The Big PictureHumanitarian trendsPreparedness Trends     Findings                       Emergency                       P...
“Not all the solutions are within our [humanitarians] hands butperhaps we are best placed to ensure overall aid is targete...
The Big PictureHumanitarian trendsPreparedness Trends     FindingsRecommendations
The big numbersUS$16.7bnEstimated international humanitarian                                                Sudan         ...
Top 20 recipients of total official humanitarian assistance 2000-2009                                                     ...
The Big PictureHumanitarian trendsPreparedness Trends     FindingsRecommendations
Overall, humanitarian aid is          rising ... International humanitarian response, 2006-2010e                          ...
... and more donors are                participating  Saudi Arabia                                                 129    ...
But at the same time,          demand is also rising ...Funding requirements for UN consolidated appeals process (CAP) app...
... and so are costs         300         250         200         150         100          50           0               199...
Unmet needs in UN CAPappeals are creeping up again   Shares of needs met and unmet in UN CAP appeals, 2000-2010           ...
... which types of emergencies        will be funded ...  UN CAP appeals: requirements by type of emergency, 2000-2010    ...
US$m changes in bilateral humanitarian expenditure                                                                        ...
... or who will be mostaffected by their choicesConcentration of funding in top 3 and top 20 recipients, 2000-2009        ...
The Big PictureHumanitarian trendsPreparedness Trends     FindingsRecommendations
What are the needs?                      500                                                                              ...
And in which environments?100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10%  0%       2005          2006         2007            20...
Donor priority growing slowly...  20…                         5,414                                     3,286             ...
But not uniformly... Norway                                                                                               ...
The Big PictureHumanitarian trendsPreparedness Trends     FindingsRecommendations
The Definition• “The aim of emergency preparedness is to strengthen  local, national and global capacity to minimise loss ...
Guiding Principles•   In the news, all the time.•   Consensus on need.•   Transformative power.•   Linking humanitarian an...
Positives... Despite the system• HCTs find ways of using CAP for preparedness funding in  the absence of clear guidance.• ...
Overall• Data reporting structures and practices are weak.• Slowly growing funding in increasingly uncertain financing  en...
[              Detailed look at donors     Donor        Preparedness      Funding mechanism                 Emergency prep...
The Three Tensions and the      one major issues• 1) conflict and natural disaster• 2) local/national and institutional• 3...
The Big PictureHumanitarian trendsPreparedness Trends     FindingsRecommendations
The Evidence Base–   Forensic analysis of spending.–   Support ongoing initiatives to improve coding and reporting.–   Pro...
Enabling environment• Establish programme of engagement with donors.• Work with the GHD to develop policies/practices;  ex...
Need, Prioritisation and Risk• Conflict preparedness, both short- and long-term.• Comprehensive risk analysis that address...
Leadership, Champions, Role        Clarification – IASC and UNDG should resolve issues of mandate   and leadership, duplic...
Financing MechanismsExisting pooled fund mechanisms• Increase financing using existing funds: GFDRR• CHFs for national lea...
Financing Mechanisms IIRole of the CAP• Work to make CAP more strategic includes emergency  preparedness.• Take the steps ...
Phase II• Country-level work essential• All actors examined and partnerships developed• Forensic data examination• Data an...
The Big PictureHumanitarian trendsPreparedness Trends     Findings         Why is this                      important?Reco...
Preparedness expenditures  where it matters... are minimal    Indonesia (9)                                               ...
... And investments on tackling  vulnerability to risk are poor                             OECD DAC
... of all kinds...                                     2000                                                              ...
