Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) into sectoral policies

Governance issues for policy development and implementation

Lessons learned from the Philippines

input to

TOT Workshop 21-25 September, Bangkok Pro-Poor Policy Approaches to Address Risk and Vulnerability

at country level

by Stephan Baas FAOHQs

Presentation objective is to share a case study on DRR mainstreaming into sectoral policies and discuss governance issues that crucially influenced the mainstreaming process

existing institutional settings and structures decentralization Participatory, and inclusive policy planning across institutional level vertical and horizontal interaction (interface of policy processes and

technical evidence ) Coordination; Integration

Presentation Structure

Overall context : why is DRR mainstreaming important • The DRR/ FNS nexus • What is at stake in agriculture ? • Entry points for DRR mainstreaming

Philippines case example • What do we do • Governance issues/processes • Lessons regarding policy processes

Emerging key issue for discussion

• Integration/linking between different policy agendas - DRR and CCA

COUNTRIES WITH HIGH PREVALENCE OF UNDERNOURISHMENT

AND HIGH VULNERABILITY

TO NATURAL HAZARD AND CLIMATE CHANGE

Basic Map: Prevalence of undernourishment in the population (percent) in 2012-2014

Damage and Loss to Agriculture based on PDNAs (2003-2013) percentage share of damage and loss to agriculture, by hazard type

Overall, Droughts and floods together cause 74% of total damage and losses on agriculture.

-

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Floods Storms Earthquakes Tsunamis Droughts

37

21

2 3

37

perc

ent

FAO (2015): The Impact of Natural Hazards and Disasters on Agriculture and Food and Nutrition Security. A Call for Action to build Resilient Livelihoods.

AGRICULTURE ABSORBS 22% OF ALL LOSS AND DAMAGES

Average percentage share of damage and loss within subsectors, by type of hazard

6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

crops livestock forestry fisheries

23

3

89

16

60

8 5 10

15

86

0 3 2 0 3

70

1 2 3

0

pe

rce

nt

storms

floods

droughts

tsunamis

earthquakes

Disaster Damage and Loss in Agriculture is proposed as indicator in SFDDR and SDG 1, 2, 13

Agricultural production losses in selected Asian Countries affected by large scale disasters

• Countries included: Bangladesh, Cambodia, India, Indonesia, Lao ,Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Vietnam

• Includes natural hazards affecting > 250,000 people : 2 Droughts; 3 Earthquakes; 21 Floods; 8 Tropical storms (total 34 disasters)

• Comparing production in year and year after disaster with 3-year average prior to disaster; production losses (tons) translated into monetary value using national producer prices/ton.

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

Cereals and Pulses Top 20 Commodities

8,962

1,587

Source: FAOSTAT (Production Quantity and Commodity Prices)

2003-2013 losses in million US$)

Floods account for 86% of losses

Entry point to DRR mainstreaming: International policy agendas provide frameworks for

national DRR policies:

Hyogo Framework for Action 2005 -2015

Sendai Framework for

Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030

Bali Roadmap (adaptation) Climate Change Agreement envisaged 2015 under UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC),

MDGs

Sustainable Development Goals,

2015-2030;

Challenge: DRR was no mainstream

topic for AG sector

yet in most developing countries,

lacking evidence on value

addition in circles of

policy makers

Since SFDRR endorsement 2015 the important role of sectoral actors to prevent and mitigate impacts from shocks and disaster, and to build resilience

has been clearly articulated into global development policy frameworks

New challenge: How to respond to and integrate/link different policy agendas from a sectoral perspective

Philippines case study

The NDRRM Council is guided by the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Framework (NDRRMF), which envisions a “safer, adaptive and disaster-resilient Filipino communities toward sustainable development” (Figure below).

National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management policy context Philippines

Three subsequent Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) projects implemented by the Government of the Philippines with technical guidance from FAO included process based DRR policy planning and mainstreaming in agriculture May 2009 – Dec 2011 July 2012 – Dec 2013 July 2014 – Dec 2015

Strengthening capacities for climate risk management and disaster preparedness in Bicol region

Consolidating capacities for DRR in Agriculture in South East Asia (Cambodia, Lao PDR, Philippines, DPRK) ’]

Enhancing capacities for DRR in Agriculture in Cambodia and the Philippines

Precondition: Operational Framework for policy process

Challenge: usually short term projects Insufficient time for policy processes in stand alone projects

Creating a programmatic long term framework

Philippines: Context what we do on DRR and Resilience; Overview

Increased resilience

of livelihoods to

shocks

APPLY PREVENTION AND

MITIGATION MEASURES:

