Example of Indicators to Measure the Implementation of the HFA

ISDR secretariat – DRAFT Working Document WORK IN PROGRESS Updated 23.05.05rev

Example of indicators to measure the implementation of the HFA.

Priority for action 1

Ensure that disaster risk reduction is a national and a local priority with a strong institutional basis for implementation.

National institutional and legislative frameworks:

Main elements / Expected results / Criteria for benchmarks / Indicators (Very tentative)
Multi-sectoral policies and plans / Countries have integrated disaster risk reduction into development policy and planning / - National disaster risk reduction policies and plans are guided and fostered by institutional mechanisms that exibitmulti-sectoral composition.
- New and revised global agreements consider disaster risk reduction issues;
- Disaster risk reduction is part of all donor assistance and lending programmes CCA/UNDAFs, PRSPs; / 1. The increment of number of new national platforms (quantitative)
2. Increase in the stakeholder and sectoral composition of existing national platforms (qualitative);
3. Number of developing countries which include disaster risk reduction in the CCA/UNDAF (quantitative)

Indicated in the HFA as key activities headings;

Stemming from key activities in the HFA;

Definition[1] and criteria for benchmarks and indicators:

Benchmark: a reference point or standard against which progress or achievements may be compared;

Indicator: An explicit measure used to determine performance; a signal that reveals progress towards objectives; a means of measuring what actually happens against what has been planned in terms of quality, quantity and timeliness.

Indicators should beSMART[2]

S = Specific - Indicators should reflect those things the projects intends to change, avoiding measures that are largely subject to external influences.

M = Measurable - Indicators must be defined precisely so that their measurement and interpretation are unambiguous. They should give objective data, they should be comparable across groups and projects, allowing change to be compared and aggregated;

A = Attainable - Indicators should be achievable by the project and therefore sensitive to the changes the project wishes to make;

R = Relevant - It must be feasible to collect data on the chosen indicators within a reasonable time and at a reasonable cost;

T = Time-bound: Indicators should describe by when a certain change is expected.

