ProDoc-SCDRR-FINAL for Sign · 2020. 6. 7. · n (SCDRR) in t Summary gh Disaster ster risk re e functions o local comm physical, econ oject is to isaster risks becomes th reduction

Th(SCdepriactdisdeso sudis It regdisdeanreddo ThPlaMaPereaimrelinttar ThjoiSuCelev

N

he project “SC-DRRD) is

evelopment pivate partnertions can besasters. The

evelopment tthat over t

stainable desaster prone

is intended tgulatory framsaster risk re

evelopment, d measures duction proc

ocumented, a

he implementanning Agenanagement C

enanggulangaady, as decid

mplementatiolevant GOI mternational, nrget budget f

his project wint UN progrstainable De

entre in Bangvel.

BAPPEN

UnitedNational Dev

Disaster Ri

afer Commudesigned to

process estabrs at all levee taken to ree ultimate aiakes place inime, a cultu

evelopment countries in t

to attain foumework estabeduction est3) Communithat can be

cesses and mand fed-back

tation of this ncy (BAPPENCoordinationan Bencana (

ded by the Pn of the proj

ministries andnational, provfigure for the

ll facilitate inamme entitle

evelopment”.gkok in Disas

NAS

Nations Devvelopment P

Governme

Safer Commisk Reductio

Projecunities Throuo make disablished in corels especially educe the pm of this pr

n a way that dre of safety and povertythe world.

ur key outputblished, 2) Intablished, stties and dec

e taken to rethodologiesinto policy fr

project will bNAS) in clo Agency (BA

(National Disroject Executject. Strategd agencies, avincial, distri

e five-year pro

nitiation of a ed “Joint UN. This projectster risk initi

velopment PPlanning Ageent of Indone

munities Throon (SCDRR) in

ct Summaryugh Disaster aster risk rere functions o

local commphysical, econ

roject is to disaster risks

becomes thy reduction

ts: 1) Disastestitutional syrengthened ision makerseduce thoses and guideliramework).

be undertakeose partnersAKORNAS PB)

aster Managtive Board, th

gic partnershas well as wiict, sub-distriogramme sta

larger and aN Strategic Plt is also collaiatives at the

Programmeency (BAPPEesia

ough n Developme

y Risk Reducti

eduction a of Governme

munities whernomic and sensure that, are consider

he norm in in Indonesia

er risk reductystems that s

and integras better infore risks; and 4ines and too

en through Nhip with th). When the ement Agenche new agenips will be esth public anict and villagands at USD $

at the same tan on Disastborating wite regional le

ENAS)

ent

ion in Develnormal part

ent and its pure the most

social vulneraover the lo

ed and accouIndonesia le

a - one of t

tion policy, lsupport deceated with lomed on disa4) Local disals developed

National Devehe National

new Badan cy) is operati

ncy will take stablished w

nd private page levels. Th$18,000,000 m

time operateter Risk Reduh the UNDP

evel and also

opment” t of the ublic and effective

ability to ong-term, unted for ading to

the most

egal and entralized ocal level aster risks aster risk

d applied,

elopment Disaster

Nasional ional and over the

with other artners at he overall million.

within a uction for

Regional o country

2

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS ......................................................................................................... 2 

SECTION I – SITUATION ANALYSIS AND STRATEGY ........................................................ 3 

PART I. SITUATION ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................ 3 PART II. STRATEGY ...................................................................................................................... 5 

II.a. Strategic Approaches ................................................................................................. 6 II.b. Programme Outputs ................................................................................................... 8 Output 1: Disaster Risk Reduction Policy, Legal and Regulatory Framework Established:........................................................................................................................ 8 Output 2: Institutional Systems that Support Decentralized Disaster Risk Reduction Integrated with Local Level Development: ...................................................................... 10 Output 3: Communities and decision makers better informed on disaster risks and measures that can be taken to reduce those risks ............................................................ 16 Output 4: Local disaster risk reduction processes, and methodologies , guidelines and tools developed applied, documented, and fed-back into policy framework: .................. 18 

