1. Madhavi Malalgoda Ariyabandu 23 January 2014 Towards Post 2015 Framework for DRR Proposed elements for consideration in HFA2

2. Background UNGA resolution Dec 2011 request UNISDR to facilitate the development of s post 2015 Framework for DRR Consultations of all stakeholders from early 2012: online, local, national, regional and global events: eight Regional Platforms and the 4GPDRR Guidance from: Reports through the HFA Monitor, GAR 2009, 2011 and 2013, deliberations of the United Nations General Assembly, literature and practice on disaster risk and resilience

3. Background Advice from: o Science and Technology Advisory Group, Global Assessment Report o Advisory Board, Private Sector Advisory Group, Parliamentarians Advisory Group, o Hyogo Framework for Action Advisory Group. Encompass over 60 senior government officials, Members of Parliament, scientists, business executives, lawyers, practitioners, CSO representatives

4. HFA2 Elements paper- purpose HFA2 will be formulated through the formal preparatory process of the 3rd World Conference for Disaster Risk Reduction (3 WCDRR Sendai, Japan, 14 ‐ 18 March 2015). Built upon regional Platforms and meetings for disaster risk reduction Aim of the paper: to provide guidance and support for the preparation and deliberations of the upcoming Regional Platforms and meetings for DRR Proposed Elements draw on the consultations to date.Platforms and meetings for disaster risk reduction Proposed Elements draw on the consultations to date.Platforms and meetings for disaster risk reduction

5. Process Regional Platforms: Africa 5 ‐ 8 May; Americas 27 ‐ 29 May; Asia 23 ‐ 26 June; Pacific 2 ‐ 4 June; Arab States Europe Regional DRR Meeting Central Asia and Caucasus 1-2 April UNISDR will submit a synthesis report with the recommendations of the Regional Platforms on the content of the HFA2 for consideration by the first preparatory committee meeting of the World Conference, scheduled for 14‐15 July 2014 (Geneva) 1

6. Learning from HFA  Progress: downward trend in mortality risk due to enhanced capacities in early warning, preparedness and response  Increase in hazard exposure, related economic loss and damage due to private and public investments related to economic growth –increased losses from intensive risk  Poor management of urban development, environmental degradation, poverty and inequality, weak governance leading to increasing losses from extensive risk.

7. Learning from HFA  Both development and disaster risk reduction have not been sustainable and effective  Critical need for addressing drivers of risk to halt increase of climate‐related and other physical and economic losses  Sustainable development goals cannot be achieved without managing disaster risk  Critical need to shift from shielding social and economic development from disasters to one of transforming development to manage risks, strengthen resilience

8. Learning from HFA Risk insensitive investments will critically influence future levels of risk HFA 2 to explicitly include public policies that facilitate risk sensitive private investment (business, households and communities)

9. Outlook  Policy and action beyond the reduction of existing risk and prioritize prevention of new risk accumulation.  Risk management as part of sustainable development policies and practices to tackle existing challenges and seize potential opportunities.  Strong international and local commitment for necessary changes to current development practices, processes and patterns.  Take opportunity to synchronize with the post‐2015 sustainable development agenda and goals and climate change framework

10. Positioning HFA2  Success in sustainable development is impossible if risk management addressed in an incoherent and incompatible manner by each the three instruments (SDG, CC, HFA2)  Managing risk and opportunities in a coherent manner to remain a common feature  HFA1 learning /evidence can guide risk management practices in development planning and investment

11. SDG-CC linkages  HFA2 to be a guiding tool for supporting the successful implementation of the future sustainable development goals and the climate change agreement  HFA2 cannot be considered as a stand‐alone, technical and sector specific agreement.  Provisions need to be made to secure an interlinked and mutually supportive implementation.

12. Monitoring mechanism An enhanced HFA Monitor Aim : to monitor the broader sustainability of Development Encourage holistic review, assessing coherence and convergence in implementation Monitor through the same process and UN governance bodies : post‐2015 development agenda and goals; climate change mitigation and adaptation monitoring arrangement

13. 3WCDRR outcomes 3 Components: 1.Post‐2015 framework for disaster risk reduction (HFA2), its monitoring system and periodic review process 2.Voluntary commitments of stakeholders, as leading examples of assumption of responsibility, vision and readiness to act 3.The political declaration.

