UNICEF – Disaster Risk Reduction and Resilience Building for Post 2015

This paper is a guide for UNICEF and partners, and aims to ensure that disaster risk reduction and resilience building[i], as identified under the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA), are appropriately considered in ongoing post 2015 discussions and processes. The paper provides an overview of post 2015 processes and sets out key messages for both post 2015 and post HFA Frameworks.

Disaster risk is increasing globally. Although disaster related mortality appears to be reducing in some countries, disasters are increasingly impacting lives, livelihoods and economies worldwide[ii]. Since 2000 disasters have affected up to 3 billion people[iii], and it has been estimated that losses from weather-related disasters alone are doubling globally every 12 years[iv].

Disasters expose existing inequities within societies; women are more likely to die in disasters than men[v], and it is estimated that children make up 50-60% of those affected by disasters annually. Climate change impacts are predicted to increase the numbers of children affected by disasters from an estimated 66.5 million per year in the late 1990s, to as many as 175 million per year in the coming decade[vi].

There are currently significant international commitments to Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and increasing evidence of its effectiveness in saving lives and money. Despite this,prioritization and resources including financinghave been slow to materialize from national governments and international donors[vii]. In 2009, only 1% of all development aid was for DRR- US$1 out of every US$100 spent on aid was for reducing disaster risk. Additionally, in that year, four countries alone counted for 75% of all DRR funding[viii].

For the purpose of this paper and in line with UNICEF’s initial framing of resilience in its Strategic Plan (2014-2017), DRR is presented as a key strategy to strengthen the resilience of the child, communities and systems to multiple shocks and stresses (including to disaster related consequences of climate change). DRR should also work to ensure the rights of the child, including rights to survival, education and development, continue to be upheld through times of disasters, shocks and stresses. UNICEF will continue to advocate that where appropriate, disaster risk should not be considered in isolation of other risks, including conflict, andthat DRR is part of an integrated approach to building resilience.

The Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015

  • The Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015 (HFA) ─ Building the Resilience of Nationsand Communities to Disasters, isthe key framework for DRR at a global level. It is a 10-year plan with the aim ‘to make the world safer from natural hazards’ by building the resilience of nations and communities to disasters. The framework was adopted by 168 Member States in 2005 at the World Conference on Disaster Reduction.
  • The HFA Mid-Term Review (2010-2011) confirmed that progress is taking place, especially from an institutional point of view, in the passing of national legislation; in setting up early warning systems; and in strengthening disaster preparedness and response. The need for disaster risk management (and in particular risk assessments) to be anintegral component of development plans and poverty eradication programmes is now wellaccepted among experts[ix].
  • The Mid Term Review also highlighted challenges. There is still a lack of systematic multi-hazard risk assessments and early warning systems factoring in social and economic vulnerabilities; there is inadequate integration of disaster risk reduction into sustainable development policies and planning at national and international level; and there is still an insufficient level of implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action at the local level.
  • Although concepts of DRR and resilience are gaining prominence globally, continued research is required to build the evidence base of the impacts and value for money of risk reduction measures. According to UN-ISDR (2011), for every dollar spent on reducing risk, 7 dollars on avoided response is saved.

Post 2015 Processes

There are three related processes currently ongoing at a high level in the UN system.

Focusing on the Sustainable Development Goals and other processes:

  1. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) initiated in Rio+20, with an Intergovernmental Group established under the UN General Assembly; additionally, a 30-member Open Working Group (OWG) of the General Assembly is tasked with preparing a proposal on the SDGs.
  2. Processes initiated through the UN System Task Team chaired by UN-DESA and UNDP. UN agencies have co-facilitated eleven global thematic consultations, including “conflict, violence and disasters”, as well as over 70 nationally-led ones. The SG established a Post 2015 High Level Panel of Eminent Persons, which will deliver its final report in 2013, and anOffice of the Special Advisor on Post 2015 Development Planning, which is an advisory body.

Focusing on the post 2015 HFA:

  1. A post HFA DRR framework being facilitated by UNISDR with an Advisory Group on the Post‐2015 Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and the Global Platform reporting to theSRSG for Disaster Risk Reduction.

Post HFA Progress

The first outline of a post 2015 DRR framework is expected to be available at the Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction (Geneva, May 2013). A draft will be finalised towards the end of 2014 to be ready for consideration and adoption at the World Conference on Disaster Reduction in Japan in 2015.

Box 1: United Nations Plan of Action on Disaster Risk Reduction
In 2012 the UN High Level Committee on Programmes requested the Special Representative of the Secretary General (SRSG) for Disaster Risk Reductionto prepare a UN Plan of Action on Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience.The draft Plan of Action reflects countries` desire that disaster risk reduction for resilience be reflected in the post 2015 development agenda, and also embraces the international momentum to use resilience as a common outcome integrating efforts to reduce poverty, reduce disaster risk and adapt to climate change, as integral to sustainable development. The draft Plan of Action contains three commitments:
  • Ensure timely, coordinated and high quality assistanceto countries where disaster losses pose a threat to development;
  • Make disaster risk reduction a priority for UN funds, programmes and specialized agencies;
  • Ensure disaster risk reduction for resilience is central to post 2015 development agreements and targets.

