Risk-informed decision-making: An agenda for improving risk assessments under HFA2

1. Risk-informed decision-making: An agenda for improving risk assessments under HFA2 Photo credit: Andrew McConnell/Panos Pictures

2. CDKN Goals • Disaster risk management • Improving risk informed decision making – increasing the use of science information • Mainstream DRM into CCD at national and sub-national levels • Positioning DRM as a priority consideration in sustainable development and post-2015 policy frameworks 2 Credit: G.M.B. Akash/Panos Pictures

3. CDKN Goals Improving risk informed decision making – increasing the use of science information • Examples of relevant projects: • Partnership with the IPCC to promote key messages emerging from 5th Assessment Report • Developing a Climate Risk Assessment for CCD Planning in Central Asia • Risk and vulnerability mapping in the Zambezi basin to inform basin-wide policy • Learning Network on the Uptake of Risk Assessments in LAC 3 Credit: G.M.B. Akash/Panos Pictures

4. Risk assessments • Increase awareness and understanding of disaster risk • Develop financial applications to spread and transfer risk • Guide and inform risk management and adaptation policies • Inform early warning systems and contingency planning • Inform spatial planning decisions • World Bank and United Nations (2012b) Improving the assessment of disaster risks to strengthen financial resilience: A Special Joint G20 Publication by the Government of Mexico and the World Bank. Washington DC: World Bank. 4 Photo credit: Chris Stowers/ Panos Pictures

5. Learning Network on the Uptake of Risk Assessments in LAC • Case studies: • Colombia, El Salvador, Dominican Republic, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Peru • Mini case studies in Pakistan (NDMA), India (CDKN project in Ahmedabad) and Ghana (CDKN project in coastal areas) • 3-4 risk assessments in each • Range of intended uses: • raise awareness x3 • risk transfer x2 • inform policies x11 • preparedness and EWS x1 • planning x6 • Mix of contexts and scales 5 Photo credit: Chris Stowers/ Panos Pictures

6. Obstacles to uptake • Technical • Lack of conceptual clarity • Lack of data • Low technical capacity • Operational • Difficulties in interpreting results • Mismatch between scales • Institutional • Low salience • Short political timescales 6

7. A political impact agenda • Enabling factors for successful use of risk assessments • Process not projects • Engage end users in design • Build capacity • Promote partnerships across scales • Target sectors • Build inter-sectoral collaboration • Interpret outputs • Link risk to development needs • Tie to political timescales

8. Conclusions • HFA2 should promote risk assessments that help policy-makers to relate disaster risk to broader development decisions • Technical, operational and institutional obstacles stand in the way of risk-informed decision-making. Too often, risk assessments are ignored by decision-makers because results are difficult to interpret • Risk assessment should be demand-led and designed with end-users to ensure uptake and sustainability in application • One-off risk assessments (as pre-conditions to risk management projects) should be avoided - these have a very short shelf life • Donors should seek to develop local capacity for commissioning and interpreting risk studies • Future risk assessments should focus on sectoral needs as the basis for subsequent multi-sectoralwork