In Yokohama at the midway assessment of IDNDR it was stated: "Equally, the creation of the organizational framework called for by the General Assembly, which includes National Decade Committees, has laid the basis for intensified preventive and preparedness effort sin the second half of the Decade; "(see: Yokohama Strategy and Plan of Action for a Safer World B. Assessment of the status of disaster reduction midway into the Decade, 3.)

In the Plan of Action it was recommended: "As appropriate, establish and/or strengthen National Committees for the Decade..."(see: Yokohama Strategy and Plan of Action for a Safer World II. Plan of Action 11.5.)

At the end of IDNDR when the successor arrangement the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction was established, the Secretary General of the United Nations requested "Governments to maintain and strengthen established national and multisectoral platforms for natural disaster reduction in order to achieve sustainable development goals and objectives, with the full utilization of scientific and technical means. "He also stated in his report that: "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, 1999, A/54/497, para. 32)

"The ISDR Secretariat has renewed its efforts to re-establish these contacts. A priority for the coming year is to revitalise and strengthen the building of stronger national networks or national platforms drawing from several sectors and disciplines to further improve the implementation of disaster reduction." (see ISDR website, Country information, Introduction)

National Platforms are concrete manifestations of political willingness and institutional recognition of disaster risk reduction as a relevant issue within the national interests. National Platforms can work to involve in ISDR activities the various ministerial departments, agencies, institutions, organizations, civil society and individuals working for the advancement of disaster reduction, so that each Member State may play an ever-increasing role in ISDR's work, and particularly in the formulation and execution of its programmes.

Particularly in its implementation, national platforms act very distinctively. In some instances, national platforms have a major role in promoting DRR as an international issue (Germany). In other cases, they have a major role in addressing the needs for DRR within their own countries (most expected in developing countries). In some countries, we found a combination of the previous cases (Switzerland and France).

On the European level, where several National Platforms of Disaster Risk Reduction exist, the National Platform started to network among themselves with the aim to make use of existing synergies and to coordinate their activities on the regional level.

The thematic session on National Platforms will show on the case study of European National Platforms:

• the diversity of possible structures
• the working agenda and focus of activities of the different Platforms
• short falls in support to the system of National Platforms
• the added value of networking on regional levels and

the potential of the National Platform structure in the implementation of the ISDR (national and regional).

The session will be started by inputs provided by representatives of different National Platforms on structures and working agenda, followed by a panel on networking and regional activities. So far the National Platforms from France, Switzerland, Czech republic and Germany confirmed their participation to the thematic session.

This session will discuss good practices and lessons learned with various aspects of establishing and strengthening National Systems for Disaster Reduction, such as:
- Legal and regulatory frameworks
- Policy and planning
- Organizational structures
- Resources and Capacities at local and national levels
- Partnerships and cooperation at national and regional levels

The session will commence with a brief session introduction, followed by short presentations of panelists from national governments, international and regional organizations as well as donor agencies on the topic of national systems for disaster risk management. Each contribution will aim at emphasizing a different aspect of the topic or present a different point of view. The panel presentations will be followed by an open discussion which will focus on identifying recommendations on how to improve the functioning of national systems for disaster risk management in the broader context of governance, how to make more effective the assistance provided, as well as the identification of issues which may require further discussion in the follow-up to the World Conference.

To present ideas and generate discussion on why and how community-focused disaster risk reduction (DRR) can be supported and expanded by national and institutional donor policy frameworks.

3 presentations:

1. The effectiveness of community-based disaster preparedness: a case study
Indian NGO Discipleship Centre will present its community-based, low cost flood preparedness and mitigation project operating in Bihar State. The effectiveness of the project in saving lives and livelihoods has been demonstrated through recent severe flooding, and detailed cost-benefit research has proved it to be a worthwhile investment. Such local level risk reduction can and should be supported through effective national and donor policy.

2. A conceptual framework for risk reduction
Tearfund will present its community-focused conceptual framework for disaster risk reduction (modified ‘crunch model’). This model informs the development of government policies based on good risk reduction practice at community level.

3. Effective national and donor policy frameworks for disaster risk reduction
A/ Community risk reduction must be facilitated through a strong national policy framework. The Indian government’s approach to DRR will be discussed from an Indian perspective.

B/ Local and national risk reduction can be either supported or hindered by donor policy. Tearfund will discuss the obstacles that institutional donor organizations face when seeking to ‘mainstream’ risk reduction, and offer recommendations to address them. This will be based on Tearfund’s consultation with 9 key donor organisations in 2003 including the EU, UN agencies, governments and financial institutions.

C/ Tearfund and Cranfield University will present a new tool – a framework of indicators –which enables donor organizations to measure and monitor their progress with mainstreaming risk reduction into relief and development processes. The indicators were developed in wide consultation with donor organizations and experts in 2004 and will be introduced at this session. The framework is designed to enable donor organizations to determine the ‘level’ of mainstreaming they have achieved, where level 1 represents ‘zero progress’ and level 4 represents ‘fully mainstreamed’. The Swedish International Development Agency (SIDA) will comment on the framework’s application for donor organizations, as well as SIDA’s own approach to mainstreaming.

The Session 1.5 will have two parts, namely, a) Presentation of Experiences, and b) Plenary discussion. The Presentation section will be a forum for sharing of experiences and approaches on Disaster Reduction on Critical Facilities. The Plenary discussion will try to look into the future of the efforts and develop a consensus of approaches and recommendations to the WCDR through the chairperson of the Thematic Cluster.

With micro and macro case studies; and good practices from Asia, Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean, the session will offer and generate significant knowledge that has direct relevance to the inter-governmental process.