PART III. MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS ..................................................................................... 23 III.a. Governing Principles .............................................................................................. 23 III.b. Oversight and Implementation Arrangements: ....................................................... 24 III.c. Delivery Arrangements: .......................................................................................... 26 III.d. Coordination Arrangements: .................................................................................. 27 III.f. Assets and Equipment: ............................................................................................. 27 

PART IV. MONITORING AND EVALUATION ..................................................................................... 27 IV.a. Monitoring Framework ........................................................................................... 27 IV.b. Financial Monitoring .............................................................................................. 28 IV.c. Audit ........................................................................................................................ 29 IV.d. Monitoring Plan ...................................................................................................... 29 

PART VI. LEGAL CONTEXT .......................................................................................................... 29 

SECTION II – RESULTS AND RESOURCES FRAMEWORK ................................................. 31 

SECTION III – RISK LOG ..................................................................................................... 36 

SECTION IV - TOTAL WORKPLAN AND BUDGET (5 YEAR PROGRAMME) ...................... 37 

ANNEX 1:  CLARIFICATION OF TERMS ........................................................................ 42 

ANNEX 2:  RISK MANAGEMENT STANDARD AS-NZS: 4360 - 1999 ........................... 43 

ANNEX 3:  DISASTER RISK REDUCTION PROBLEMS ASSESSMENT .......................... 44 

ANNEX 4:  JOINT UN STRATEGIC PLAN ON DISASTER RISK REDUCTION FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (2007 – 2010) .......................................... 47 

ANNEX 5: SUPPLEMENTAL PROVISIONS TO THE PROJECT DOCUMENT ...................... 55

ANNEX 6: REGIONAL PROGRAMME FOR CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT IN RISK REDUCTION ................................................................................................ 60 

3

Section I – Situation Analysis and Strategy Part I. Situation Analysis Indonesia is populated with over 200 million people living across a far stretched archipelago. Many are vulnerable to natural and man-made disasters. Natural disasters are common and frequent phenomena in Indonesia causing loss of lives and livelihoods, destruction to property and environmental damage. The country is vulnerable to a high level of seismic activity due to its location at the intersection of three seismic plates with much of this activity just offshore under the sea bringing added risks of tsunamis. As a nation, Indonesia has more earthquakes per year than any other country on earth. A part of the “Ring of Fire”, Indonesia has more than 500 volcanoes, 128 of which are considered to be active. Many parts of the country are susceptible to drought caused by a strong correlation with the El Nino/La Nina (ENSO) phenomenon resulting in crop failure and uncontrolled bush fires exacerbating the forest fires from the extensive forest logging. Added to this is the fact that there are over 5,000 rivers, 30% of which pass through high-density population centers and regularly cause floods - the most commonly recurring natural hazard in Indonesia. The 26 December 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami and Earthquake, with its unprecedented impact on Indonesia followed by a series of well publicized disasters since then, has created both a national and international determination to make the changes needed to save both lives, protect livelihoods and property and reduce the related developmental setbacks. As a result, new initiatives by the Government of Indonesia (GOI) to reform and strengthen its disaster management system have come as part of an overall reform programme of the new Presidential Administration elected in Sept 2004 and a general recognition of the need for improved disaster management identified in a national assessment (19 January 2005 BAPPENAS document to CGI, Chapter 16) following the tsunami and earthquake. The opportunity represented by this national momentum, corresponding parliamentary support and public sentiment is matched by a corresponding wave of international support for this reform, notably by several partner Governments, bilateral donors, multilateral agencies (UN System and IFIs) and civil society organizations. The strategic approach of this programme has resulted from an extensive consultation and assessment process at the national, provincial, district and community levels as well as among UN Agencies in Indonesia. From a UN system perspective, UNDP is responsible “for operational activities for natural disaster mitigation, prevention and preparedness in order to promote national capacity building” as well as the related responsibility for coordinating the recovery cluster after a disaster to help ensure that recovery programmes are linked to risk reduction. The outputs and activities of this programme are strategically aligned with the UNDP Country Programme Document (CPD) and United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) for 2006-2010 that were developed in consultation with and agreed to by the GOI - specifically UNDAF Outcome 3 “Protecting the vulnerable and reducing vulnerabilities”. They are also linked to achievement of the United Nations Millennium Development Goals - particularly those related to Democratic Governance, Poverty Alleviation, Gender Equality, Environmental Sustainability and Development Partners. Further, this programme will be instrumental in designing a joint UN programme entitled “Joint UN Strategic Plan on Disaster Risk Reduction for Sustainable Development” (see Draft Joint Programme Document in Annex 4, page 45) to which, in turn, this programme and future relevant programmes/projects by other UN agencies will be aligned. The joint programme represents the recognition by the UN Country Team (UNCT) in Indonesia that disaster risk reduction must take place across almost every sector of human activity. If the GOI and local communities throughout Indonesia must take a comprehensive, multi-discipline, multi-sectoral approach to making disaster risk reduction a part of sustainable development, so must the UNCT. Therefore, in order to be a

