1

Strasbourg, 20 June 2007AP/CAT (2007) 18

Or. E

Meeting of European National Platforms and HFA Focal Points for Disaster Risk Reduction

Strasbourg, 7 May 2007

hosted by the Council of Europe

(EUR-OPA Major Hazards Agreement)

Draft

Meeting Report

Table of content:

  1. Context
  2. Date, venue Conveners
  3. Meeting Objectives
  4. Participation
  5. Proceedings
  6. Outcome of the Meeting
  7. Closure of the Meeting and next Steps

Appendix 1 – List of Participants

Annexes: Presentation, material distributed etc

  1. Context

National Platforms (NP) for disaster risk reduction were an integral part of the International Decade for Natural Disaster risk reduction (IDNDR), where they proved to be effective partners within the international structure. After phasing out of IDNDR they took the same crucial position within its successor arrangement, the International Strategy for Disaster risk reduction (ISDR). Therefore NPs continue to be the pillars of the international initiatives to reduce the negative impacts of hazards at the national level. This important role of NPs is also recognized by the United Nations Secretary-General, who recommended in his report to the General Assembly in 1999: “Given the success of national committees and focal points for the Decade in a large number of countries, the Secretary General strongly encourages all Governments to take the necessary measures to implement this appeal.” (see Secretary General’s Report to the UNGA A/54/497, 1999, para. 32).

Subsequently, at the 2005 World Conference on Disaster Reduction, 168 Governments adopted the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters (HFA). One of the HFA’s strategic goals is “the development and strengthening of institutions, mechanisms and capacities to build resilience to hazards”. It calls on all nations to “support the creation and strengthening of national integrated mechanisms such as multi-sectoral National Platforms” to ensure that DRR is a national and a local priority.

Disaster risk is increasingly global in character. Due to factors such as climate change and economic globalization, actions in one region may have an impact on risk of hazards in another, and vice versa. This, compounded by growing vulnerability as a result of unplanned urbanization, under-development and competition for scarce resources, points to a future where disasters will increasingly threaten the world’s economy and population.

Europe is a hazard prone region as well as a major international player in the different sectors of development aid and humanitarian assistance, as well as research and other sectors provided by its member states and the European Commission.

  1. Date, Venue and conveners

UN/ISDR secretariat and the Council of Europe (European and Mediterranean Major Hazards Agreement) invited representatives of National Platforms and/or Focal Points for disaster risk reduction to a meeting on 7 May 2007 in Strasbourg. The meeting was hosted by the Council of Europe and took place in its premises.

  1. Meeting Objectives
  • To present the outcome of the collaborative initiative between UN/ISDR secretariat and the German Committee for Disaster Reduction (DKKV), draft proposal, in which both organizations have collected information, undertaken a survey and developed a strategic view on how the European Platform can collaborate and strengthen their role and capacities;
  • Discuss and share information on progress in the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action;
  • Prepare for the first session of the Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction, 5-7 June, Geneva
  1. Participation
    See list of participants in Appendix 1
  1. Proceedings

DKKV served as rapporteur for the meeting.

During the course of the workshop three working groups were formed to discuss different sets of questions. Each of the working groups (WG) elected a rapporteur, who presented the outcome to the group discussion in the plenary and provided a short summary in writing to be attached to the final workshop report..

WG 1: (France, Monaco, UK, Turkey, Council of Europe, European Commission, and UN/ISDR) rapporteur: Steve Barnes, UK

WG 2: (European Commission, Italy, Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland) rapporteur: Petter Nuland, Norway

WG 3 (Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Slovenia, Council of Europe and Germany) rapporteur: Gerd Tetzlaff, Germany

The discussions in the working groups followed a proposed set of questions.

5.1 Welcome remarks:

Ms. Helena Molin-Valdes, Deputy Director of UN/ISDR secretariat in Geneva welcomed the participants on behalf of UN/ISDR. In her opening speech she underlined the objectives of the meeting:

  • to present the outcome of the collaborative initiative between UN/ISDR secretariat and the German Committee for Disaster Reduction (DKKV), draft proposal, in which both organizations have collected information, undertaken a survey and developed a strategic view on how the European Platform can collaborate and strengthen their role and capacities;
  • discuss and share information on progress in the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action;
  • prepare for the first session of the Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction, 5-7 June, Geneva

Thereafter Eladio Fernández-Galiano, Executive Secretary, EUR-OPA Major Hazards Agreement of the Council of Europe, as co-organiser and host of the meeting, welcomed the participants to the premises of the Council of Europe. He gave a short overview on the history of the Council of Europe which was founded more than 50 years ago. In his speech he explained the engagement of the Major Hazards Agreement in DRR and referred to its work programme for the coming five years which was adopted at the 11th Ministerial Session in Marrakech in October 2006.

Following the welcome remarks the agenda was adopted.