14. Component 1: HFA2 o Build on the experience from HFA1, be practical, action oriented, strengthen accountability, relatively short, capable of addressing future natural and technological risk scenarios, far reaching. o Build on the experience and the principles enshrined in the preceding frameworks: - Yokohama Strategy for a Safer World International Framework of Action for IDNDR - A Safer World in the 21st Century: Disaster and Risk Reduction- ISDR

15. Component 1: HFA2 Substantive elements of the post 2015‐framework for disaster risk reduction may be guided by a question: C onsidering that managing risk may require a variety of instruments and initiatives at local, national, regional and global level: what is it that is currently missing or unclear, but which, if agreed upon by the specific means of an global non legally binding framework, would enable more effective risk management? A set of guiding principles Redefinition of the expected outcome Strategic goals and priorities for action

16. 5 Guiding principles 1.The sustainability of development and resilience of people, nations and the environment depend on sound risk management, which needs to guide private and public planning and investments. It goes beyond the reduction of existing risk and includes the prevention of new risk accumulation. 2.Natural and technological hazards are within the scope of the post‐2015 framework for disaster risk reduction. 3.Prevention and reduction of disaster risk ‐ are an international legal obligation and constitute a safeguard for the enjoyment of human rights.

17. 5 Guiding principles 4. The increasingly trans‐boundary and global characteristics of risk drivers require further cooperative efforts in their assessment and management. 5. The availability of open source and open access science‐based risk information and knowledge is instrumental to cost‐benefit analysis, transparent transactions, accountability, and the development of partnerships across public, private and other stakeholders.

18. Outcome, Strategic goals Outcome: Secure, healthy, wealthy and resilient nations and communities. Three complementary strategic goals: 1.Risk prevention and the pursuit of development pathways that minimise disaster risk generation; 2.Risk reduction, i.e. actions to address existing accumulations of disaster risk; 3.Strengthened resilience, i.e. actions that enable nations and communities to absorb loss and damage, minimise impacts and bounce forward.

19. P riority areas Critical public policies that address disaster risk Public policies in: i. Prospective and anticipatory risk management (risk prevention), ii Corrective risk management (risk reduction) iii. Actions to strengthen resilience. Refocusing of the HFA Priority Areas on public policy to sharpen the instrument, define responsibilities, strengthen accountability and facilitate monitoring.

20. Governance Expected outcome and strategic goals, public policies on risk management to be underpinned by appropriate governance frameworks that incorporate actions by national and local governments, by civil society, the private sector, the science and academic sector and others. “HFA[2][Plus] – Managing Risk to Achieve Resilience.”

21. Enhanced Monitoring System The success of the policies will determine the level of disaster loss and damage a country faces and the longer term impacts on the economy, the environment and social welfare. Measure how public policy in disaster risk management is addressing : i. underlying risk drivers to prevent risk creation (prospective risk management), ii. reducing existing levels of risk (corrective risk management) iii. strengthening resilience (the capacity to absorb loss and bounce forward) when disasters occur

22. 5 Families of indicators 1.A set of disaster loss and damage metrics, expressed in both absolute and relative (to population, GDP etc) terms. Include both human loss (mortality, people injured or affected); physical damage (houses and local infrastructure damaged and destroyed) and economic loss (replacement costs of damaged and destroyed assets). 2. countries’ risk profile, including both intensive and extensive risk Built on metrics such as Annual Average Loss (AAL) and Probable Maximum Loss (PML)

23. 5 Families of indicators 3. Explore the resilience of a country’s economy to Probable losses. Indicators that compare risk to the size of a country’s economy, its capital stock, investment and savings levels, trade flows, insurance penetration, the fiscal health of government, the degree of social protection and other metrics. 4. How a country is managing its underlying risk drivers, also providing links from disaster risk management to the SDGs and to the climate change convention. Indicators in categories including: economic and fiscal structure; poverty and social vulnerability; environmental and ecosystem services degradation and climate change; urbanization; coping capacity.