4

more effective partner to GOI, the UNCT must demonstrate a cross-agency approach to its own development programming in its own operational way of addressing disaster risk reduction. A common agency work plan will be used that is guided by UNDAF Outcome 3 “Protecting the vulnerable and reducing vulnerabilities - “By 2010, Government and civil society will have better policy, legal frameworks and mechanisms to protect vulnerable people and reduce vulnerabilities.” Expected outputs below and their respective activities and sub-activities for the work plan provide a framework for coordinating disaster risk reduction actions developed by ISDR and used as the basis for the Hyogo Framework. The expected outputs are 1) risk monitoring, 2) risk reduction and 3) risk impact management. This framework of activities has already been used in Indonesia in a September 2005 UN/INGO/Donor Convergence Workshop to review nationwide disaster risk reduction programmes. Now, this mechanism, combined with a joint programming process, will play a key role in making disaster risk reduction a normal part of agency wide programme development, identifying gaps in activities, and will help ensure that these activities coincide with broad GOI disaster risk reduction priorities and programmes. Later through various consultative venues such as the UN/INGO/Donor Convergence workshops, the Joint Programme seeks to broaden this mechanism to include the related agencies of the Government of Indonesia, international financial institutions, bilateral development agencies, civil society and private sector partners. The programme particularly responds to national and local level gaps in and the need for sustained programmes of disaster prevention, preparedness and mitigation recognized by the GOI and further highlighted by disaster events other than the 2004 tsunami such as the current hot mud eruption in East Java near Surabaya (June - August 2006), recent tsunami and earthquake in Southern Java (17 July 2006), the floods in Sulawesi (June 2006), the earthquake and volcanic eruptions in Yogyakarta and Central Java (June 2006), the earthquakes in Nabire, Alor (2004) and Bengkulu (2000), floods (2003), landslides and previous volcanic eruptions of Mount Merapi (2002), ENSO (1997/98) and forest fires (1998). Many lessons have been learned from these disasters. A selection of key lessons learned and the way this programme intends to address them follows. Multi-hazard, early warning systems and their more important community level evacuation and preparedness planning was not in place during the 2004 tsunami. This programme seeks to help put in place an institutionalized approach to ensure that the so called “last mile” of community level early warning and preparedness planning takes place which, a year and a half later, for the most part is still not happening. The institutional system in Indonesia was and still is set up to deal with disasters in reactionary way through relief and response. This programme seeks to help the GOI in its efforts to focus disaster management on the link between development and disasters by making disaster risk reduction a normal part of the decentralized, local level development process. Despite the GOI intent to achieve MDGs and sustainable development, the related high risk of disasters in Indonesia has gone unrecognized and the MDG and development setbacks cased by disasters have not been addressed. Further, appropriate resources have not been allocated for reducing disaster risk. The absolute level of vulnerability is continuing to grow as Indonesia develops because disaster risk reduction investments are not being made. This programme will help make decision makers understand the importance of investment in risk reduction through training, education and awareness raising and by making economic information about disaster impacts available to help inform development decisions regarding disaster risks. The policy, legal or regulatory framework is not fully in place that makes disaster risk reduction a normal part of the decentralized, local level development process. This programme will help enact and implement the policy, legal and regulatory framework at the local level that the GOI is currently trying to initiate at the national level. The inherent capacity of communities to recognize and reduce their own disaster risks was not a significant part of the disaster management and