1

ISDR secretariat – DRAFT Working Document WORK IN PROGRESS Updated 23.05.05rev

Background information on criteria for benchmarks and indicators

Expected outcome: The substantial reduction of disaster losses, in lives and in the social, economic and environmental assets of communities to countries.
Conceptual link to MDGs: MDG # 1 Eradicating extreme poverty and hunger: indicated by prevention of loss of lives and livelihood and in particular child mortality MDG # 3. Environmental asset protection is also linked to protection of resource based livelihoods (MDG # 1) as well as MDG # 7 (Ensuring Environmental Sustainability).
Tentative indicators:
- Number of people dead due to disasters;
- Percentage (quantitative measure) of economic losses;
-Percentage (quantitative measure) of biodiversity losses;) / Data Sources:
- EM-DAT
- ProVention
-IDB
-Commission on Sustainable Development
Strategic Goals: The integration of disaster risk reduction into sustainable development policies and planning.
Conceptual link to MDGs: Creating an international governance regime that promotes sustainable development policies and planning is a key example of how MDG # 8 (Develop a Global Partnership for Development) can be implemented.
Sustainable development is linked to MDG # 7 (Ensuring Environmental Sustainability) and to basic development issues such as reducing extreme poverty and hunger through food security (MDG # 1), access to clean drinking water and basic healthcare facilities (MDGs # 4, 5& 6). Therefore, it is advisable to view sustainable development as a cross-cutting issue which can be linked to a number of MDG’s but in particular to MDG’s # 1, 6, 7 and 8.
Tentative indicators:
-Progress on sustainable development and achievement of MDGs (tbd)
-Related to application of DRR in:
CCA/UNDAF (international level);
PRSP (international level);
National platforms (international and national level); / Data Sources:
-- HDI;
-- HPI;
-- ODA;
- Global Humanitarian Assistance for Disasters;
- MDGs reports;
Strategic Goals:Development and strengthening of institutions, mechanisms and capacities to build resilience to hazards
Conceptual link to MDGs:MDG # 6 (Combating HIV/AIDS, Malaria and Other Diseases) Retrofitting and structural strengthening of health care centres hospitals, sanitation facilities and sewage treatment plants so that basic facilities and basic necessities are not completely compromised in the event of a disaster. (Increased coping capacity and resilience to hazards). Structural strengthening of schools can be linked to MDG # 2 (Achieving Universal Primary Education) as the destruction of schools during a disaster has a wide-ranging impact on the community.
Strengthening of mechanisms can be linked to MDG # 8 (Developing a Global partnership for Development) since many mechanisms in place to prevent or mitigate disasters, such as National Platforms and Disaster Control Centres are linked to regional or global efforts either through funding or through knowledge, awareness or shared technical expertise.
Tentative indicators:
Related to priority area one:
-Number of functioning national platforms for disaster risk reduction (or other national mechanisms);
-Number and scale of international programmes in support of HFA;
(Local dimensions, bilateral and multilateral dimensions). / Data Sources:
Strategic Goals: The systematic incorporation of risk reduction approaches into the implementation of emergency preparedness, response and recovery
Conceptual link to MDGs: The systematic incorporation of DRR mechanisms can be linked to a number of MDG’s depending on the nature of the risk reduction approach. For example, the incorporation of RD into the agricultural sector by promoting hurricane resilient agricultural practices in an area prone to hurricanes such as the Caribbean will increase the level of food security, thus directly linking to MDG # 1 which aims to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger but also with the loss of lives (MDG # 1) (EW) Further, since an early-warning system would allow economically marginal communities to move livestock and basic necessities away from the high risk areas, thus also preventing the loss of livelihood (MDG # 1). The reconstruction of buildings such as schools (MDG #2) and hospitals (MDG # 4,5,6) need to be made disaster resistant through earthquake-resistant or hurricane-resistant constructions.
Tentative indicators:
(National, bilateral and multilateral dimensions. Operations) / Data Sources:
- CAPs
- ODA.
Areas / Main elements /

Expected results

/ Tentative benchmarks / Tentative indicators
Priority for action 1: Ensure that disaster risk reduction is a national and a local priority with a strong institutional basis for implementation.
Countries that develop policy, legislative and institutional frameworks for disaster risk reduction and that are able to develop and track progress through specific and measurable indicators have greater capacity to manage risks and to achieve widespread consensus for, engagement in and compliance with disaster risk reduction measures across all sectors of society.