24. 5 Families of indicators 5. Measure how countries are adopting effective public policies in favour of prospective and anticipatory risk management, corrective risk management and the strengthening of resilience by both the public and private sectors. Indicators to measure the effectiveness of the governance and arrangements for information and knowledge generation and management that need to underpin public policy in disaster risk management.

25. Data for monitoring First indicator family: derived from national disaster loss databases Second family: from the results of global risk assessments Third and fourth families: from internationally available and comparable statistics and databases Fifth family : generated by governments, using a modified and enhanced HFA Monitor

26. Monitoring Indicators that are compatible with the Objectives of SDG and new CC arrangement HFA Monitor system would need to make this link explicit at the indicator level to enable monitoring progress across all three frameworks concurrently.

27. Review process Through the High Level Political Forum (HLPF) of UNGA- SDG and CC review process HLFP as a critical instrument which could serve the review of HFA2 To ensure a synchronised and harmonised review process and deliberations, cross‐fertilisation with learning from the implementation of the 3 future frameworks

28. Voluntary stakeholder commitments 1. The formulation of voluntary commitments at the regional and global levels by all stakeholders through the Regional Platforms, and their integration into the Conference’s overall outcome 2. Commitments represent the proposal by stakeholder groups for concrete actions to implement the post‐2015 framework for disaster risk reduction at regional and/or global levels. 3. Indicate how all stakeholders could work together and generate the necessary shift “from shared risk to shared value”, captured in the 2013 Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction.

29. Voluntary stakeholder commitments Recognising the value in guiding implementation and cooperation, voluntary commitments should be included in the political declaration of the World Conference. To be practical and actionable, voluntary commitments should provide targets, indicators and means of verification and commit to periodic self‐assessment of progress. The voluntary commitments could be compiled by country, region and sector to facilitate visualisation and monitoring.

30. The Political Declaration Political Declaration to be build on the deliberations of the Regional Platforms, in order to ensure harmony between global and regional levels and specificities. 11 points capturer proposed substantive elements for consideration in the political declaration :

31. The Political Declaration 1. Nature of risk: anthropogenic nature of risk, changing characteristics, need to focus on risk drivers, address exposure together with vulnerability 2. Recognition of the redefinition of HFA elements as a necessary innovation to effectively manage risk for resilience 3. Naming the post‐2015 framework for disaster risk reduction as: “HFA [2] or HFA [Plus] – Managing Risk to Achieve Resilience”, defining the latter as an evolution of HFA, that builds on the past frameworks

32. The Political Declaration 4. Welcome the updating of the HFA Monitor into a HFA [2] [Plus] Monitor, with new core system of targets, indicators and means of verification. 5. Welcome and appreciate the significance of the stakeholders “commitments”, as an essential sign of leadership, goodwill, cooperation and concrete action to articulate and implement the post‐2015 framework for disaster risk reduction.

33. The Political Declaration 6. Stress on enhancing accountability at local, national and international levels, and welcome international law concerning the “Protection of persons in the event of disasters” by the UN International Law Commission. 7. Call for an integrated implementation of the post‐2015 framework for disaster risk reduction and the post‐2015 development agenda/goals and climate change agreement.

34. The Political Declaration 8. Request periodic review of HFA2 by the HLPF through the periodic meetings under the auspices of the UN General Assembly and the ECOSOC 9. Recognise the significance of regional strategies to manage risk and suggesting their review in line with HFA2

35. The Political Declaration 10. Call on the United Nations system to support countries and stakeholders with the implementation of HFA2 through the UN Plan of Action on Disaster Risk Reduction for Resilience. 11. Call on countries and stakeholders to join forces under the safe schools initiative launched at the World Conference.

36. Thank you http://www.preventionweb.net/posthfa/ http://www.preventionweb.net/posthfa/