5.2 Results of the initiative to strengthen existing and support the development of National Platforms in Europe.

a)Project outcomes

This topic was opened by a presentation of the project outcomes given by Ms. Paola Albrito (UN/ISDR) and Mr. Karl-Otto Zentel (DKKV). The presentation:

  • provided background information on the role and the need for National Platforms (Why National Platforms);
  • gave an overview on the collaborative initiative between UN/ISDR secretariat and the German Committee for Disaster Reduction (DKKV), the information collected and the outcome “products”;
  • outlined opportunities for National Platforms and Focal Points and regional partners especially referring to existing political regional bodies in Europe and the role of European countries at regional and international levels. (See folder “Presentation made at the meeting”).

b)Development of the European network of National Platforms

Mr. Philippe Boulle, Head, International Programmes, AFPCN presented information on a network which was formally established in April between the French, German and Swiss National Platform. The establishment of this network was the result of initiatives undertaken by the German Platform and followed a meeting organized by the French Platform in Paris in December last year. The three National Platforms signed an agreement on:

  • common goals
  • specific objective
  • work plan
  • structure

of their future close cooperation. The three platforms agreed that for the first two years Germany will chair the network. The first event of the network will be a meeting in November 2007, organized by the French Platform jointly with the German and Swiss partners. The network is understood as an open process and all National platforms and Focal Points in Europe are invited to join the network. (See folder “Presentation made at the meeting”, where you can find a PP presentation on the subject).

c)Group discussion

The group discussions served to exchange ideas and to come to more concrete understanding on important issues of National platforms and Focal Points.

1. What is the added value of a regional network?

2. What could be the role of such a network?

3.What would be the role of a regional network with regard to national platforms, focal points, global platforms?

  1. What is the added value of a regional network?

-exchange of information

-common topics/issues

-research is an example of a topic from which we can learn from each other

-connection with other partners to avoid duplication

-possible update on formulation

-stimulate NPs to expend their knowledge and exchanges internally

-for regional organizations to consult with a network of NPs

-to share information on who is doing what

-also in emerging issues and experience

-advocate on NPs added value

-learn – not reinvent the wheel

-promote transparency

-forum for multidisciplinary exchange and national approaches

-“a bridge”

-Cross border cooperation

-Collection and exchange of information (national feedback)

-Education (tertiary) - European capacities and exchange possibilities

-Warning systems - regional perspective

-Risk analysis - (harmonization)

-Climate Change adaptation - regional

  1. What could be the role of such a system?

-to focus on concrete issues but not operational

-knowledge during initiatives

-combine best practices for/in Europe of NPs and regional organization

-advance and exchange with other regions

-provide practical support to other countries in other regions which need experience

-common hazards addressed

-a European Forum for DRR

-advocacy

-“a one-stop shop”

-sharing information and experience

-put together knowledge / identify and make use of synergies

-coordination role in political activities

-identify possible funding sources for DRR

-definition of work plans + coordination + coherence

-specific topics: Education, Warning systems, Risk analysis, Adaptation

  1. What could be the role of a regional network with regard to NP and FP and Global Platform?

-opportunity for learning from each other

-dissemination

-convene regional meetings

-use web-based exchange

-connecting people

-providing information

-coordinating activities

-establish work plans for the network which capitalize national work plans and regional opportunities

-support to NP + HFA (information, exchange of know how, political support)

-regional aspects of Climate Change transferred to Global level

-provide regional perspective to Global Platform

5.3 The Implementation of the HFA/Role of National Platforms and HFA focal point achievements in implementing the HFA

a) This topic was introduced by a presentation by Ms. Helena Molin-Valdes, UN/ISDR, followed by three case studies presented by National Platforms and HFA Focal points on their role in the implementation of the HFA and a presentation by Ms. Paola Albrito, UN/ISDR, on the South Eastern Europe Disaster Risk Management Initiative.

Ms. Molin-Valdes gave a detailed overview of background on

  • disaster risk development,
  • the newly published IPCC reports and the expected negative effects of Climate Change and
  • the World Conference on Disaster Reduction in Kobe and its outcome document, the HFA.

Based on this information an overview was provided on international progress in the implementation of the HFA and development of the strengthened ISDR system.

The importance of interlinking the national – regional – international levels was underlined. The presentation closed with a short outlook on the Global Platform meeting. (See folder “Presentation made at the meeting”)

b) Case studies presented by National Platforms on their role in the implementation of the HFA and progress.

Mr. Widmer, Executive secretary of the Swiss National Platform (PLANAT) gave a concise presentation with the title “Implementation of the HFA and progress made in Switzerland” providing an overview on its history, the risk situation in Switzerland, the PLANAT Vision and the steps undertaken. This last point provided an overview on the different phases and the current situation in the Implementation of an Action plan with 20 selected projects. (See folder “Presentation made at the meeting”)

The HFA Focal Point from Norway, Petter Nuland, presented “Disaster risk reduction in Norway” with background information on the risk patterns in Norway, the initiative underway to establish a National Platform and a number of activities undertaken in Norway (e.g. risk mapping, adaptation to climate change) and future challenges within the framework of the implementation of the HFA. (See folder “Presentation made at the meeting”).

