Sarriot Climate Change
•Download as PPT, PDF•
1 like•496 views
CORE Group Fall Meeting 2010. Climate Change and Food Security: Implications for Sustaining Community Health. - Ilona Varallyay, Jennifer Yourkavitch, and Eric Sarriot, CEDARS
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (8)
Similar to Sarriot Climate Change
Similar to Sarriot Climate Change (20)
More from CORE Group
More from CORE Group (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Sarriot Climate Change
- 1. CLIMATE CHANGE AND FOOD SECURITY: IMPLICATIONS FOR SUSTAINING COMMUNITY HEALTH MODERATED BY ILONA VARALLYAY, JENNIFER YOURKAVITCH, AND ERIC SARRIOT Wednesday, September 15 th CORE Fall Meeting 2010
- 2. CEDARS | ICF Macro www.cedarscenter.com “ The Center for Design and Research in Sustainability (CEDARS) pursues excellence in planning and measuring sustainability in health and social development initiatives. We are committed to learning from praxis through evaluation to inform ongoing debates about global health and the expanding challenges of community health for vulnerable groups in a globalized and changing world.” Part I: An Introduction to CEDARS
- 5. PART 2: RESOURCES FOR SUSTAINABILITY PLANNING IN CHILD SURVIVAL PROJECTS CEDARS | ICF Macro www.cedarscenter.com
- 8. CEDARS Center | ICF Macro
- 10. CEDARS Center | ICF Macro
- 12. CEDARS Center | ICF Macro
- 15. Potential Impact of 3 Types of Climate Change Scenarios Climate Change Scenario Potential Health/Food Security and Other Impacts 1. Progressive climate change (e.g., shifts in mean temperatures and rainfall amounts, changes in lengths of growing seasons) Probability profile: Irregular (high variability) over short term; incrementally significant over long term. a. Loss of coastal habitats reduce some food production activities. b. Increased rainfall variability leads to decrease in water resources in some locations and decreases irrigation potential with reduced food production. c. Increasing temperatures in many locations lead to more demand for water for irrigation, thus leading to lower yields. d. Mitigation efforts drive up input costs, reducing agricultural productivity. e. Change in range of infectious disease vectors. f. Increase in respiratory illness due to changes in air quality. g. Increased conflict due to resource competition h. Increasing temperatures lead to heat stress on animal and fish stocks, reducing fertility and increasing mortality. 2. Extreme events (e.g., floods, destructive wind storms, droughts, climate induced fires) Probability profile: Already observable; increased frequency expected. Likely for certain geographic profiles (lower elevation coastal areas, etc.). a. Heat-related deaths (heat wave). b. Deaths and injury (flood, fire, storms). c. Spread of infectious disease post-event (flood). d. Spread of pests reducing food production (flood following drought). e. Loss of cultivable land (flood/drought). f. Loss of water resources (drought). g. Heat-related stresses reduce cattle reproduction and increase deaths. 3. Threshold events or tipping points (e.g., negative synergies with multi-system failures) Probability profile: Unpredictable—High Impact a. Epidemics (cattle or human). b. Crop failure (large scale). c. Broad ecosystem collapse (leading to uninhabitable zones). d. Economic crash due to systemic and multi-system spiraling effects. e. Massive out-migration from affected zones. f. Conflict (violence) due to migration and resource scarcity.
- 24. What Community Approaches Can Do CEDARS Center | ICF Macro
- 32. The preceding slides were presented at the CORE Group 2010 Fall Meeting Washington, DC To see similar presentations, please visit: www.coregroup.org/resources/meetingreports
Editor's Notes
- SHOUT has been contributing to tools and manuals; implementing studies and publishing work; and providing technical assistance in planning and measurement for sustainable health. Its discussion forums are accessible to all who register on CEDARS. ( We’ve currently opened a discussion on building social capital as necessary to both achieve sustainable health gains and advance adaptation to climate change in developing countries. We’d be excited to have you join this conversation. )
- which affect the sustainability of any hard earned health gains The Sustainability Framework has been adapted by a number of NGO partners for use with their health development projects around the world. Experiences from Child Survival Technical Support Projects: In 2000-2001, with support from USAID, the CSTS project worked with the CORE Group to carry out a study called the Sustainability Initiative. Plan Kenya Child Survival- KIDCARE (2004-2009) in kilifi District. 1) Development of a community based health system with strong links to MoH service providers, and 2) Design and implementation of the IMCI approach at the facility and community levels.
- Theoretical Framework Elements: Component 1: Health outcomes Component 2: Health service provision Component 3: MOH district capacity and viability Component 4: Main local NGO capacity and viability Component 5: Community capacity Component 6: Enabling environment 1. Health Policy and Government Commitment to Health 2. Governance and Civil Stability ( disruption of civil stability because of war or insurrection, there is likely to be disruption of services, strains in social networks, and even physical displacement of people.) 3. Human Development (Large swings in the economic and development landscape can make for shifting priorities among organizations and individuals that may threaten health gains); UNDP—the Human Development Index (HDI) 4. Women’s Empowerment (The role of women is critical in population health gains, as women are the main caregivers to themselves and their family members. Values related to women; their decision making authority and power within the household to effect positive change for health; linked to level of education and literacy. 5. Natural Environmental Factors (natural disasters ; profile of vulnerabilities will vary from location to location. ANNEX 2:Project Management Toolbox 89 Annex 2.1: Project Planner’s Sustainability Checklist 91 Annex 2.2: Definition of Local System; Planning for Nature and Level of Involvement of Local Stakeholders 97 Annex 2.3: Facilitating an Exercise to Develop a Local System Vision and Sustainability Scenario 101 Annex 2.4: Facilitating a Participatory Detailed Project Planning Workshop with Local Stakeholders 107 Annex 2.5: Pro-Sustainability Results Framework: A suggested format for integrating pro-Sustainability thinking into a project’s Results Framework 115 Annex 2.6: Methodological Notes for Basing an Evaluation on the SF 119 ANNEX 3: Sustainability Framework Measurement Toolbox 139 This annex presents and/or links to suggested tools to measure progress in each of the six components of the Sustainability Framework.
- You need to register to contribute—it’s fast and easy CIF: discussion about ideas; moves toward consensus; may result in publications or presentations Link to forums at bottom of SHOUT page
- Pro-Sustainability Choices and Child Deaths Averted Health Policy and Planning publication: Based on benchmarks from the child survival project of Save the Children US in Guinea, this paper assesses the expected impact of translating pro-sustainability choices into investment strategies, as a basis for further thinking and empirical testing. Examples of uses of SF: Experiences from Child Survival Technical Support Projects (see “Projects” tab on website) Cross-sectional assessment of progress toward sustainable mother and child health at the district level for USAID in Nepal Five year post-project sustainability assessment on urban health project in Bangladesh