UNISDR is supporting a dedicated post HFAplatform and an online consultation ( is facilitating, partly through regional platforms on DRR,“an open dialogue with all stakeholder groups, including governments and local authorities; international, regional organisations and thematic platforms; the private sector; science and technical based institutions; NGOs, civil society and community-based organisations”2.

Possible post HFA goals have been unofficially drafted[x] :

Goal / Targets / Indicators
To reduce risk and build resilience to disasters for all / 1. Nations to halve disaster mortality by 2030 / 1.1: Crude mortality rate (disaster deaths by 1000 inhabitants)
2. Nations to halve disaster related economic loss by 2030 / 2.1: Direct economic losses as percentage of GDP
3. All nations to develop a national DRR and resilience plan by 2020 / 3.1: National DRR and Resilience plans adopted and referenced in national development plans

Consultation and discussion on these and other draft goals continues.

The second proposed target in particular has received significant criticism. The goal states that economic disaster losses should be halved; however, economic losses are increasing globally as assets are becoming increasingly exposed to hazards as populations increase, urbanisation continues and assets and people are increasingly located in hazard prone areas. Current estimates are that rates of economic losses from extreme weather events will double every 12 years[xi]. At this rate even maintaining economic disaster losses at the current level may not be attainable, and halving losses seems unreachable.

The ability of nations to measure progress against goals remains a significant challenge. Although disasters can be measured in terms of mortality, economic loss or people affected, many countries still cannot measure these indicators accurately. For the first two goals shown above, monitoring progress or understanding if and when the goal has been reached will be difficult if the indicators cannot be measured with confidence.

Post HFA Links to Wider Post 2015

Disaster risk reduction involves many stakeholders and is incorporated into many strategies and frameworks- for example, the Common Framework for National Capacity Development for Emergency Preparedness is an IASC driven agreement to take a coordinated and coherent approach to strengthening national capacity for emergency preparedness, as part of a wider approach to disaster risk management.

More specifically, the HFA explicitly links with sustainable development in general and the MDGs in particular, stating that implementation of the HFA areas of priority action will contribute to the achievements of the internationally agreed development goals, including the MDGs[xii].

The inter-relationship between disaster risk and development has been well established. Development can increase disaster risk – for example, the building of schools that are not earthquake or cyclone resistant in hazard zones will place school children at increased risk of injury or death in the event of a disaster. Conversely, risk informed development can increase resilience and decrease vulnerability to disasters if undertaken properly.

In turn, disaster losses can impede or reverse development gains – for example, floods in Thailand in 2012 were estimated to cost 3% of annual GDP, as well as impacting educational continuity for affected children and leading to household asset losses for vulnerable families.

A recent discussion paper argues that linkages between disaster and climate change risk and the current MDGs are a significant gap that should be addressed in post 2015 frameworks[xiii]. This was emphasised by the Government of Japan during Rio +20[xiv]; they recommended that “disaster risk reduction be clearly placed within the post-MDGs”.

UNICEF, DRR and Post 2015Processes

In its paper ‘Towards a Post 2015 World Fit for Children’ (2012), UNICEF proposes the following as one of the suggested actions:

“The framework must be flexible and dynamic to remain relevant to people and encompass innovation and change. It must, in particular, be innovative in tackling the dire risks and uncertainties faced by children and women in conflict-affected, disaster-prone societies and in countries with weak or “fragile” public sector capacities.”

The Global Thematic Consultation on Conflict, Violence and Disaster was co-convened by UNDP, UNICEF, the UN Peace building Support Office (UNPBSO) and the UNISDR in partnership with the Government of Finland. The co-leads organized four global sub-thematic consultations for a more focused and deeper consultation on Conflict, Violence and Disaster.High level consultations on Conflict, Violence and Disaster and the Post 2015 Development Agenda have taken place and consultations on disasters and DRR have been undertaken around regional DRR platforms, including in Tanzania, Chile and Indonesia (AMCDRR).

Through these and other consultations UNICEF is advocating for a post 2015 agenda that prioritises disaster risk reduction and resilience building; and that seeks to address the underlying causes of disaster risk and other shocks and stresses for boys, girls, women and men. Post 2015 frameworks must also work to relieve the most vulnerable, including women and children, from the disproportionate burden of risk they carry. This means considering risk reduction in the context of all priority risks, including those caused, for example, by conflict, climate change and environmental degradation, to build resilience and capacity equitably into the future.

In order to move forward on these vital issues, it is recommended that key messages for both post 2015 frameworks overall and a post HFA framework in particular are promoted.

