Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) into sectoral policies. © FAO: http://www.fao.org

1. Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR)
into sectoral policies
Governance issues for policy development and implementation
Lessons learned from the Philippines
input to
TOT Workshop 21-25 September, Bangkok
Pro-Poor Policy Approaches to Address Risk and Vulnerability
at country level
by Stephan Baas FAOHQs

2. Presentation objective is to share a case study on DRR
mainstreaming into sectoral policies and discuss governance
issues that crucially influenced the mainstreaming process
 existing institutional settings and structures
 decentralization
 Participatory, and inclusive policy planning across institutional level
 vertical and horizontal interaction (interface of policy processes and
technical evidence )
 Coordination; Integration

3. Presentation Structure
 Overall context : why is DRR mainstreaming
important
• The DRR/ FNS nexus
• What is at stake in agriculture ?
• Entry points for DRR mainstreaming
 Philippines case example
• What do we do
• Governance issues/processes
• Lessons regarding policy processes
 Emerging key issue for discussion
• Integration/linking between different policy
agendas - DRR and CCA

4. COUNTRIES WITH HIGH PREVALENCE OF UNDERNOURISHMENT
AND HIGH VULNERABILITY
TO NATURAL HAZARD AND CLIMATE CHANGE
Basic Map: Prevalence of undernourishment in the population (percent) in 2012-2014

5. Damage and Loss to Agriculture based on PDNAs (2003-2013)
percentage share of damage and loss to agriculture, by hazard type
Overall, Droughts and floods
together cause 74% of total
damage and losses on
agriculture.
-
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Floods Storms Earthquakes Tsunamis Droughts
37
21
2
3
37
percent
FAO (2015): The Impact of Natural Hazards and Disasters on Agriculture and Food and
Nutrition Security. A Call for Action to build Resilient Livelihoods.
AGRICULTURE ABSORBS 22%
OF ALL LOSS AND DAMAGES

6. Average percentage share of damage and loss within subsectors,
by type of hazard
6
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
crops livestock forestry fisheries
23
3
89
16
60
8 5 10
15
86
0 32 0
3
70
1
2 3
0
percent
storms
floods
droughts
tsunamis
earthquakes
Disaster Damage and Loss in Agriculture is
proposed as indicator in SFDDR and SDG 1, 2, 13

7. Agricultural production losses in selected Asian Countries affected by
large scale disasters
• Countries included: Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, Lao ,Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri
Lanka, Thailand, and Vietnam
• Includes natural hazards affecting > 250,000 people : 2 Droughts; 3 Earthquakes; 21 Floods; 8 Tropical
storms (total 34 disasters)
• Comparing production in year and year after disaster with 3-year average prior to disaster; production
losses (tons) translated into monetary value using national producer prices/ton.
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
Cereals and Pulses Top 20 Commodities
8,962
1,587
Source: FAOSTAT (Production Quantity and Commodity Prices)
2003-2013 losses in million US$)
Floods account for 86% of losses

8. Entry point to DRR mainstreaming:
International policy agendas provide frameworks for
national DRR policies:
Hyogo Framework for
Action 2005 -2015
Sendai Framework for
Disaster Risk Reduction
2015-2030
Bali Roadmap (adaptation)
Climate Change Agreement
envisaged 2015 under UN
Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC),
MDGs
Sustainable
Development Goals,
2015-2030;
Challenge:
DRR was no
mainstream
topic for
AG sector
yet in most
developing
countries,
lacking
evidence
on value
addition in
circles of
policy
makers
Since SFDRR endorsement 2015 the important role of sectoral actors to
prevent and mitigate impacts from shocks and disaster, and to build resilience
has been clearly articulated into global development policy frameworks
New challenge: How to respond to and integrate/link different policy agendas from a
sectoral perspective

9. Philippines case study

10. The NDRRM Council is guided by the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management
Framework (NDRRMF), which envisions a “safer, adaptive and disaster-resilient Filipino
communities toward sustainable development” (Figure below).
National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management policy
context Philippines

11. Three subsequent Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) projects implemented by the
Government of the Philippines with technical guidance from FAO included process
based DRR policy planning and mainstreaming in agriculture
May 2009 – Dec 2011 July 2012 – Dec 2013 July 2014 – Dec 2015
Strengthening
capacities for climate
risk management and
disaster preparedness
in Bicol region
Consolidating capacities for
DRR in Agriculture in South
East Asia (Cambodia, Lao
PDR, Philippines, DPRK)
’]
Enhancing capacities
for DRR in Agriculture
in Cambodia and the
Philippines
Precondition: Operational Framework for policy process
Challenge:
usually
short term
projects
Insufficient
time for
policy
processes
in stand
alone
projects
Creating a programmatic long term framework

