International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR)

Background
Building on three case studies conducted in Vietnam, Kenya and Mexico, the recent workshop hosted by UN-ISDR on behalf of the inter-agency Vulnerability and Adaptation Resource Group (VARG) explored the linkages between disaster risk management and adaptation to climate change. The goal of the discussions was to identify opportunities and barriers to managing current and future climate risks as well as entry points for action.

More than 50 participants from bi- and multi-lateral agencies, representatives from Kenya, Mexico and Vietnam, the private sector, NGOs and regional disaster risk management and climate change experts, and academics attended the workshop, which was supported by DFID, DGIS, GTZ, OECD and SIDA. The country studies were funded by the EC on behalf of VARG.

Discussions & Conclusions
Anchored on the case studies and supplemental presentations from donor agencies, the workshop specifically addressed issues related to (i) data and information, (ii) collaboration and capacity building and (iii) costing and financing climate risk management and role of the private sector.

Workshop participants considered when and at what level a link between disaster risk management and adaptation to climate change is necessary to reduce vulnerabilities that threaten the sustainability of development processes. The discussions highlighted the need to connect decision processes at various scales with local-level needs and ensure an appropriate feedback process.

Data and Information Needs
The lack of climate data is often considered a major bottleneck to strengthen the adaptive capacity of developing countries. While the discussions at the workshop certainly underlined the continued need to maintain and improve the spatial and temporal data coverage in developing countries, participants emphasised that a major constraint is that existing data sources are not fully utilised and data access is often difficult. In particular, there is a need to create opportunities for better integrating physical and socioeconomic information to improve the understanding of the links between exposure to hazards, social, economic and environmental vulnerability factors and awareness of trends that affect vulnerability over time.

Aside from raw data, it was recognised that appropriate information formats for decision-making processes at various levels are lacking. This gap needs to be recognised by strengthening services that can package and translate scientific data into information that guides practical measures. It was suggested that emphasis should be placed on educating professionals to function as 'translators', in order to enable them to relate information on disaster risk, climate change and vulnerability to the needs of various economic sectors.

Coordination and Capacity Building
Strengthening the capacity to address current and future risks involves a broad range of stakeholders. The time horizon that needs to be considered for climate-proofing development activities will differ by the characteristics of the sector and activity under consideration. At the local level, addressing existing deficits to cope with climate variability usually will take priority over long-term considerations for adaptation. However, it is crucial that policy planning processes and incentive systems addressing existing vulnerabilities also take the long-term implications into account to avoid maladaptive development paths.

The country studies demonstrate that the number of multi-sectoral committees and initiatives is increasing. While this is a promising development, these initiatives often still suffer from lack of influence on budgeting processes, which limits the ability to build long-term and sustainable risk reduction efforts. Furthermore, there is often still a lack of coordination between initiatives addressing disaster risks and climate change.

While solutions will differ by country and cultural setting, it is important to put in place the institutional arrangements that will enable networks addressing disaster and climate risks to work together. This also implies improved recognition in planning and budgeting processes to allow for a more continuous approach to reducing vulnerabilities. At the same time, such networks should be characterised by a flexible structure that allows the engagement of different expertise depending on the sector and type of disaster risk that is being addressed. In this context, country participants stress the importance of strengthening existing institutions and networks when possible, rather than creating new ones

Given that development assistance is increasingly channelled through programmes rather than individual projects, the role of donor agencies in the dialogue on climate risk management has to be considered. High-level policy dialogue can complement bottom-up approaches within countries, giving greater visibility to in-country expertise.

Costing & Financing/Private Sector Engagement
There are a variety of public financing sources for adaptation to climate change, including the funds of the UNFCCC, as well as trust funds of donor agencies. In addition there is an increasing emphasis on financial incentives for disaster risk reduction as a complement to emergency relief. This includes in-country activities as well as multilateral resources.

However, it has to be recognised that public sector financing will not suffice to reduce vulnerability to disaster and climate risks. Foreign direct investments often dwarf official development assistance and it is important to explore how the private sector can engage in creating incentives and standards for risk management. In this context, insurance products, especially weather index insurance systems, can play a viable role if tied to efforts aimed at vulnerability reduction.