Monitoring the Post 2015 Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction : Proposed system of indicators and targets

Kazuko IshigakiRisk Knowledge EconomistUnited Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction 23-24 April 2014

The HFA Monitor

• 22 Core indicators in 5 Priorities for Action• Priority 1: Ensure that disaster risk reduction is a national and

a local priority with a strong institutional basis for implementation.

• Priority 2: Identify, assess and monitor disaster risks and enhance early warning.

• Priority 3: Use knowledge, innovation and education to build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels.

• Priority 4: Reduce the underlying risk factors. • Priority 5: Strengthen disaster preparedness for effective

response at all levels.

2

Are we achieving the HFA ?

Gradual progress across all Priorities for

Action

Increasing physical damage and economic loss

3

Why do we need the new indicator system?

Current HFA monitor Proposed

1. Input rather than output focused

Link input indicators to outputs and outcomes

2. Does not measure generation of new risks

Measure not only risk reduction but also risk generation and resilience

3. Progress not related to risk levels of country

Integrate risk levels in the system

4. Subjective, not allowing international benchmarking

Objective, supporting peer to peer learning

4

Why do we need the new indicator system?Current HFA monitor Proposed

5. Core indicators related to multiple policies and stakeholders: Unclear responsibility and accountability

Refer to specific public policies, identifying stakeholders for each policy

6. No clear link to MDG and CC

Provide clear links to SDGs and CC

7. Not used for supporting decision making

Help countries identify weak policy area by facilitating systematic understanding of disaster risk mechanism 5

Examples: Input-Output-Outcome

6

EWS Development Policy

Disaster Loss Reduction

% of population coverage of EWS

Awareness raising campaign

Disaster Loss Reduction

Housing retrofittingHousing relocation

Sufficient coverage?

Can all people evacuate?

Behavior change?

Housing not destroyed?

Architecture of indicator system under development

Comprehensive DRM Policies

Disaster Risk

Underlying Drivers of Risk and Resilience

Disaster Loss

Disaster Impact7

Resilience

Outcome level : Resilient societies for Sustainable Development

• Success Indicator: Decreasing loss over time (mortality, economic loss, physical loss)

• Data source: national disaster loss databases• Sample global targets: X% reduction in mortality and

economic loss in Y years (political decision)• Linked: to SDG indicators and targets

8

Disaster Loss Database in GAR UniverseLIE LMIE UMIE HIE Others* Total

Africa 5 1 0 0 6Americas 0 6 9 2 17Asia 1 6 3 0 10Europe 0 0 0 0 0Oceania 0 7 6 3 5 21Total 6 20 18 5 5 54

Note1: Others are the countries that income data is not registered in the World Bank Database and could not be classified by income.Note 2: The Indian states of Orissa and Tamil-Nadu are included in the list of 56 countries in GAR Universe.

Asia: Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Rep. of), Jordan, Lao PDR, Lebanon, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Syrian Arab Rep., Vietnam, Yemen.

9

Sustainable Development Goal (SDG)

10

• Post 2015 Millennium Development Goal framework

• 19 focus area: for example, poverty eradication; food security; health : education; gender; water; energy; equality; city and settlements; climate

• Not strong DRR integration at current proposal

Output level :Disaster risks managed• Success Indicator: managed risks • Data source: global probabilistic risk assessment (UN)• Sample National targets: simplified disaster deficit index

Extensive:Localised floods, landslides, fires, storms etc.

Intensive:Major earthquakes, tropical cyclones

11

UNISDR’s Global Risk ModelHazard Type Gar 13 Gar 15

Output Scale Output ScaleEarthquake AAL and PML

250Global AAL and PML

multipleGlobal

Tsunami Exposure Global PML multiple Global

Cyclones Winds AAL and PML 250

Global AML and PML multiple

Global

Storm surges

- - AAL and PML multiple

Global

Floods River flood

AAL Thailand AAL and PML multiple

Global

Ponding flood

AAL and MPL 250

Caribbean AAL and MPL multiple

Tbc

Volcanic Ash - - Exposure Global12

Output levels : Underlying risk and resilience

• Success Indicator: (1) healthy ecosystems; well managed urban development; reducing poverty and inequality, (2) hazard insurance penetration

• Data source: available global datasets (environment, poverty, urbanization, governance, infrastructure, trade and economic development)

• Sample national targets: X% reduction of population in poverty;

• Linked: to SDG and CC indicators and targets

13

Input level : Integrated Disaster risk management policies

Risk Knowledge

Reducing Risk

Avoiding

Risk

Strengthening Resilience

Risk Governance

14

15

Clarifying responsibilities of each stakeholder (Examples)

Public function protectionEducation Risk assessment and retrofitting of every

schools Contingency planning at every schools

Health Risk assessment and retrofitting of every hospitals and health care facilities

Contingency planningUrban Development Risk proof urban infrastructures

Risk proof building codesFinance Catastrophic insurance to protect public

finance Support for hazard related property

insurance to protect private assets

• Critical infrastructure protection• Eco-system degradation• Water management• Cascading effect (in global economy)• Cascading effect (in relation with other hazard)• Crop insurance

16

Examples of missing policies/issues in current HFA monitoring system

Input level : Disaster risk management policies

• Success Indicator: Effective DRM policies in place to support public sector, households and businesses. Wide array of policy indicators proposed as menu

• Data source: national multi-stakeholder monitoring• Sample national targets: % of houses built according to

seismic code; % of households with catastrophe insurance etc.

17

Implementing new indicator system

• Dashboard: each indicator family presented graphically highlighting progress towards targets

• Cluster analysis: groups of countries with similar challenges

• Periodicity of monitoring: every 4 years (suggested) linked to SDG periodicity

18

Timeline for development

• Q4 2013: design of system architecture and rationale (November 11 paper)

• Q1 2014: design of system architecture and rationale, Expert group meeting 1 (Vienna, 10 - 11 February); consultation to UN system and others, identification and testing of indicators

19

Timeline for development• Q2 2014: Expert group meeting 2, pilot testing

of indicator system, briefings at Regional DRR platforms

• Q3 and Q4 2014: Consultations at Prepcons for WCDRR

• Q1 2015: Adoption as part of post 2015 Framework for DRR

20

Monitoring system in the context toward post 2015 Framework for DRR

Monitoring system

development

2015: Post 2015 Framework for DRR/WCDRR

2014:Preparation Conferences

+Regional Platforms

HFA Elements and political process for reaching agreement

on HFA

Links to SDGs and UNFCCC

21

22

Discussion points

1. Recommendations for HFA2 monitoring mechanism:

(1) Is the proposed indicator system reasonable? (2) Suggest 3 to 5 recommendations for the

improvement

23

Discussion points

2. Resilience indicators: What should be the key indicators to monitor

resilience? Identify 3 to 5 possible indicators.

24

Discussion points

3.Target: (1)What kind of targets should we have at national level? Identify 3 to 5 possible national targets.

(If time permits)(2) What kind of targets do we need to establish at global level?

Thank you very much

Contact: Kazuko Ishigaki

United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction

Tel: +41 22 917 3460ishigaki@un.org