HFA Reporting Framework And Monitor

Reviewing Progress in HFA implementation ISDR Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction

Outline

Why HFA Monitoring and Reviewing?

2. Levels: national, regional

and global; Areas: Thematic

3. Mechanisms and review tools

4. Timeframe and responsibilities

Rationale for HFA Progress Reviews

HFA identifies monitoring, reviewing and reporting responsibilities for states, regional and international organisations

Reporting and analysis of progress is essential to planning and work-programming

Consolidating political and economic commitment

Levels of Reporting

Territorial Dimension:

National; sub-regional and regional reporting

Thematic Dimension:

Reporting on sectors or cross-cutting issues from a global perspective

Global Dimension:

ISDR Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction

National level arrangements

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

Broad, inclusive consultation across government and other stakeholders, using where appropriate national platform mechanisms

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

Supportive of national processes and feeds into national level DRR planning

Facilitated and supported by UNCT and technical agencies, as relevant.

Sub /regional level arrangements

Inter-governmental sub-regional and regional organisations are responsible, where possible

Convene, coordinate and compile country level reporting across sub-region / region

Overview of trans-boundary issues and progress

Sub-regional / regional reports inform joint planning and work-programming

Backstopped and supported by ISDR Regional Office and relevant technical agencies and partners

Regional progress so far …

Asia – SAARC, ASEAN ( Bangkok, February 13 – 15 2008)

Pacific – SOPAC (Fiji, March 27, 2008)

Latin America and Caribbean - CEPREDENAC, CDERA, CAPRADE/PREDECAN, OEA, ACS (Panama, February 5 – 7, 2008 )

Africa – African Union ( Dakar, April 2 – 4, 2008)

Europe – Council of Europe, Network of Europe (Geneva, February 7, 2008)

Thematic Progress Reviews

Responsibilities for thematic reviews: at regional (sub/regional institutions), and international level (technical agencies)

Areas are identified by the Hyogo Framework , areas covered by the existing ‘thematic platforms’ of the ISDR system, and additional areas highlighted by 2007 Global Review

Assess key trends in progress and challenges: presented in standard template format.

Institutional commitments so far… Environmental risk management Climate change adaptation UNEP UNDP/ WMO/ WB/ UNEP 4 Risk Identification Early Warning GRIP WMO 2 Local level capacities IFRC 1 5 3 HFA Priorities Recovery and reconstruction WB/ IRP Education for disaster risk reduction Knowledge and Education Platform Thematic Reviews Organisation

Global level outputs

ISDR Secretariat and partners produce biennial ISDR system Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction beginning 2009

Report analyses all national, sub-regional /regional and thematic reports with key conclusions and recommendations

Includes a global risk update and a central focus on links between disaster risks and poverty trends

Informs 2009 Global Platform on DRR and establishes priorities for ISDR joint global work-plan

Global Risk Update

HAZARD UPDATES : flood, cyclone, tsunami, landslide, drought, earthquakes.

PRODUCTS : range of indicators on disaster risk and vulnerability (Human disaster risk index, economic disaster risk index, sub national mortality and economic loss risk, disaster deficit index, amongst others) and key trends analysis to be conducted

DISASTER RISK PLATFORM : online platform to visualise data, create maps and test scenarios using interactive tools for data analysis

PARTNERS : UNDP-GRIP,World Bank, UNEP, WMO, Colombia University, Norwegian Geotechnical Organisation, UNESCO

Disaster Risk – Poverty Analysis

Extensive risk analysis (from disaster loss data): locations across Asia and LAC

Issue papers : urban – IIED, rural – IDS

Extensive risk- poverty analysis (from poverty/ human development datasets): across Asia, LAC and Africa case studies

Practice Reviews : 5 major areas (climate change adaptation, sustainable livelihoods, risk insurance and social protection, environment, and CBDRM).

Mechanism for national online reporting

HFA indicators and benchmarks: provide baselines from HFA, Indicators of Progress guide

HFA Monitor: enable comparative analysis across regions and years

Annual reporting, Biennial analysis: first reporting invited April – July 2008

In-depth country case studies :

2 – 3 countries per region (March - July 2008)

Supportive of national processes

Login opt#1 Policy National Plans Login to manage HFA progress reports and plans

HFA progress reporting Please c hoose your preferred language for reporting: > France Welcome Ivan Dommy Note: you will not be able to change the language settings once reporting begins Welcome, you have logged in for the first time

HFA progress reporting

5 steps to monitor your progress on implementation of the Hyogo Frame work for Action (HFA )

Strategic goals- Provide a contextual ‘strategic goal’ statement that captures ‘current priorities’ for each strategic goal of the HFA .

Priorities for Action- Assess progress made on the ‘core indicators’ set against each priority for action . P rovide specific evidence of efforts made towards achieving the priorities indicated which relates to the HFA priority

Match the evidence for the core indicators with the strategic goals.

Drivers of progress- E mphasize areas or specific issues which have been considered an important means to achieve progress at the level of priorities for action and outcomes. Efforts will be made to align the drivers with MDG goals.