Humanitarian financing.   Clarity Counts.           Our aim is to provide access to reliable, transparent and           un...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Preparedness presentation nov 18th 2011

209

Published on

How much money is spent on emergency preparedness worldwide and what could be done to increase that funding to enable better resilience

Published in: Spiritual
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
209
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Humanitarian aid is risingPoint out GROWTH in Spain’s HA (now 5th largest donor).. Caveat with indicative fall in 2010 data..Huge growth (double) in HA to Palestine/OPT
  • P19 of report1. HA is volatile – but overall, the trend is upwards.2. Public and non-DACs contributions mainly captured following ‘big’ emergencies; 2008 food price crisis, 2010 haiti and PakistanAll figures for 2010 are preliminary estimates. Private contribution figures for 2006-08 are based on our own reserach of a study set of NGOs and UN delivery agencies. The figure for 2009 is an estimate. The figure for 2010 is a preliminary estimate.
  • P12 of reportNot a greater vol of money.. Greater mix, lowering entry criteria for non-trad donors, encouraging incrased participation P45... Pooled funds facilitate increase in number of donors without coordination challenges1. In 2010, 127 non-DAC donors reported to the FTS 2010 saw humanitarian aid from non-DAC donors (as reported to the FTS) increase by US$67.2 million to US$622.5 – mainly in response to Haiti and Pakistan.2. The top two donor governments contributing to the Haiti emergency response fund were non-DAC donors – Saudi Arabia, with US$50 million, and Brazil, with US$8 million. 3. eight of the ten governments making the largest contributions to this fund were non-DAC donors. Thirdly, India made the largest contribution to the Pakistan ERF, with US$20 million. This represents a move away from traditional bilateral government funding towards support for multilateral mechanisms that contribute towards improved coordinationBut in recent years, engagement in fundingmechanisms and UN processes (seeSection 1.3: ‘How does the funding getthere?”) has made the contributions fromother governments and private donorsmore visible.4. Different types of donor have differentpriorities. Countries which have seenincreased flows from both privatecontributions and other governmentsinclude Indonesia and Sri Lanka (inresponse to the Indian Ocean-earthquake/tsunami), Pakistan (South Asiaearthquake), Myanmar (Cyclone Nargis),Somalia, Palestine/OPT and Lebanon.
  • Funding requirements in UN appeals continues to grow and the gap in unmet needs has widened
  • P61Funding requirements in UN CAP appeals continues to grow and the gap in unmet needs has widened
  • ... For first time since 2003. and within that trend there are some big losers.. The biggest losers in 2010 were: CHAD CAR PALESTINE UGANDA
  • Some donors’ overall aid budgets have declined, while others have increased (in attempts to meet their 0.7% commitments). They might be chosing to prioritise development programmes over aid, or certain countries over others. It really is a mixed bag in terms of how financial crisis may have affected donors’ humanitarian aid budgets. Ones to watch of course are the BIG donors in terms of overall volume (US, UK, EU, Germany, NL, Spain etc) ... Though in terms of recipients, the smaller donors may chose to target the recipients that the big 5 don’t .. So this is something to watch.In fact, Spain has doubled its humanitarianaid contributions since 2000, rising fromfifteenth largest donor that year to becomethe fifth largest in 2009 (the latest year forwhich we have full final data for OECD DACmembers). Its share of total governmentcontributions has risen from 2.8% to 5.4%.Preliminary partial data (which does notinclude donors’ totally unearmarked funds– i.e. core contributions to UN agenciesor EU institutions), suggests that Spain’sexpenditure may have dipped in 2010, alongwith that of 12 other OECD DAC members.The Netherlands’ humanitarian expenditurecontracted for the second year in a row,as did that of Austria, Denmark, Greece,Korea and Portugal. Ireland’s humanitarianaid declined for the third consecutive year.However, overall, the dip in volumes fromthese donors is offset by large increasesin expenditure by the United States (up bysome US$400 million), Canada (by US$129million) and Japan (by US$275 million). Thisis likely to be attributable to expenditure inHaiti and Pakistan.