National Institution and legislative frameworks

/ Multi-sectoral policies and plans / DRR integrated into development policy and planning by countries.
Multi-sectoral national platforms or other coordination mechanisms for DRR created and functioning
Increased resource allocation for DRR / - Countries have a multi-stakeholder and multi-sectoral national platform;
- DRR is part of all donor assistance and lending programmes CCA/UNDAFs, PRSPs;
- Achievements in disaster reduction initiatives are reported in national MDGs reports;
- New and revised global agreements consider disaster risk reduction issues;
- National follow-ups to WSSD Plan of implementation has included disaster risk reduction (for LDCs countries)
- Assessments are part of sectoral policies and plans;
- Evidence of DRR financial allocation in foreign investment; / 1. Percentage of countries with multi-stakeholder and multi-sectoral national platforms (30% 2005; - 40% 2006; 50% 2007).
2. Composition of multi-sectoral national platforms.
3. Number of developing countries in which disaster risk reduction has been included in the CCA/UNDAF.
4. Proportion of MDGs reports that includes disaster risk reduction initiatives.
5. Percentage of countries of new and revised global agreements considering risk reduction.
6. Percentage of countries that have included disaster risk reduction into WSSD Plan of implementation.
7. Number of assessments undergone including hazard vulnerability-risk analysis;
8. Number of geographical, sectoral policies and plans including hazard vulnerability-risk analysis and risk reduction strategies;
9. Number of countries with annual budget allocations for disaster risk reduction;
10. Number of countries beneficiary of donor support for issues related to DRR;
11. Proportion of ODA provided for DRR issues
Legislation / Legislation adopted or modified to explicitly support disaster risk reduction;
Compliance of normative regulations / - Requirement of compliance by law;
- Codes and standards exist and updated;
- Existence of systems to control compliance and enforcements; / 12. Number of countries where legislation has been adopted or modified to support disaster risk reduction.
13. Proportion of countries that present a legislation enforcement system.
14. Percentage of national assessments conducted on disaster risk reduction;
15. Number of low implementation cases related to enforcement of legislation related to DRR;
Decentralization and local authorities responsibilities / Empowered sub-national authorities / - Existence of decentralised administrative structure relative to disaster risk management functional responsibilities. / 16. Percentage of responsible designated offices on the implementation of enforcement system.
Community
participation
(Cross cutting) / Community and volunteers empowered and involved in DRR planning and activities
Community involvement and the media are engaged in build resilience to disasters
Specific mechanisms are developed to engage stakeholders communities and volunteers.
Human resources assessed and capacity building plans and programme developed (related to strengthen disaster preparedness for effective response). / - Consultation mechanisms and role for civil society, volunteers, NGOs and private sectors;
-Identifiable local leaders, institutions or collaborations that lead DRR activities;
- Documented NGO activity ensuring the consideration of such issues in national/local discussion, decision, activities, practise;
- Coverage of disaster risk reduction related activities by media;
- Visibility of disaster risk reduction day;
- Identified means, sources to convey local relevance, community experience or traditional knowledge in DRR;
-- Coverage of community training and community based preparedness;
- Halve the average of annual casualties by 2015 (MDGs)
-Staff allocation;
-Evidence of human capacity assessments;
-Evidence of technical resources assessments; / 17. Percentage of countries presence of NGOs, civil society, volunteers and private sector in National Platforms;
18. Percentage of countries with NGO project activities involving DRR;
19. Percentage of policies, plans and programmes developed in consultation with NGOs and civil society;
20. Percentage of media coverage related to disaster prevention;
21. Percentage of countries with events organised on DRR day;
22. Percentage of local community involvement in the organisation of the DRR day;
23.Number of risk management plans that are implemented with involvement of the local community;
See tentative indicator s n.: 40, 43
24.Percentage of annual casualties related to disasters;
24. Number of countries which have undertaken human capacity, technical and financial assessments (NOT SMART YET);
25. Percentage of technical resources assessments.
Gender (Cross cutting) / Gender perspective integrated in all disaster risk management policies, plans and decision-making processes / - Evidence of gender perspective in DRR policies and decision making processes / 26. Proportion of seats held by women in DRR policy plans;
Multi-hazard approach (cross cutting) / Multi-hazard approach integrated into disaster risk management policies, planning and programming / -Evidence of multi-hazard approach integrated into disaster management policies, planning and programming / See tentative indicators n.: 38, 39, 41
Capacity building (cross Cutting / Capacity building developed, supported and strengthened at all levels in all sectors / - Capacity building programmes ongoing;
- Capacities in disaster risk reduction assessed and reported as basic information for all project and programmes development; / 27.Number of capacity building trainings related to DRR (NOT SMART YET);
28 Percentage of capacity building trainings available on DRR NOT SMART YET)
29. Number of projects and programmes including hazard vulnerability-risk analysis and reduction of disaster risk;

