remain very much visible at the national level; it has not permeated so well to the local level. At the local level DRR initiatives and discussion are very much limited in scopes and intensity and hence there is a need to establish and sustain appropriate institutional mechanisms at the local that would contribute towards DRR becoming a priority rather than an add on or a supplementary thing. Priority should be towards building a social demand for DRR rather than relying on the top-down supply of sporadic initiatives on DRR; and
b. Evidence Uptake for DRR: PfA3 on the use of knowledge needs to consider the diverse sources of knowledge which go beyond the traditional dichotomy of expert (scientific) vs. non-expert (traditional) knowledge. The emphasis should be on strengthening an enabling environment that would facilitate demand for and uptake of such diverse source of knowledge and research evidence on DRR for evidence-informed policy making and planning, including allocation of resources.
Sincerely,

Jyotiraj Patra
India

Dear Colleagues
I wish to share this information with you and hope it may be of interest and assistance regarding elements for addressing the Post 2015 Framework for Disaster Risk Prevention

My name is Stella Joy and I am one of the Directors of Active Remedy Ltd. We are based in the U.K. The sole objective of Active Remedy Ltd. is the protection and regeneration of the global fresh water cycle and the natural ecological factors, which maintain it. We feel that there is a severe lack of attention being focused on this matter and feel it to be critically important that it be raised as an imperative issue within the global agenda.

We are therefore working on initiating and hoping to implement a feasibility study, which could guide a global action plan in the protection and regeneration of the global fresh water cycle. We believe that the research we have gathered and the innovative method, which we have formulated for this purpose, has the potential to be used successfully worldwide. We have recently received the registration documents needed to attend ‘The Eleventh Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity’ (CBD COP 11)

http://activeremedy.org.uk/pages/?s=mop6_cop11

Paragraph 122 of 'The Future We Want' states:

"We recognize the key role that ecosystems play in maintaining water quantity and quality and support actions within the respective national boundaries to protect and sustainably manage these ecosystems."

We are sharing this with you all to highlight the key role that ecosystems, especially mountains, mountain forests and wetlands play in maintaining fresh water quantity and quality globally. We wish to see this and supportive efforts that protect, sustainably manage and restore these ecosystems given major focus and added into all dialogues concerning water, mountains, forests, biodiversity, sustainable development, climate change, disaster risk prevention and the Post 2015 Agenda.

http://activeremedy.org.uk/pages/?s=watercycle_paper

On the 25th September 2012 we added input into the U.N-Water Analytical Brief, which was being discussed and formulated in New York. We are very pleased to say that our input was accepted.

This brief will later also include a summary of the findings emerging from the U.N.G.A Side Event, which was also held in New York on the 25th September 2012.

http://activeremedy.org.uk/pages/?s=news_UN_water

Thank you for your time and consideration upon this.

Wishing you all the Best
Stella

Apreciados amigos, permítame expresarle la satisfacción que sentí al encentra personas que al igual que yo estamos preocupado por la situación que presenta el mundo. Sabemos que los fenómenos naturales como el sismo y el huaracan han existido desde siempre, que son fuerzas portentosas, las cuales, hasta ahora no hemos podido evitar. En este siglo XXI veremos nacer una nueva estirpe de ciclón y sismo de gran magnitud, sus poderes serán devastadores, sus furias arrasaran ciudades entera, serán animales de vientos y aguas de movimientos telúricos de gran magnitud, mucho más voraces que los ocurridos en toda la historia de la humanidad. También sabemos que al igual que cualquier ecosistema natural, las ciudades tienen capacidad de resiliencia, siempre y cuando tengan los recursos necesario para volver a restablecer lo perdido. El objetivo principal de los gobiernos locales es garantizar el bienestar de los munícipes, proteger sus vidas y sus patrimonios, por lo que los alcalde deben proveerse de resoluciones o ordenanzas municipales que le exijan a los munícipes tener conciencia de gestión de riesgo en todo el accionar de su vida. El estado debe garantizar elementos jurídicos a la ciudadanía, garantizándolas protección colectiva. Los organismos internacionales a la hora de prestar dinero, ayuda etc. Deben tener una clausura en el contrato o acuerdo donde se disponga de un fundo para invertirlo en apoyar la mitigación de riesgo.