  • p44In order to guard against ..share of non top 20 has halved in last 10yrs. In fact, Spain has doubled its humanitarianaid contributions since 2000, rising fromfifteenth largest donor that year to becomethe fifth largest in 2009 (the latest year forwhich we have full final data for OECD DACmembers). Its share of total governmentcontributions has risen from 2.8% to 5.4%.Preliminary partial data (which does notinclude donors’ totally unearmarked funds– i.e. core contributions to UN agenciesor EU institutions), suggests that Spain’sexpenditure may have dipped in 2010, alongwith that of 12 other OECD DAC members.The Netherlands’ humanitarian expenditurecontracted for the second year in a row,as did that of Austria, Denmark, Greece,Korea and Portugal. Ireland’s humanitarianaid declined for the third consecutive year.However, overall, the dip in volumes fromthese donors is offset by large increasesin expenditure by the United States (up bysome US$400 million), Canada (by US$129million) and Japan (by US$275 million). Thisis likely to be attributable to expenditure inHaiti and Pakistan.
  • Preparedness presentation nov 18th 2011

    1. 1. The Big PictureHumanitarian trendsPreparedness Trends Findings Emergency Preparedness FinancingRecommendations Prepared for FAO on behalf of the IASC Presentation to OCHA, 18th November 2011, New York
    2. 2. “Not all the solutions are within our [humanitarians] hands butperhaps we are best placed to ensure overall aid is targetedcorrectly, because we are otherwise left with the failure of notdoing so.”Good Humanitarian Donorship (GHD) Donor“In many countries development funding is declining whilsthumanitarian funding is increasing at an alarming rate. Yet anumber of these countries are not receiving any preparednessfunding. How can this be addressed?”UN representative“Preparedness is essential - it saves lives; and it is more cost-effective than response.”Emergency Relief Coordinator – Valerie Amos
    3. 3. The Big PictureHumanitarian trendsPreparedness Trends FindingsRecommendations
    4. 4. The big numbersUS$16.7bnEstimated international humanitarian Sudan United States Largest recipient, US$1.4bn, 2009 Largest donor, US$4.4bn, 2009response, 2010 Top 10 recipients Top 10 donorsHumanitarian aid from governmentswent up to United States 4,376 Sudan 1,422US$12.4bn...(11.7) Palestine/OPT 1,303 EU Institutions 1,613the highest year on record Ethiopia 692 United Kingdom 1,024Private contributions are estimated to Afghanistan 634 Germany 727have reached Spain 632 Somalia 573US$4.3bn... (3.9) Congo, Dem. Rep. 567 Sweden 573 Pakistan 486 Netherlands 508Prompted by the ‘mega disasters’ in Iraq 468 France 406Haiti Pakistan and Kenya 400 Canada 396 US$3.6bn, US$2.9bn FTS Zimbabwe 393 Norway 375 OECD DAC
    5. 5. Top 20 recipients of total official humanitarian assistance 2000-2009 Sudan: 11.2% 2000-2009 OECD DAC
    6. 6. The Big PictureHumanitarian trendsPreparedness Trends FindingsRecommendations
    7. 7. Overall, humanitarian aid is rising ... International humanitarian response, 2006-2010e OECD DAC and OCHA FTS
    8. 8. ... and more donors are participating Saudi Arabia 129 Governments outside the OECD DACD Brazil contributing to the international response in 2010 Two largest donors to Haiti Emergency Response Fund (ERF), 2010 89 in 2009 93 in 2008 8 out of 10 71 in 2007Largest government donors to the Haiti ERF were not members of the OECD DAC 100 in 2005 Some financing aspects of humanitarian reform are bearing fruit ... ...allowing non-OECD DAC governments (as well as private donors) increased visibility and opportunities to participate OCHA FTS
    9. 9. But at the same time, demand is also rising ...Funding requirements for UN consolidated appeals process (CAP) appeals, 2000-2010 OCHA FTS
    10. 10. ... and so are costs 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 1992 1999 2006 Commodity Fuel (energy) Index - Monthly Price Commodity Food Price Index - Monthly Price Supply Demand (Humanitarian expenditure) (Humanitarian need) Escalating costs 2007-2011 Escalating vulnerabilityBudgetary constraints Food: 40% Increased demand Oil: 36% Food and energy price index