The HFA Focal Point from Turkey, Kerem Kuterdem and Nehir Varol presented “Disaster Risk Reduction activities – best practices and case studies” as well as the “AFEM – European Natural Disasters Training Center”, a specialised Centre of the Council of Europe’s EUR-OPA Major Hazards Agreement. Both presentations gave information on steps undertaken in Turkey in the implementation of the HFA. The presentations provided background information on natural disasters in Turkey and the disaster management structures. Different case studies were presented on rehabilitation, regional multi-hazard mapping, disaster monitoring and early warning networks and legal arrangements. (See folder “Presentation made at the meeting”)

South Eastern Europe Disaster Risk Management Initiative (SEEDRMI).

As the meeting agenda was already behind schedule, Ms. Paola Albrito, UN/ISDR provided a concise statement concerning the SEEDRMI.

The SEEDRMI is a regional initiative in South Eastern Europe aiming at reducing vulnerability to the impact of natural hazards.

The initiatives launched by the World Bank, the UN/ISDR and other international/regional partners is in line with the Hyogo Framework and aims at reducing the vulnerability of the countries of South Eastern Europe to the risks of disasters.

SEEDRMI incorporates three focus areas:

(i) hydro-meteorological forecasting, data sharing and early warning;

(ii) coordination of disaster mitigation, preparedness, and response; and

(iii) financing of disaster losses, reconstruction and recovery, and disaster risk transfer (disaster insurance).

The initiative will build on the existing cooperation in the region, and will complement and consolidate the activities in cooperation/coordination with EU, the Council of Europe, the UN, the Stability Pact, the CMEPC, the DPPI and others to promote more effective disaster mitigation, preparedness and response.

This initiative will form the foundation for regional and country specific investment priorities (projects) in the area of early warning, disaster risk reduction and financing. (See folder “Presentation made at the meeting”).

c)Group discussions

Following these presentations the three working groups started to discuss the overall question of the implementation of the HFA based on four questions provided by UN/ISDR. The composition of the working groups remained unchanged.

  1. How have you been instrumental in moving forward the implementation of the HFA nationally, regionally, internationally?
  2. What possible next steps could be taken to enhance the role of NP and FP in the implementation of the HFA?
  3. How does the reporting on progress improve your work?
  4. How is the reporting on progress to UNISDR organized in your country?
  1. How have you been instrumental in moving forward the implementation of the HFA nationally, regionally, internationally?

Reference to the reporting system to HFA implementation

Nationally

Turkey: use of 5 points of HFA

(no NP – educational-training for schools about DR yet)

France: communicated on goals of Kobe

Monaco: FP just appointed

(NP)

Regionally

Turkey:------

France:- push forward NP’s

- participation in COF E to build knowledge of network on NP’s

- dealt with EC – operational aspects MIC

Internationally

Turkey:international projects

- training two Asian countries on Disaster Reduction

- sharing experiences

France:dealing with countries outside Europe e.g. Tsunami

  1. What possible next steps could be taken to enhance the role of NP and FP in the implementation of the HFA?

-information sharing among nations

-control of the reporting system

-update the web pages with instruments

-increase governmental support to National Platforms

-increase institutional support to National platforms

-clear road map endorsed by government

  1. How does the reporting on progress improve your work?

Possible next steps:

-additional information collected

-raises visibility of HFA and DRR

-reporting on progress

improves / does not
if you do it! / if you do not!
useful for sharing (lessons learned) / resources and time
language used
(why English/French?)
framework used ?
(limits transferability)
  1. How is the reporting on progress to UNISDR organized in your country?

Different and mixed experiences on the process were reported by the member of the WG. France considered its own reporting process as well organized.

-Romania, Hungary, Czech Republic, Germany

Reporting organized via NP/FP (strengthening required)

One of the working groups closed the internal discussion on all four questions at the point that the question covered such a broad approach that the answers would have to include all information included into the national HFA reports. Thus the members referred to the respective reports sent in to UN/ISDR.

5.4 The Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction (Geneva, 5-7 June 2007)

Mr. Lars Bernd, UN/ISDR presented an overview on the upcoming first Global Platform meeting. The presentation informed about:

  • the background of the meeting;
  • objectives (raising awareness, sharing experiences, guiding the ISDR system);
  • expected outcomes (options for the implementation of the HFA, enhance cooperation and information sharing, identify priorities for the ISDR system)
  • structure (ministerial statements, plenary meeting, workshops and poster sessions, parallel meetings)
  • breakdown of the programme of the three days.

The Objectives of the Global platform meeting were described as:

  • Raise awareness on reducing disaster risk:

-increase the profile of disaster risk reduction as part of development and climate change adaptation, recognizing that it is “everybody's business” and must be a multi-stakeholder undertaking, with Governments' playing a central role;

-reiterate the commitment of policy and decision-makers to implement the Hyogo Framework for Action.

  • Share experience:

-learn from good practice;

-provide practical guidance for nations and communities to reduce disaster risk.

  • Guide the ISDR system:

-assess progress made in implementing the Hyogo Framework, and identify obstacles, critical problems and emerging issues that must be addressed to speed up national and local implementation;

-enhance cooperation and concerted action by the international community to support national and local implementation of disaster risk reduction including identification of priorities for the ISDR system for 2008-2009.