The key speakers from Action Aid International will present a paper and show a documentary that will analyse the challenges, good practices and past experiences in the area of governance and risk reduction. The session proposed by ActionAid International will take forward the outcomes of the seminar we are hosting in December mentioned in the next section.

Background work for the proposed session: ActionAid International is organizing an international seminar on "governance and disaster risk reduction" in December 2004 in Bangladesh. The seminar is one of six seminars in a series titled "Managing Risk: Exploring Interfaces Between Disasters and Development" organized by Integrated Planning Against Risk [IPAR] and funded by Economic and Social Research Council[1] in the UK. The IPAR network is a transdisciplinary group of development practitioners, policy-makers and academics. It is hosted by five organizations; ActionAid International, Centre for Development Studies (University of Wales, Swansea), Benfield Hazard Research Centre (University College London), Wageningen University Social Scientists and INTRAC.

Members from the network will be participating in the seminar along with local Bangladeshi organizations. We are currently exploring collaboration with Comprehensive Disaster Management Programme [CDMP] of UNDP and Government of Bangladesh; DFID funded Chars Livelihoods Programme and University of Dhaka.

ActionAid International has carried out a number of studies on the subject across many countries including Ethiopia[2], Malawi[3], India and Bangladesh. We published a paper together with the Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED) and University Collage London on the subject for the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in Johannesburg in 2002 entitled "Development at Risk"[4].

We will be drawing on experience both from across ActionAid International and our partners experience at a micro and macro level to feed into the parallel session. The very timing of our Bangladesh seminar provides an ideal platform to develop discussions for the WCDR international conference.

ActionAid International are also discussing and developing thinking with other NGOs including Tearfund, Christian Aid, British Red Cross, Cafod, ITDG, Stakeholder Forum and the Department for International Development.

The Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) is the UK's leading research funding and training agency addressing economic and social concerns. They aim to provide high quality research on issues of importance to business, the public sector and government. The issues considered include economic competitiveness, the effectiveness of public services and policy, and our quality of life. (www.esrc.ac.uk)

[1] The Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) is the UK's leading research funding and training agency addressing economic and social concerns. They aim to provide high quality research on issues of importance to business, the public sector and government. The issues considered include economic competitiveness, the effectiveness of public services and policy, and our quality of life. (www.esrc.ac.uk)
[2] www.actionaid.org.uk/wps/content/documents/em_gov.doc
[3] www.actionaid.org.uk/content_document.asp?doc_id=211
[4] www.actionaid.org.uk/content_document.asp?doc_id=194

Global learning shows that dominant disaster management approaches (preparedness and mitigation and response) alone cannot help societies and vulnerable people cope with the increased pattern of disaster risk. What is most important is a full adoption of -risk reduction- that relates to how systematic development and the application of policies, strategies and practices can minimize vulnerabilities, hazards and the impact of disasters on a society, in the broad context of sustainable development.

Increasingly appropriate governance is noted as fundamental if risk considerations are to be factored into development planning and if existing risks are to be successfully reduced. Learning from practitioners suggests that good governance does reduce disaster risk.

Governance, in the form of transparency, participation and accountability can explain why different groups of people are affected differently and have different recovery patterns, and among these groups why the poorest and most marginalized have the least capacity to cope. AAI research in Bangladesh and Ethiopia clearly suggests that there are strong linkages between levels of accountability and government's performance in risk reduction.

Although it has long been acknowledged that strengthening public accountability is likely to be the most effective way of reducing the negative impact of emergencies on some of the world's poorest people[5], very little work has been done on what this means and on how to strengthen channels of institutional accountability in order to reduce disaster risk. There has been substantial investment in strengthening governance in many developing countries in recent years, but this has rarely been extended to disaster risk.

ActionAid International, therefore, is applying for a parallel session to contribute to the future direction of disaster reduction, which falls under the discussion of theme of governance focussing on risk reduction and sustainable development and transparency-accountability.

Importance of the session: One of the key issues that has emerged from the UN/ISDR online dialogue is the following: "Political will and accountable governance is the most essential element for sustainable development as well as effective disaster reduction at all levels, in government and society at large". Although this has been conceptually acknowledged, significant knowledge gaps exist in terms of understanding what form and nature of governance can reduce disaster risk. The second area, which is also poorly researched, is how citizen participation could build the form and nature of governance that essentially protects citizens from disaster risk.

Purpose and main discussion issues in the session: Given the problem mentioned above, the ActionAid International proposed session will discuss the barriers of risk reduction, potential solutions and suggest a policy direction for the WCDR negotiation process.


[5] See, for example, Drèze, J., and Sen, A., 1989, Hunger and Public Action, Oxford: Clarendon Press

In recent years there have been two important trends in thinking about the impacts of climate on human societies. First, there has been an increasing focus on preventive measures dealing with disasters arising from climatic extremes. Secondly, it has been recognized that, whatever the outcome of mitigation measures to combat climate change, some climate change is inevitable and adaptation measures that address the most likely impacts of climate change especially within the development context will be necessary. There is the need to explore the contextual linkages between disaster prevention and adaptation to climate change in order to promote a more comprehensive approach to current and future climate risks, which maximizes benefits for the sustainable development process.

Thematic Link : Theme 1: Governance: Institutional Policy Frameworks for Risk Reduction. The proposed session is closely linked to Theme 1 of the parallel sessions. It proposes a more comprehensive approach to current and future climate risks by highlighting linkages and divergences between disaster risk management and adaptation to climate change. Thereby it addresses an issue of relevance to development processes, which deserves more practical recognition on the international to sub-national level.

Approach: A Short Paper will presented by the agencies highlighting the core messages. The presentation will be followed by an open discussion

The workshop will include several short presentations. Although focussing on Swiss experiences, it is designed for a wide international audience and will take into account the particular situation and needs of developing countries.