UNICEF key messages for Post 2015 Frameworks

  1. Disasterscan reverse development gains; new development goals must factor in risk whereby all goals, to the extent possible, are risk informed;
  2. Given the significance of the risks posed by climate change, fragility and conflict, a post 2015 framework that draws together DRR, climate change adaptation and conflict prevention/peace building under a goal or target for resilience, should be considered;
  3. DRR must not only be addressed as inter-sectoral or cross-cutting, but operating at all levels; international and regional prioritization, integrating DRR into national and sub-national plans, and building sustainable DRR capacities at community level are all vital to build resilience;
  4. Disasters exacerbate existing inequalities; in order to ensure equity, those most vulnerable to disasters and other shocks, particularly women and children, must be specifically capacitated, empowered and protected;
  5. Disaster risk reduction is the responsibility of states; and within post 2015 frameworks, many statesas duty bearers must improve transparency, accountability and knowledge sharing such that progress against goals is accurately monitored and the rights of girls and boys as well as women and men are upheld and progressed;
  6. There must be close alignment between disaster risk reduction considerations in the post 2015 development agenda, the Sustainable Development Goals, the post 2015 framework on DRR and other frameworks.

UNICEF key messages for aPost HFA Framework

  1. Stress the importance that a successor framework to the HFA must, in the context of the array of shocks and stresses faced by children and communities, better link with conflict and climate risk, while promoting resilience as a common goal;
  2. Emphasize that the HFA should focus not only on intensive risk (high-impact but less frequent events) but also on extensive risk (low impact but common events), that not only affect large numbers of people, but if left unchecked will accumulate risk;
  3. Promote the setting of measurable targets to strengthen the system of reporting and accountability at global and national level – currently, the HFA is not legally binding and the primary tool of reporting is government self-assessment, which has some disadvantages;
  4. Advocate that DRR, as much as climate change, is an inter-generational issue, and that decision making within the post HFA process should include the active participation and agency of children and young people;
  5. Ensure it is recognised that those most vulnerable to disasters, particularly women and children, including those with disability face unique disaster risks; thesemay require specific consideration at national and sub-national level;
  6. Promote the continued importance of multi-hazard risk assessment and analysis, including ensuring there is adequate capacity at sub-national level;
  7. Emphasize the importance of national and sub-national systems to monitor data (sex and age disaggregated)on disaster damage and losses, as a basis for improved accountability and programming for DRR;
  8. Emphasize the impacts that disasters can have on basic social services, not least on education, as well as the role of social services in reducing risk and building resilience;
  9. Emphasize that building the capacity of partner governments at national and sub-national scale is vital to integrating DRR into sustainable planning and decision making; and that community capacities, rights and needs must also be prioritised, as disaster impacts manifest at local levels;
  10. Emphasize that without timely and appropriate funding and funding mechanisms at international and national levels, DRR will not always be effective.

Conclusion

The current post 2015 agenda presents a unique opportunity to embed disaster risk reduction and resilience into future development targets, with the aim of safeguarding development gains and saving lives, livelihoods and economies in the face of increasing risks.

It is important that post HFA processes lead to a new DRR Framework that demonstrably builds the resilience of communities, nations and systems in support of safer communities, equitable progress and a child’s right to survival, protection, education and development.

Through post 2015 and post HFA processes,UNICEF should promote key messages on DRR as well as advance its position to strengthen the safety and resilience of children in the face of all shocks and hazards.

UNICEF Geneva, March 2013 1

[i]Resilience has been defined as : ‘The ability of countries, communities, and households to anticipate, adapt to, and recover from the effects of hazardous occurrences (including natural disasters, climate change, conflict or economic shocks) in a manner that reduces vulnerability and supports economic and social development’Adapted from Enhancing resilience to food security shocks in Africa, DFID, WB, FAO, 2012

[ii]The ISDR, 2009, p. 4 has defined a disaster as ‘a serious disruption of the functioning of a community or a society involving widespread human, material, economic or environmental losses and impacts, which exceeds the ability of the affected community or society to cope using its own resources’.

[iii]UNISDR, 2012, The Economic and Human Impact of Disasters in the last 12 years

[iv] Mitchell, T., Mechler, R. and Harris, K., 2012, Tackling Exposure: Placing disaster risk management at the heart of national economic and fiscal policy, Climate and Development Knowledge Network.

[v] Neumayer, E. & Plümper, T. 2007, The Gendered Nature of Natural Disasters: The Impact ofCatastrophic Events on the Gender Gap in Life Expectancy, 1981–2002, Annals of the Association of American Geographers,97:3, 551-566

[vi]SCF, 2007, Legacy of Disasters

[vii]United Nations, 2011 Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction: Summary and Main Findings

[viii]Global Humanitarian Assistance, 2012 Disaster Risk Reduction: Spending where it should count

[ix]UNISDR, 2012, Towards a Post 2015 Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction

[x]Circulated in the 2012 UNISDR consultative paper Measuring the Progress on Disaster Risk and Resilience in Sustainable Development. A further discussion on a range of proposed coals in discussed in a recent ODI paper (see end note xi).

[xi]Mitchell, T., Mechler, R. and Harris, K. 2012 Tackling Exposure: Placing disaster risk management at the heart of national economic and fiscal policy, Climate and Development Knowledge Network, London

[xii]United Nations, 2005, Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters, Extract from the final report of the World Conference on Disaster Reduction p. 23

[xiii]Mitchell, T. 2012 Options for Including Disaster Resilience in Post 2015 Development Goals, ODI, London

[xiv]Government of Japan, 2011, Input to the Rio+20 Outcome Document