    11. 11. Unmet needs in UN CAPappeals are creeping up again Shares of needs met and unmet in UN CAP appeals, 2000-2010 30.2% OCHA FTS
    12. 12. ... which types of emergencies will be funded ... UN CAP appeals: requirements by type of emergency, 2000-2010 Winners: Flash, Haiti/Pakistan = 70% funded Losers: Consolidated, drop from 70% to 60% funded OCHA FTS
    13. 13. US$m changes in bilateral humanitarian expenditure 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Australia ... or how Austria Belgium 86.5 23.2 7.1 -12.2 -11.7 21.7 -70.4 -4.1 -4.3 134.7 27.7 27.1 23.4 -6.8 -6.2 -42.5 -12.9 52.1 donors will Canada Denmark Finland 39.1 176.7 51.2 -10.7 22.8 -29.9 66.9 16.0 -8.6 -33.7 129.2 -50.6 48.5 -6.5 27.6 -23.0 16.3 -4.4 prioritise France Germany 10.1 145.4 22.3 42.2 -19.2 -123.2 -14.4 6.2 16.3 72.8 16.5 -32.9 Greece 8.0 1.8 -9.5 3.3 -1.6 -9.6(declining?) aid Ireland Italy 30.0 -11.9 21.4 6.6 90.6 0.3 -18.1 28.3 -67.5 -3.2 -4.6 -68.0 Japan budgets ... -125.4 -378.1 -104.3 163.9 -20.1 275.2 Korea 10.6 -3.5 -6.6 8.2 -4.6 -2.6 Luxembourg -9.1 23.4 -12.2 0.3 5.8 9.6 Netherlands 216.9 -26.5 -106.1 36.3 -83.8 -72.7 New Zealand 34.8 -30.1 3.2 -1.8 -8.6 3.11 Humanitarian aid and development aid both go up Norway 209.2 -102.0 38.5 -35.3 -43.5 67.7 Portugal -6.7 -7.1 -7.5 0.4 -0.0 -0.62 Humanitarian aid and development aid both go down Spain 42.5 20.3 73.9 182.3 25.7 -64.53. Humanitarian aid rises but other aid falls Sweden 62.0 26.7 -21.2 38.4 36.5 -10.6 Switzerland 49.2 -21.6 -17.0 -28.8 -9.3 2.24. Humanitarian aid goes down but other aid rises United Kingdom 94.6 163.4 -338.3 160.4 145.5 -8.8 United States 906.0 -510.4 -120.5 1,333.8 -45.0 430.5 EU Institutions 225.8 193.5 -27.7 295.9 -345.8 83.6 Total 2,273.0 -525.7 -765.0 2,408.6 -346.1 684.5 Changes in bilateral humanitarian aid, 2007-2010 (does not include multilateral ODA contributions to UNHCR, UNRWA, WFP) Haiti/Pakistan OECD DAC
    14. 14. ... or who will be mostaffected by their choicesConcentration of funding in top 3 and top 20 recipients, 2000-2009 OECD DAC
    15. 15. The Big PictureHumanitarian trendsPreparedness Trends FindingsRecommendations
    16. 16. What are the needs? 500 700 Number of affected (millions) 450 600 400Number of disasters 350 500 300 400 250 200 300 150 200 100 100 50 0 0 2003 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Number of disasters Total number affected (millions)
    17. 17. And in which environments?100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Conflict-affected Non-conflict-affected (excluding China)
    18. 18. Donor priority growing slowly... 20… 5,414 3,286 455 20… 5,223 3,604 333 20… 4,672 2,247 99 20… 4,985 2,214 41 20… 6,731 2,612 70 20… 4,251 1,756 6 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Material relief assistance and services Emergency food aid Relief co-ordination; protection and support services Reconstruction relief and rehabilitation Disaster prevention and preparedness Preparedness funding US$ million Disaster prevention and preparedness 454.6 Other humanitarian funding 73.7 Development funding 130.2 Total 658.5
    19. 19. But not uniformly... Norway 22 EU 77 USA 59 UK 53 Japan 46Australia 28Germany 25Sweden 23 Canada 6Denmark 3Switzerl… 2 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Material relief assistance and services Emergency food aid Relief co-ordination; protection and support services Reconstruction relief and rehabilitation Disaster prevention and preparedness 2009
    20. 20. The Big PictureHumanitarian trendsPreparedness Trends FindingsRecommendations
    21. 21. The Definition• “The aim of emergency preparedness is to strengthen local, national and global capacity to minimise loss of life and livelihoods, to ensure effective response, to enable rapid recovery and increase resilience to all hazards (including conflict and epidemics).• This entails readiness measures (risk assessment, contingency planning, stockpiling of equipment and supplies, training, community drills and exercises) and institutional preparedness (coordination arrangements, early warning systems, public education) supported by legal and budgetary frameworks.”