WATCH TO SAFEGUARD:

ENABLE THE

ENVIRONMENT:

PREPARE and RESPOND:

In following part of presentation focus is only on the DRR mainstreaming into sectoral policies

• Understanding the risk and need • Understanding and use of existing institutional

environment and capacities (what is already in place?) • Know how , availability of and access to good practices

and technology options for DRR (evidence to make policies “tangible” at all levels)

• Synergies and complementarity with other policy development agendas

Key elements for mainstreaming DRR into AG sector policies and programmes

Natural hazard occurrence in the Philippines 1980-2010

Source: "EM-DAT: The OFDA/CRED International Disaster

Database

Detailed Understanding the hazard risk Basis for any sectoral policy development on DRR

Drought , 2.2% Earthquake, 3.7%

Flood, 28.9%

Storm, 60.6%

Volcano, 4.3% Wilfire, 0.3%

Country example Philippines Agricultural Losses by year and sub-sector

National data (DA)

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Bill

ion

s

Infrastructure

Fisheries

Livestock

Crops

• Between 2006-2013 total losses in the AG sectorS were 4.1 billion USD; of these losses, 3.6 billion USD occurred in the crops sub-sector

• In 2013, alone, total AG sectors losses were more than 900 million USD

• The regions most impacted were region 2 (Cagayan Valley) with 1.35 million Ha

affected, region 3 (Central Luzon) and region 5 (Bicol Region).

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4A Region 4B Region 5 Region 6 Region 7 Region 8 Region 9 Region 10 Region 11 Region 12 Region 13 CAR ARMM

330

1354

1256

247 217

1082

384

61

530

35 55

131

39 6

303

50

‘00

0 H

ect

are

s

)

Areas of crops affected (‘000 Ha) by region, Philippines (2006-2013

365

488

738

107 94

260

306

62

492

18

71

574

25 10 0.1

18

173

16

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4A Region 4B Region 5 Region 6 Region 7 Region 8 Region 9 Region 10 Region 11 Region 12 Region 13 Region 15 ARMM CAR CARAGA

US$

Mill

ion

s

• There are significant differences between crop ha losses and US$ value loss

Region 3 has been the most affected by natural hazards during the period of

2006-2013, followed by region 11, 8 and 2.

• Climate change is expected to massively alter the situation southwards

Agricultural damage & losses by region in US$ millions, Philippines (2006-2013)

Strengths for DRR mainstreaming into

agriculture sector policies & plans

• National strategy , policies and overall legal frameworks for DRR/M exist

• High level of awareness of people and policy makers on importance of DRR exists.

• Emergency response system well established ; tasks for sectors defined; calamity funds at all levels exist

Governance bottlenecks for DRR mainstreaming

• Sectoral DRR/M policies and plans did not exist;

• Information flow for policy and/or decision making from the bottom-up and vice versa,

• Sectoral integration of strongly related but nevertheless different policy processes, with different stakeholder groups supporting differing policy agendas, e.g. the integration and link between DRR/M and climate change adaptation, and

• Up-scaling of good practices for DRR/M (e.g. farming practices, climate information services or methodologies for the assessment of losses and damages) for building resilience at scale.

Starting point for DRR mainstreaming process in agriculture (institutional context)

Nat

ion

al le

vel

Re

gio

nal

leve

l Lo

cal l

eve

l

Provincial AG office

Mainstreaming Disaster Risk Reduction and Management (DRR/M) in Agriculture in the Philippines Key governance issue: Translating policies into local action

Local Government Units (LGU)

Barangays, farmers, farmer groups

Municipal AG officer

Policy/institutional environment for DRR Climate Change Act 2009; Strategic National Action Plan 2009-2019 Philippine DRR/M Act 2010; National Framework Strategy on Climate Change 2010-2022 Philippine Development Plan 2011-2016 Midterm Update National Climate Change Action Plan 2011-2028; National DRR/M Plan 2011-2028

Policy/institutional environment for DRR Community-based DRR/M plans

AG extension system

Department of Agriculture Regional Field Unit V DA/RFU V

(Technical Unit for DRR/CCA)

Climate and agro-meteorological

services (PAGASA)