1

ISDR secretariat – DRAFT Working Document WORK IN PROGRESS Updated 23.05.05rev

Areas of Activities / Main elements /

Expected results

/ Tentative benchmarks / Tentative indicators
Priority for action 2:Identify, assess and monitor disaster risks and enhance early warning.
The starting point for reducing disaster risk and for promoting a culture of disaster resilience lies in the knowledge of the hazards and the physical, social, economic and environmental vulnerabilities to disasters that most societies face, and of the ways in which hazards and vulnerabilities are changing in the short and long term, followed by action taken on the basis of that knowledge
National and local risk assessments / Data availability, analysis and dissemination / Statistical information is maintained and shared on disaster occurrence, impact and losses. / -Identifiable, accessible, structured record system maintained at national and appropriate sub-national levels to a common and compatible standard;
-Percentage of development projects and investment based on independent risk and environmental impacts assessments, including in post disaster phases;
-Evidence of statistical information exchanged at international, regional, national and local level; / 30. Number of citizens that have access to information on risks (NOT SMART YET);
31. Number of publications related to data analysis results on DRR;
32. Number of statistical information exchanged at international, regional, national and local level (NOT SMART YET);
33. Percentage of countries developing EWS;
34. Percentage of EWS based on community vulnerability;
Indicators on vulnerability and disaster risks / Indicators on disaster risks and vulnerability developed, to assess the impact of disaster on social, economic and environmental conditions at national and sub-national scales. / -Vulnerability and capacity indicators developed and systematically mapped and recorded;
-Identifiable programs assessing vulnerability and developing risk scenario;
-Indefinable programs/centres for hazard monitoring and analysis in institutions such as national hydro-meteorological, seismic, etc. / 35. Number and geographical scope of vulnerability and capacity assessments;
36. Percentage of identifiable programmes assessing vulnerability and risk scenario:
37. Percentage of assessment undergone at country level to establish national indicators based on the suggested indicators relative to the implementation of the HFA;
Risk maps / Risk assessments and maps (hazards/vulnerability) are current and available to the public. / -Historical record of hazards and their impacts (catalogues, inventories);
-Hazard and vulnerability mapping available at all levels; / 38. Percentage of countries with a multy-hazards risk mapping completed
39. Percentage of area and population covered by hazard maps, covering all hazard typology;
40. Percentage of development projects and investment based on independent risk and environmental impacts assessments, including in post disaster phases;
41. Percentage of community-based hazard and vulnerability mapping;
Early Warning / Early waning systems and information management / People centered early warnings developed and communication systems to those at risk reviewed and assessed. / -Availability of robust and extended communication means through areas at risk;
-Public, professional, technical assessment of communication effectiveness in EWS;
-People centered early warning / 42. Percentage of assessments on communication effectiveness on EWS;
43. Percentage of people centered early warning systems.
Early warning policy administration / Early Warning systems policy and practices are linked to emergency management operation capabilities / -Political capacities married to institutional abilities in EWS;
-Evidence of policy, operational links between EW and emergency response abilities in communities; / 44. The number of established policies to enable effective cooperation for data sharing and preparedness at national and international level;
45. Percentage of people at risk and responsible authorities reached by Early Warning increased by 50% by 2015. (NOT SMART YET)
Observation modelling and forecasting of hazards / 46. Modelling and forecasting of hazards
See tentative indicators n.: 38,39,41.
International coordination / International and regional efforts are harmonized for cooperation and support for standards in early warning capacities and procedures / - International, regional efforts for standards, cooperation to build early warning capacity;
-Recognised global authority, standards, procedures for consistent motivation of EWS at international and regional level;
-Level of implementation of the second international Conference on Early Warning
-Level of implementation of the Mauritius Strategy related to the Small island Developing States. / 47. Number of countries implementing the Second international Conference on Early Warning;
48. Number of regional initiatives related to EWS;
Emerging risks / Research and analysis / Research, analysis and reporting are undertaken on long-term changes and emerging issues that might increase vulnerabilities and risk exposure / - Evidence of analysis concerning emerging risks and increased vulnerabilities; / 49. Percentage of assessments reporting on emerging risks;
Regional risks / Exchange of data and monitoring at regional level. / Regional data information is compiled and exchanged;
Trans-boundary hazards are monitored. / -Evidence of international, UN, bilateral assistance on the compilation and exchange of data and monitoring on regional risks;
- Regional meetings and workshops organised on regional and trans-boundary hazards; / 50. Percentage of assessments reporting on trans-boundary hazards;
51. Number of data compilation relative to regional risk monitoring;
Priority for action 3: USE KNOWLEDGE, INNOVATION and education to build a culture of saFety and resilience at all levels.
Disasters can be substantially reduced if people are well informed and motivated towards a culture of disaster prevention and resilience, which in turn requires the collection, compilation and dissemination of relevant knowledge and information on hazards, vulnerabilities and capacities.
Information management and exchange / Information capacity and management / Easily understood information on DRR gathered, analysed and disseminated and widely used / -National information sharing systems;