    22. 22. Guiding Principles• In the news, all the time.• Consensus on need.• Transformative power.• Linking humanitarian and development.• Including conflict.• National actors to the fore.
    23. 23. Positives... Despite the system• HCTs find ways of using CAP for preparedness funding in the absence of clear guidance.• Humanitarian donors make preparedness a priority for development counterparts – work around funding silos.• Some financing mechanisms do fund preparedness activities of different types in different contexts.• Institutions formed both informal and formal relationships to improve preparedness, especially for disasters.• The Nepal Consortium is an example of how a well argued and articulated plan can garner both attention and funding.
    24. 24. Overall• Data reporting structures and practices are weak.• Slowly growing funding in increasingly uncertain financing environment• Donor structures and policies are very variable and almost always inadequate.• Financing mechanisms currently inadequate and do not fund enough.• Little prioritisation and little analysis of all risks.• CAP has potential but is not at all a comprehensive solution.• Examples of best practice at country level are not used.• Considerable structural issues in the system, globally and at country level.
    25. 25. [ Detailed look at donors Donor Preparedness Funding mechanism Emergency preparedness policy definition Own Adopted Hum. Dev. Other Integrated Nat. Conflict Pandemic Aid Aid All Risk Policy Disaster HFA ISDRCanada X Y Y Y Y X X Y Y YUSA** Y Y Y Y Y Y X Y Y YJapan X Y Y Y Y X X Y X* XUnited Kingdom X Y Y Y Y X X Y X* YGermany X Y Y Y Y Y X Y X* YEuropean Union X Y Y Y X X X Y X* XSwitzerland X Y Y Y X X X Y X* XSweden X Y Y Y X X X Y X* XAustralia X Y Y Y Y X X Y X* YDenmark X Y Y Y Y X X Y X* XNorway X Y Y Y X X X Y X* Y Bifurcated donor structures dominate preparedness articulation and funding.
    26. 26. The Three Tensions and the one major issues• 1) conflict and natural disaster• 2) local/national and institutional• 3) short-term preparedness and long-term risk reduction. • Joining all these together into a single question and answer.
    27. 27. The Big PictureHumanitarian trendsPreparedness Trends FindingsRecommendations
    28. 28. The Evidence Base– Forensic analysis of spending.– Support ongoing initiatives to improve coding and reporting.– Promote introduction of a marker in databases.– Track preparedness within all CAP appeals.– Advocate for much better preparedness reporting by all actors (visibility) and all methods. – This work will help detail what is meant by conflict preparedness, working towards a clear consensus.
    29. 29. Enabling environment• Establish programme of engagement with donors.• Work with the GHD to develop policies/practices; examples: large-scale multi-country crisis, developing principles, combating bifurcation, encourage multi-year funding.• Widen partnerships, especially beyond humanitarians.• Communicate relevance, evidence, benefits of improved financing to all, including beyond IASC.• Donors undertake policy work on conflict preparedness
    30. 30. Need, Prioritisation and Risk• Conflict preparedness, both short- and long-term.• Comprehensive risk analysis that addresses multi- hazards• Use prioritisation to bridge the aid divide.• Analyse first those countries most in need, not those easiest to fund.• Include likely scenarios/trends: food prices, urbanisation, scarcity, climate change.
