For greater impact, should we better mainstream disaster risk reduction into other post-2015 goals and how?
  • Nazare AlbuquerqueNazare Albuquerque
    Helen Clark, UNDP Administrator
    ‘Building Resilience: the importance of prioritising disaster risk reduction – a United Nations Development Programme Perspective’
    Hopkins Lecture, University of Canterbury
    Aurora Centre, Burnside High School, Christchurch
    6.30 pm, Wednesday 15 August 2012

    http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/presscenter/speeches/2012/08/15/helen-clark-building-resilience-the-importance-of-prioritising-disaster-risk-reducti

    "As the Hyogo Decade comes to a close, the post-2015 Framework on disaster risk reduction, which will be determined by the UN Member States, is an opportunity to reflect on good practices and lessons learned. UNDP will consolidate its own lessons learned from the implementation of the current framework to help guide the direction of post-Hyogo arrangements. For example:
    • one of the key strengths of the Hyogo Framework is that it is a voluntary non-binding arrangement. It has worked quite well, as reflected in the high uptake it has had by national governments, and in the high number of references in policy and programme documents, as well as in voluntary progress reporting. More than 100 countries and territories have been monitoring and reporting on progress towards the Hyogo Framework, in recent years. There is value in continuing a similarly structured voluntary arrangement after 2015.
    • The Hyogo Framework itself does not have any specific targets, but a number of countries have voluntarily committed themselves to targets. For example, Viet Nam committed to working towards reducing its average annual disaster losses to under one per cent of its annual GDP. The framework which succeeds the current Hyogo one could specify measurable outcomes, rather than just processes. That would make for a more effective agreement and enable progress to be measured.
    • More than ninety per cent of disasters are related to climate events. The post-Hyogo Framework needs to find ways to converge with the development and environment agendas, including in the area of climate change adaptation. Building capacity to deal with climate-related disaster risks will be fundamental to future risk-reduction strategies. Disaster managers cannot continue to develop risk-reduction strategies based only on past trends. They urgently need to begin accounting for the added impact of climate change.
    • In view of mounting disaster losses, investment in disaster risk reduction needs to be scaled-up exponentially. The negotiations around the post-Hyogo Framework will be an opportunity to explore financing mechanisms for disaster reduction, particularly at the local level.
    • Disaster risk reduction needs to cut across development sectors. The post-Hyogo discussion is an opportunity to engage with sectors of governments beyond national disaster risk management authorities, including those responsible for finance, planning, health, and gender equality. All sectors need to be part of the dialogue.
    • As of 2008, and for the first time in human history, there are more people living in urban areas than in rural areas globally; by 2030 this pattern will apply in all developing regions including Asia and Africa, which adds new dimensions to disaster risk. The post-Hyogo framework must take this new reality into account with a focus on urban planning and building safer cities.
    • Current thinking is leading to seeing sustainable recovery from disasters as a human right. Post-Hyogo Framework negotiations will be an opportunity to place greater emphasis on recovery, and work towards developing robust policy and institutional, and legislative arrangements which are human rights-based and support inclusive and sustainable post-disaster recovery.
    The post-Hyogo discussions also need to link to other processes. 2015 is the date for achieving most of the Millennium Development Goal targets which have guided international development since 2000. Disaster risk reduction needs to become central to mainstream development planning and action, and be reflected in discussions on the overall post-2015 development agenda.
    The outcome document from the recently completed Rio+20 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development has already helped the debate move in that direction. It explicitly mentions disaster reduction as an essential ingredient of sustainable development. It calls for governments, international organisations, the private sector, and civil society to protect people, infrastructure, and other national assets from the impact of disasters. "

  • Tomoko SugaTomoko Suga
    Impacts for environmental, health and social reasons indicate better integration for disaster risk reduction into post 2015 goals. Initial comments were made to mainstream disaster risk reduction by voluntary actions from member states and climate change, one of the cross-cutting issues this century. On a different note, concerning nations that represent fragmented developments are Africa and Asia. Majority of the globally undernourished people live in developing countries with absence of agricultural innovations. The trade and market in agricultural developments limit advancement that require demand and supply for coordination compared to production for industrialized countries. Health factors and economic developments impact upon the constraints for natural resources and potential areas to focus. These include cost-effective development, health management, suitable technologies, potable water and shelter. The environmental considerations are vital for development planning and public awareness is essential for sustainable development. Water and land management, strongly connected to disaster risk reductions involve socio-economic factors, rapid industrialization and untreated facilities, food security and ecological processes that require more emphasis for the post 2015 goals.
  • Loy RegoLoy Rego
    Dear Nazare and Hanna,

    Thanks for posting this landmark policy address of your Administrator. I would encourage all participants in the dialogue to read it, where Ms Clark eloquently explains UNDP’s approach and its commitment and future plans to upscale its investment in supporting Governments building resilience in all at risk countries

    Thanks for the broader question and I hope many in the dialogue will contribute to this.