Department of Agriculture

Climate Change Commission

MoU/partnerships Mutual cooperation

Information exchange

Enhanced climate + agro-meteorological

services

Design and endorsement of CCA and DRR/M policies

Link DRR + CCA/ensure policy

coherence

Overlapping mandates and account-ability

Integration of CCA and DRR planning and

GPO replication at municipal and barangay level

Inte

grat

ion

, co

her

ence

, flo

w o

f in

form

atio

n

Other stakeholders

Social mobilization process/ownership

Outreach and adoption

Other stakeholders

Universities, AG research institutes

Validation, documentation +

replication of lessons learnt and Good

Practice Options (GPO)

National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council (DND, DILG, DSWD, DOST, NEDA, DA, DENR, DAR)

Office of Civil Defense (OCD)

Regional Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council

Municipal Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council

Barangay Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council

Inte

grat

ion

, co

her

ence

, flo

w o

f in

form

atio

n

Advise for, knowledge transfer, replication in and

cooperation with other regions

KEY

Governance challenges and bottlenecks

Opportunities, products, incentives

Success factors: Policy process with ”concrete” products

Challenge: Linking/ feeding policy process with results from bottom up planning Create evidence for policy makers

Outcome : Two regional and 30 municipality-based action plans for DRR/M in agriculture (all formally endorsed) provided evidence of value added for overarching national strategy for DRR/M in agriculture (currently under finalization)

Establishment of regional and community-based plans for DRR/M in agriculture

TCP project DIPECHO I project DIPECHO II project

a) Regional plan of

action for DRR in

agriculture

Identified specific needs

for sectoral planning for

DRRM

In Bicol region formally

endorsed by RFU 5 DA in

2013

In Caraga region 2015

(currently under

development)

b) Integrated

community-based

DRR/M action plans

for agriculture

For 9 barangays in 3

municipalities in Bicol.

For 24 barangays in 10

municipalities in Bicol.

For 10 municipalities in

Bicol and 7 municipalities

in Caraga)

c) National strategy for

DRR/M in agriculture

Facilitation support and

technical advice with DA

Central Office in the lead

Overarching institutional and policy environment; Global DRR agenda to refer to and existence and overall national DRR/M

policies and of legislation

Ownership & trust as basis to facilitate policy processes Continuity and consistency through iterative consultation process to

effectively take into account evolving governance/socio-institutional contexts/conditions, thus creating ownership of key stakeholders • working strictly through national/regional/local leadership and

encouraging a culture of ‘counter-partnering’ ;

Catalysing formalized collaboration “MoU” between/among national key actors to spur mutual cooperation,

information exchange, and capacity development activities between different stakeholders

Success factors perceived as helpful to address governance challenges:

Communication and knowledge management

enhancing critical mass and voicing platform though close collaboration and pooled messaging between various projects (TCP AMICAF UNJPJ and DIPECHO);

catalysing expression of concrete demands at various levels to inform decision makers to underline importance of topic and trigger support; and

providing learning platforms across levels, regions and agricultural extension contexts (regular learning/exchange workshops with decision makers; leveraging on existing extension programmes (e.g. FFS), use of PAR approaches);

Success factors perceived as helpful to address governance challenges:

Linking governance processes with “tangible” technical products/delivery: creating evidence-based, field-tested products/outputs perceived as value added

promoting “locally visible” incentives/value added to inform and support governance processes, e.g. through enhanced climate and agro-meteorological services, validated and documented lessons learnt and Good Practice Options ; improved PDNA methodology;

Enhancing political commitment Proactively informing on linkages between national/local/sectoral processes and “global”

commitments and agendas (e.g. HFA) thus highlighting importance of local/regional processes in wider contexts

Get agricultural sector players stronger involved into DRR and CC international discussion

Success factors perceived as helpful to address governance challenges:

Rice production trends

DRR/M within wider policy context : Linking DRR / CCA and poverty alleviation

Patterns/drivers of vulnerability to natural hazards

DRR/M within wider policy context:

Linking DRR/CCA and poverty alleviation

.

Ref: IPPC SREX report

DRR- CCA interfaces relevant for policy development

Climate change induces three dimensions of change for sustainable agriculture, food security & nutrition:

gradual changes (slow on setting increase of average temperatures, change in rainfall patterns, sea level rise, etc) which are less visible yet, but with possibly massive longer term impact on the sustainability of agro-ecosystems; (CCA long term planning)

the increasing variability and uncertainty of current weather patterns; and (sustainable agricultural production)

the increased occurrence of climate extreme events which have high impact and create emergencies with losses of lives, livelihoods and substantial economic damage and losses. (DRR)

Hand over to WS and group discussion: How to embed DRR and CCA, and possibly both together into Agriculture and AA policy development ??