12. Philippines: Context what we do on DRR and Resilience; Overview
Increased resilience
of livelihoods to
shocks
APPLY PREVENTION AND
MITIGATION MEASURES:
WATCH TO SAFEGUARD:
ENABLE THE
ENVIRONMENT:
PREPARE and RESPOND:
In following part of presentation focus is only on the DRR mainstreaming into sectoral policies

13. • Understanding the risk and need
• Understanding and use of existing institutional
environment and capacities (what is already in place?)
• Know how , availability of and access to good practices
and technology options for DRR (evidence to make
policies “tangible” at all levels)
• Synergies and complementarity with other policy
development agendas
Key elements for mainstreaming DRR into AG sector
policies and programmes

14. Natural hazard occurrence in the Philippines 1980-2010
Source: "EM-DAT: The OFDA/CRED International Disaster
Database
Detailed Understanding the hazard risk
Basis for any sectoral policy development on DRR
Drought , 2.2%
Earthquake, 3.7%
Flood, 28.9%
Storm, 60.6%
Volcano, 4.3% Wilfire, 0.3%

15. Country example Philippines
Agricultural Losses by year and sub-sector
National data (DA)
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Billions
Infrastructure
Fisheries
Livestock
Crops
• Between 2006-2013 total losses in the AG sectorS were 4.1 billion USD; of these losses,
3.6 billion USD occurred in the crops sub-sector
• In 2013, alone, total AG sectors losses were more than 900 million USD

16. • The regions most impacted were region 2 (Cagayan Valley) with 1.35 million Ha
affected, region 3 (Central Luzon) and region 5 (Bicol Region).
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4A Region 4B Region 5 Region 6 Region 7 Region 8 Region 9 Region 10 Region 11 Region 12 Region 13 CAR ARMM
330
1354
1256
247
217
1082
384
61
530
35
55
131
39
6
303
50
‘000Hectares
)
Areas of crops affected (‘000 Ha) by region, Philippines (2006-2013

17. 365
488
738
107
94
260
306
62
492
18
71
574
25
10 0.1
18
173
16
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4A Region 4B Region 5 Region 6 Region 7 Region 8 Region 9 Region 10 Region 11 Region 12 Region 13 Region 15 ARMM CAR CARAGA
US$Millions
• There are significant differences between crop ha losses and US$ value loss
Region 3 has been the most affected by natural hazards during the period of
2006-2013, followed by region 11, 8 and 2.
• Climate change is expected to massively alter the situation southwards
Agricultural damage & losses by region in US$ millions,
Philippines (2006-2013)

18. Strengths for DRR
mainstreaming into
agriculture sector policies
& plans
• National strategy , policies and overall legal frameworks for DRR/M exist
• High level of awareness of people and policy makers on importance of
DRR exists.
• Emergency response system well established ; tasks for sectors defined;
calamity funds at all levels exist
Governance bottlenecks
for DRR mainstreaming
• Sectoral DRR/M policies and plans did not exist;
• Information flow for policy and/or decision making from the bottom-up and vice
versa,
• Sectoral integration of strongly related but nevertheless different policy processes,
with different stakeholder groups supporting differing policy agendas, e.g. the
integration and link between DRR/M and climate change adaptation, and
• Up-scaling of good practices for DRR/M (e.g. farming practices, climate information
services or methodologies for the assessment of losses and damages) for building
resilience at scale.
Starting point for DRR mainstreaming process in
agriculture (institutional context)

19. NationallevelRegionallevelLocallevel
Provincial AG office
Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction and Management (DRR/M) in Agriculture in the Philippines
Key governance issue: Translating policies into local action
Local Government Units (LGU)
Barangays, farmers, farmer groups
Municipal AG officer
Policy/institutional
environment for DRR
Climate Change Act
2009;
 Strategic National
Action Plan 2009-2019
 Philippine DRR/M Act
2010;
 National Framework
Strategy on Climate
Change 2010-2022
 Philippine
Development Plan 2011-
2016 Midterm Update
 National Climate
Change Action Plan 2011-
2028;
 National DRR/M Plan
2011-2028
Policy/institutional
environment for DRR
 Community-based
DRR/M plans
AG extension system
Department of Agriculture
Regional Field Unit V DA/RFU V
(Technical Unit for DRR/CCA)
Climate and agro-
meteorological
services (PAGASA)
Department of
Agriculture
Climate Change
Commission
MoU/partnerships
Mutual cooperation
Information exchange
Enhanced
climate + agro-
meteorological
services
Design and endorsement of
CCA and DRR/M policies
Link DRR +
CCA/ensure policy
coherence
Overlapping
mandates and
account-ability
Integration of
CCA and DRR
planning and
GPO replication
at municipal and
barangay level
Integration,coherence,flowofinformation
Other
stakeholders
Social mobilization
process/ownership
Outreach and
adoption
Other
stakeholders
Universities, AG
research institutes
Validation,
documentation +
replication of lessons
learnt and Good
Practice Options (GPO)
National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management
Council (DND, DILG, DSWD, DOST, NEDA, DA, DENR, DAR)
Office of Civil
Defense (OCD)
Regional Disaster
Risk Reduction and
Management Council
Municipal Disaster
Risk Reduction and
Management
Council
Barangay Disaster
Risk Reduction and
Management
Council
Integration,coherence,flowofinformation
Advise for, knowledge
transfer, replication in and
cooperation with other regions
KEY
Governance challenges and
bottlenecks
Opportunities, products,
incentives

