Process and mechanics of HFA progress monitoring and

Review 2009-11

Sujit Mohanty, UNISDR

Meeting of the ISDR Asia Partnership24 – 26 March 2010

Bangkok

Outline

• Purpose of the review process

• Reflections on 2007 – 09 HFA progress review

• 2009 – 11 progress monitoring and review

• National level review process

• Timeframe

Purpose

• Assist countries in assessing their own progress, gaps and challenges in DRR efforts

• Serves as a continuous feedback mechanism for the countries

Global 2007-09 HFA Review Process

• Africa >> Countries: 53       Completed: 19       On-going: 8       Not started: 26

• Americas>> Countries: 51       Completed: 17       On-going: 6       Not started: 28

• Europe >> Countries: 32       Completed: 14       On-going: 4       Not started: 14

• Asia >> Countries: 42       Completed: 24       On-going: 2       Not started: 16

• Oceania >> Countries: 10       Completed: 4       On-going: 4       Not started: 2

• Total >> Countries: 188     Completed: 78      On-going: 24     Not started: 86

102 countries participated

Findings from GAR 09 analysis• Significant progress: HFA Priority 1, 5 Strengthening institutional capacities, systems, policies and

legislation for disaster risk reduction; technical and institutional capacities for disaster preparedness, contingency plans

• Consistent progress: HFA Priority 2 Identification, assessment and monitoring of disaster risks;

enhancement of early warning systems

• Weak progress: HFA Priority 3 and 4 Knowledge, innovation and education, raising awareness; in

particular mainstreaming of disaster risk reduction into economic, social, urban, rural, environmental, infrastructure planning

Learning from 2007-09 process

• Feedback :– Global HFA monitoring survey– Regional lessons learned reports– Global Platform Chair’s summary– GP Informal Plenary report– Review report of cross-cutting issues in HFA

monitoring– HFA Monitor utilization study

Key issues and challenges• Multi-stakeholder approach not common• Subjective progress assessment• Lack of civil society involvement• Inadequate visualization of the input to HFA

monitoring• No means of verification for the reported

status• Access of the monitoring tool to regional

organizations

2009 – 2011 review process

• Process enhancements:– Greater geographic coverage– Multi stakeholder involvement– Greater involvement of the civil society

organizations– Alignment of local and national level progress

monitoring – Incorporation of quantifiable and disaggregated

indicators

2009 – 2011 review process• Improvements in HFA monitor tool:

– A set of ‘Key Questions’ and ‘Means of Verification’ added

– Overall interaction design improved– Visualization of HFA progress input (phase 2)– Access to regional organizations (phase 2)

• Available ONLINE from 22 March 2010

Overview of the process

National level arrangements

• Nominated HFA focal point facilitates inputs to online ‘HFA Monitor’

• Broad, inclusive consultation across government and other stakeholders

• Draw on existing monitoring and review process (if available)

• Includes analysis of DRR progress reported in other frameworks (CCA, NAPA, MDG etc.)

• Supportive of national processes and feeds into national level DRR planning

Multi stakeholder approachExamples of key stake holders

Suggested stepsPhase I By 30 September 2010

Step 1: Identification of relevant stake holders

Step 2: Grouping of stakeholders

Step 3: Carry out multi stakeholder meetings/ workshops

Step 4: Assemble all inputs from the working groups

Step 5: Input all validated information in the web based HFA monitor system

Step 6: Circulate the interim report to the working groups

Step 7: Share the information as an ‘Interim’ report

Phase II

Step 8: Continue improving the information on the report

Step 9: Finalize the report with the stakeholder group

Step 10: Share the 2009- 2011 ‘Final Report’ through the HFA monitor

Guidance resources available• A practical guide to HFA monitoring and review 2009 -

2011• HFA Monitor template • Frequently Asked Questions• Recommended steps for progress review at the national

level • Indicators of progress • Words Into Action • Responsibilities for HFA reporting and monitoring • Summary of the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015:

Building the resilience of nations and communities to disasters

Guidance resources available

http://www.preventionweb.net/english/hyogo/hfa-monitoring/

Further guidanceContact regional focal points:

• South Asia: Madhavi Ariyabandu (ariyabandu@un.org )

• South East Asia: Abhilash Panda (pandaa@un.org )

• Pacific: Angelika Planitz (planitz@un.org)

• Central Asia: Goulsara Pulatova (goulsara.pulatova@undp.org)

Overview of Global Assessment Report 2011

• builds on the success of GAR 2009 which was launched by the Secretary-General of the United Nations in Manama, Bahrain on 17 May 2009

• overall focus will be on drivers of risk reduction and on how to address the challenges

• will be launched in Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction, June 2011

Overview of Global Assessment Report 2011

• GAR11 components: – An enhanced analysis of global risk patterns,

trends and drivers – An identification of effective strategies to

reduce different segments and strata of risk – A second round of progress review (2009-

2011), against the Hyogo Framework of Action – An identification of an enabling environment for

disaster risk reduction,

Overview of Global Assessment Report 2011

• coordinated by and with ISDR partners including UNEP, WMO, UNDP, the World Bank, WFP, FAO a wide range of specialized technical and academic institutions, regional intergovernmental organizations, NGOs, governments and many others.

Overview of Global Assessment Report 2011

• Organizations from Asia Pacific region are invited to contribute

Please contact:

Jerry Velasquez : velasquez@un.org or

Andrew Maskrey, Coordinator, Global Assessment Report : maskrey@un.org

Discussion points

• Clarification on the overall process

• Views and expectations of the national focal points

• Views and expectations of the key stakeholders