sudan
Senior Member
- Oct 17, 2012
- 266
- 11
- 51
This paper issued by the policy drafting committee of Beyond 2015 for Conflict, Fragility & Disaster aims to shed lights on the efforts to develop the Post-2015 Development Agenda which was started by the UN (United Nations) almost two years ago and which included as well Sudan as has been published in this page before.
In funding these approaches the international community must address the problem of the gap between humanitarian, development and peacebuilding partners, and develop appropriate funding and delivery models that can be adapted to national or local realities. Significant increases in long-term funding need to be allocated for sustainable development and peace-building in areas traditionally the domain of humanitarian funding. Institutional donors need also more confidence in programming in fragile environments, through the development of protocols and continuing to build an emerging evidence base. There needs to be agreement about how state and peace-building can include support for health and other human development goals and vice-versa.
The effects of investing in disaster risk reduction on MDG achievements
While great strides have taken in the commitment and focus on integrating disaster risk reduction (DRR) in broader development strategies, those most vulnerable and at risk still find their social wellbeing, livelihoods and food security affected on an annual basis often with devastating results.
Countries that have invested in strengthening their disaster management capacities have witnessed a steady decline in mortality risk, primarily with regard to weather-related disasters. However, much more needs to be done to reduce economic losses fuelled by the rapid growth of asset exposure.
If the objective of the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) the significant reduction of disaster losses is to be achieved and if progress is to be made towards development, a new paradigm in disaster risk reduction must emerge.21 DRR is recognized as a cost-effective alternative to the ever mounting costs of emergencies22 and an important determining factor of a countrys resilience and preparedness. Enhanced investment in DRR measures should therefore be included as an integral element of the post-2015 development framework.
UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNIISDR) research highlights two examples Philippines and Mongolia - that show investment in risk reduction practices has been very effective in facilitating progress across a wide range of MDGs.23 A further example of the positive recovery and resilience capacity that DRR embeds can be gleaned by comparing the 2010 earthquakes in Chile and Haiti. The Chilean 8.8 magnitude earthquake resulted in far fewer deaths than the 7.0 Haitian earthquake; with the difference credited to Chiles significant investment in DRR since the 1960s, including strong building code regulations, and Haitis inherent vulnerability caused by low literacy, poor access to basic services, years of conflict, political instability and recurrent disasters such as cyclones, floods and mudslides which had weakened Haitis already low capacity to invest in the long-term safety of its citizens24. Thus, coherent and comprehensive policy approaches would address, for example, the link between low literacy and effective DRR strategies.
There is political acknowledgement25 of the importance of DRR but enhanced efforts are needed to embed DRR within national and international policy and legal frameworks. DRR must extend beyond the humanitarian domain and be hardwired into the post-2015 development framework, both as a cross-cutting issue that should be mainstreamed and as a stand-alone goal in its own right. To this end the work leading up to the post-2015 HFA will be instrumental and must be integrated into post-2015 development framework discussions.
Moreover, to ensure that enhanced investment in DRR will result in optimal effects for overall development greater emphasis must be placed on addressing the underlying causes of risk and vulnerability, while DRR funding must be embedded to a greater extent in development spending, with an increased focus on low income and highly vulnerable contexts. Often within this context the role of animals and animal welfare is key to livelihood protection, recovery, food security and social structures. A new deep-rooted approach is required that addresses inequalities in the distribution of rights, resources and power which increase vulnerability, prevent equitable risk-sharing and severely constrain risk reduction options.
In funding these approaches the international community must address the problem of the gap between humanitarian, development and peacebuilding partners, and develop appropriate funding and delivery models that can be adapted to national or local realities. Significant increases in long-term funding need to be allocated for sustainable development and peace-building in areas traditionally the domain of humanitarian funding. Institutional donors need also more confidence in programming in fragile environments, through the development of protocols and continuing to build an emerging evidence base. There needs to be agreement about how state and peace-building can include support for health and other human development goals and vice-versa.
The effects of investing in disaster risk reduction on MDG achievements
While great strides have taken in the commitment and focus on integrating disaster risk reduction (DRR) in broader development strategies, those most vulnerable and at risk still find their social wellbeing, livelihoods and food security affected on an annual basis often with devastating results.
Countries that have invested in strengthening their disaster management capacities have witnessed a steady decline in mortality risk, primarily with regard to weather-related disasters. However, much more needs to be done to reduce economic losses fuelled by the rapid growth of asset exposure.
If the objective of the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) the significant reduction of disaster losses is to be achieved and if progress is to be made towards development, a new paradigm in disaster risk reduction must emerge.21 DRR is recognized as a cost-effective alternative to the ever mounting costs of emergencies22 and an important determining factor of a countrys resilience and preparedness. Enhanced investment in DRR measures should therefore be included as an integral element of the post-2015 development framework.
UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNIISDR) research highlights two examples Philippines and Mongolia - that show investment in risk reduction practices has been very effective in facilitating progress across a wide range of MDGs.23 A further example of the positive recovery and resilience capacity that DRR embeds can be gleaned by comparing the 2010 earthquakes in Chile and Haiti. The Chilean 8.8 magnitude earthquake resulted in far fewer deaths than the 7.0 Haitian earthquake; with the difference credited to Chiles significant investment in DRR since the 1960s, including strong building code regulations, and Haitis inherent vulnerability caused by low literacy, poor access to basic services, years of conflict, political instability and recurrent disasters such as cyclones, floods and mudslides which had weakened Haitis already low capacity to invest in the long-term safety of its citizens24. Thus, coherent and comprehensive policy approaches would address, for example, the link between low literacy and effective DRR strategies.
There is political acknowledgement25 of the importance of DRR but enhanced efforts are needed to embed DRR within national and international policy and legal frameworks. DRR must extend beyond the humanitarian domain and be hardwired into the post-2015 development framework, both as a cross-cutting issue that should be mainstreamed and as a stand-alone goal in its own right. To this end the work leading up to the post-2015 HFA will be instrumental and must be integrated into post-2015 development framework discussions.
Moreover, to ensure that enhanced investment in DRR will result in optimal effects for overall development greater emphasis must be placed on addressing the underlying causes of risk and vulnerability, while DRR funding must be embedded to a greater extent in development spending, with an increased focus on low income and highly vulnerable contexts. Often within this context the role of animals and animal welfare is key to livelihood protection, recovery, food security and social structures. A new deep-rooted approach is required that addresses inequalities in the distribution of rights, resources and power which increase vulnerability, prevent equitable risk-sharing and severely constrain risk reduction options.