    31. 31. Leadership, Champions, Role Clarification – IASC and UNDG should resolve issues of mandate and leadership, duplications and gaps. – National ownership and conflict scenarios. – Clearer leadership on preparedness amongst the donor community and constituencies such as G20 and GHD. – Single institution responsible for articulating, presenting, and developing policy within the CAP.
    32. 32. Financing MechanismsExisting pooled fund mechanisms• Increase financing using existing funds: GFDRR• CHFs for national leadership.• Expand ERFs to include preparedness & country number.• Consider expansion of CERF.Vertical fund• Consider added value in context of challenge presented by combining disaster/conflict, and divide between humanitarian and development assistance.
    33. 33. Financing Mechanisms IIRole of the CAP• Work to make CAP more strategic includes emergency preparedness.• Take the steps to make emergency preparedness a specific element within the CAP.• Assess the possibility of a marker for tracking levels of preparedness funding within individual projects.Quality of Activities:• Investigate how good current activities are and what can be improved.
    34. 34. Phase II• Country-level work essential• All actors examined and partnerships developed• Forensic data examination• Data and reporting advocacy• Risk analysis and prioritisation• Financing mechanisms investigated• Advocacy and engagement with those can make decisions• Improvement of the preparedness system • Bifurcated donor structures undermine attempts to move forward.
    35. 35. The Big PictureHumanitarian trendsPreparedness Trends Findings Why is this important?Recommendations
    36. 36. Preparedness expenditures where it matters... are minimal Indonesia (9) 30.0 Afghanistan (8) 11.9 1,454 Pakistan (8) 15.6 DRC (7) 11.4 1,996 Sudan (6) 3.6 Uganda (6) 8.8 Ethiopia (6) 16.5 2,585 Average (5.5) 9.3 Serbia (5) 0.3 Chad (5) 0.5 Lebanon (5) 0.6 Liberia (5) 0.7 Somalia (5) 3.5 Zimbabwe (5) 4.2 Burundi (5) 5.5 Kenya (5) 11.1 Sri Lanka (5) 11.6 Iraq (5) 47.4 1,602 Angola (4) 0.5 Jordan (3) 0.2Palestine/OPT (2) 1.9 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 US$ million Reconstruction relief and rehabilitation Disaster prevention and preparedness Total remaining humanitarian OECD DAC 2005-2009
    37. 37. ... And investments on tackling vulnerability to risk are poor OECD DAC
    38. 38. ... of all kinds... 2000 16% 1800 13% 14% 13%US$ million (constant 2009 prices) 1600 12% 1400 10% 1200 10% 8% 1000 8% 6% 7% 800 6% 4% 4% 4% 4% 600 4% 4% 400 2% 2% 2% 1% 200 1% 1% 1% 2% 0% 0% 0 0% Child soldiers (prevention and demobilisation) Civilian peace-building, conflict prevention and resolution Land mine clearance Post-conflict peace building (un) Reintegration and salw control Security system management and reform % of ODA
    39. 39. Humanitarian financing. Clarity Counts. Our aim is to provide access to reliable, transparent and understandable information so that we can all work to ensure better outcomes for people affected by humanitarian crises. Global Humanitarian Assistance is a Development Initiatives programme, funded by the governments of Canada, Denmark, the Netherlands, Sweden and the United Kingdom Name: Lisa Walmsley Email: lisa@devinit.org Tel: +44 (0)1749 671343 Web: globalhumanitarianassistance.org Global Humanitarian Assistance, Development Initiatives, Keward Court, Jocelyn Drive, Wells, Somerset, BA5 1DB, UK
    1. A particular slide catching your eye?

      Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

    ×