    As I had said in my earlier post in the first thread of this round in relation to the same point

    “.We must mainstream disaster risk reduction into all relevant post-2015 development goals; otherwise, as with the MDGs we run the risk of development gains being washed away or collapsing then hit by the next disaster, as happened in many countries with the MDG gains, and were much lamented by several heads of Government at both the 2010 and 2012 MDG summits.

    Looking ahead, even if there is a stand-alone goal for resilience, DRR has to be specifically disaggregated into sectorally specific agendas and action, and then routinised into those systems. Ideally we should pursue both.

    In her post Marla gave one example of what Mainstreaming would imply in the education sector, based on discussions at the AMCDRR 5. I shared about the ongoing program on mainstreaming DRR into development of the Regional Consultative Committee on Disaster Management in Asia since 2005, based on its Hanoi Declaration at its 5th meeting. (Available at http://www.rccdm.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=67&Itemid=156)

    The declaration called for mainstreaming DRR into national development processes and into specific priority sectors, namely agriculture, housing, infrastructure, health, education and financial services. To promote action on each theme, priority implementation partnerships were initiated by the NDMAs with sectoral ministries and other stakeholders. In the previous post I gave specific examples of approaches taken in national planning processes and agriculture, and I now give examples of other sectors as follows:

    3. Urban Planning and Infrastructure

    3.1 To incorporate disaster risk assessments as part of the planning process before construction of new roads and bridges

    3.2 To promote use hazard risk information in Land-use planning and zoning programs

    5. Health

    5.1 Project to assess hospitals that are located in hazard-prone areas, analyze the internal and external vulnerability of health facilities during emergencies and increase the standard resilience to these hazards– building /functioning

    5.2 Develop and implement Hospital Preparedness Plan for all health facilities

    6. Education

    6.1 Incorporate DRM modules into school curriculum

    6.2 To construct all new schools located in hazard prone areas to higher standards of hazard resilience

    6.3 To add features in schools in hazard prone areas for use as emergency shelters by incorporating additional facilities for water, sanitation and cooking

    7. Financial Services

    7.1 Incorporating micro financing scheme to have flexible repayment schedules that can be activated in the event of recipients being affected by natural disasters

    7.2 Encourage financial services sectors and local capital markets to develop schemes for financing disaster risk-reduction measures.

    The RCC developed detailed guideline documents on 3.1 and 3.2 and these are useful reference documents for any governemnt and agency available on the RCC site.

    UNDP has done pioneering work on mainstreaming DRR into national development processes in Bangladesh, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Vietnam, Philippines, and I would hope that colleagues from the UNDP country offices and regional DRR advisors share the progress. It will be great if the NDMAs in these countries report with pride on their work as well.

    UNDP BCPR took a bold step in launching a Global Mainstreaming Initiative in 2005, and this produced excellent work of developing a framework for mainstreaming and training material and courses. I hope that as this discussion moves on to the wider world we want website, that some of these materials and country reports will be available as resource inputs to developing this subject further.

    In the last 8 months the new UNISDR Global Education and Training Institute (GETI) in Incheon, building on some of this work, has started a new process called “ Mainstreaming adaptation and Disaster reduction into Development” (MaDRiD) jointly by UNDP, ISDR, WMO, IFRC, and ADPC. In the last several months they have held three Leadership Development Forums (LDFs) for country teams drawn from NDMOs, planning and finance ministries and sectoral ministries/agencies from 7 countries from Asia and Africa. I do hope some of the participants in that enterprise will also come forward and share their experience.

    It is from this global, regional and country level work ( including subnational and local) that the core ideas will emerge of what elements of resilience to build in to our specific indicators of the sectoral development goals

    Warmly,

    LOY REGO
  • Jalil Ur RehmanJalil Ur Rehman
    What I think any initiative for development is meaningless and useless until and unless, if it can not integrate DRR into policy, planing and implementation process.The development concept in the third world countries is best example of failure because of negligence to DRR integration. By mainstreaming DRR into other post 2015 development goals, we can expect sustainable development in the whole globe in general and third world in particular.

    As Mr Loy Rego mentioned GETI, which is working on "Mainstreaming adaptation and disaster into development" but the access to those institutions is possible for government officials while the other humanitarian organizations and community leaders did not have access to those institutions. Unfortunately the government officials from third world visit these institutions just for passing time, so the actual goals can not be achieved. While disasters risk trends are more fatal in the developing world.

    For better results advocacy on mainstreaming DRR would be effective at state and community level. The development goals can utilize advocacy as a tool for carrying out mainstreaming DRR objectives at all level and in different sectors.
This discussion has concluded and posts can no longer be made.