20. Success factors: Policy process with ”concrete” products
Challenge:
Linking/
feeding
policy
process
with
results
from
bottom
up
planning
Create
evidence
for policy
makers
Outcome : Two regional and 30 municipality-based action plans for DRR/M in
agriculture (all formally endorsed) provided evidence of value added for overarching
national strategy for DRR/M in agriculture (currently under finalization)
Establishment of regional and community-based plans for DRR/M in agriculture
TCP project DIPECHO I project DIPECHO II project
a) Regional plan of
action for DRR in
agriculture
Identified specific needs
for sectoral planning for
DRRM
In Bicol region formally
endorsed by RFU 5 DA in
2013
In Caraga region 2015
(currently under
development)
b) Integrated
community-based
DRR/M action plans
for agriculture
For 9 barangays in 3
municipalities in Bicol.
For 24 barangays in 10
municipalities in Bicol.
For 10 municipalities in
Bicol and 7 municipalities
in Caraga)
c) National strategy for
DRR/M in agriculture
Facilitation support and
technical advice with DA
Central Office in the lead

21. Overarching institutional and policy environment;
 Global DRR agenda to refer to and existence and overall national DRR/M
policies and of legislation
Ownership & trust as basis to facilitate policy processes
 Continuity and consistency through iterative consultation process to
effectively take into account evolving governance/socio-institutional
contexts/conditions, thus creating ownership of key stakeholders
• working strictly through national/regional/local leadership and
encouraging a culture of ‘counter-partnering’ ;
Catalysing formalized collaboration
 “MoU” between/among national key actors to spur mutual cooperation,
information exchange, and capacity development activities between
different stakeholders
Success factors perceived as helpful to address governance challenges:

22. Communication and knowledge management
 enhancing critical mass and voicing platform though close collaboration and pooled
messaging between various projects (TCP AMICAF UNJPJ and DIPECHO);
 catalysing expression of concrete demands at various levels to inform decision
makers to underline importance of topic and trigger support; and
 providing learning platforms across levels, regions and agricultural extension contexts
(regular learning/exchange workshops with decision makers; leveraging on existing
extension programmes (e.g. FFS), use of PAR approaches);
Success factors perceived as helpful to address governance challenges:

23. Linking governance processes with “tangible” technical products/delivery:
 creating evidence-based, field-tested products/outputs perceived as value added
promoting “locally visible” incentives/value added to inform and support governance
processes, e.g. through enhanced climate and agro-meteorological services, validated and
documented lessons learnt and Good Practice Options ; improved PDNA methodology;
Enhancing political commitment
 Proactively informing on linkages between national/local/sectoral processes and “global”
commitments and agendas (e.g. HFA) thus highlighting importance of local/regional
processes in wider contexts
 Get agricultural sector players stronger involved into DRR and CC international discussion
Success factors perceived as helpful to address governance challenges:
Rice production trends

24. DRR/M within wider policy context :
Linking DRR / CCA and poverty alleviation
Patterns/drivers of vulnerability to natural hazards

25. DRR/M within wider policy context:
Linking DRR/CCA and poverty alleviation
.
Ref: IPPC SREX report

26. DRR- CCA interfaces relevant for policy development
Climate change induces three dimensions of change
for sustainable agriculture, food security & nutrition:
 gradual changes (slow on setting increase of average temperatures,
change in rainfall patterns, sea level rise, etc) which are less visible
yet, but with possibly massive longer term impact on the
sustainability of agro-ecosystems; (CCA long term planning)
 the increasing variability and uncertainty of current weather patterns;
and (sustainable agricultural production)
 the increased occurrence of climate extreme events which have high
impact and create emergencies with losses of lives, livelihoods and
substantial economic damage and losses. (DRR)
Hand over to WS and group discussion: How to embed DRR and CCA, and
possibly both together into Agriculture and AA policy development ??