5

development process. This programme seeks to reverse that situation with a special emphasis on the poorest segments of society. An important result of the onslaught of disasters referenced above is that a number of critical disaster risk reduction initiatives have been taken by the GOI. They include 1) enactment of Disaster Management Law No 24/year 2007 since April 2007 2) launching of a National Action Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction that supplements the existing the National Development Plan and 3) preparation of a GOI Work Plan with a substantial budget for prevention and risk reduction programmes which are described in more details as follows:

1) Joint development by BAPPENAS and BAKORNAS PB of a “National Action Plan for Disaster

Risk Reduction” (RANPRB) as a component of the National Development Plan which references the UN Economic and Social Council call for Governments to “maintain and strengthen National Action Planning for Disaster Reduction” to ensure attainment of sustainable development targets and the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015 call for integrated disaster risk reduction mechanisms supported by adequate institutional capacity and budgetary resources.

2) Preparation of the Government Work Plan for 2007 (Presidential Regulation No. 19 of 2006)

tabled in June 2006, in which BAPPENAS included substantial funds for prevention and risk reduction (pre-disaster) programmes that will support disaster risk and vulnerability mapping, strengthened early warning systems, community empowerment and awareness raising and improved crisis management systems in addition to recovery and reconstruction programs in North Sumatra (Aceh) and Central Java (Yogyakarta).

Part II. Strategy The overall strategic focus of this programme is to transform disaster risk management in Indonesia by moving it from its current response and relief emphasis toward a comprehensive disaster risk reduction culture of safety that is decentralized and well established as a normal part of the process of development, that is sustainable with its own supporting policy, legal and institutional framework and fully integrated into the core functions of Government at all levels with input from communities and partner organizations and expected by the general public. The real backbone of disaster risk reduction is development at local levels that takes into account disaster risks faced by that community – a condition that is not currently common in Indonesia. Therefore, at the heart of this programme there will be numerous demonstrations in varying contexts that will show how disaster risk reduction can be inserted in the development planning and decision making process. Examples of these demonstrations include things like establishment of training programs that will teach masons how to build earthquake resistant houses, local building regulations that require earthquake resistant construction of schools, local lending policies that make earthquake or flood resistant construction a pre-requisite for getting a construction loan, central Government block grant programs that encourage provincial and district level expenditure on assessing the disaster risk of development projects being considered, local level preparedness and evacuation planning that will ensure that communities and their local Governments know how to respond to tsunamis with or without a warning, or community based landslide risk monitoring and evacuation plans. Parallel to this will be a concerted effort to ensure that each demonstration is directly linked to expenditures on development so that not only will the process be demonstrated, but it will also be implemented as a part of development projects using funds and budgets normally used for development that are outside of these project resources.

6

However, simply demonstrating how disaster risk reduction is done as a part of the development process is not enough to ensure that the methods and approaches demonstrated will be replicated or institutionalized over the long-term. Therefore, the programme will take both a “top down” as well as a “bottom up” approach to ensure that a supporting environment is in place at the national, provincial and district levels to ensure that disaster risk reduction becomes a normal part of community level development with the emphasis always placed on putting a disaster sensitive framework in place that will continuously support community level actions that reduce disaster risk. As a result, three strategic areas will be addressed in order to put in place 1) a policy, legal and regulatory framework that supports decentralized disaster risk reduction, 2) strengthened institutions that support disaster risk reduction partnerships, knowledge sharing, professional development and education, and 3) a broadly based understanding among development decision makers and the public of what disaster risk reduction is, how it is done and why it is so important for Indonesia’s communities. The GOI is already in the early stages of developing national level policy, legal and regulatory framework that this programme will help activate and enact throughout line ministries, but most importantly as a part of the decentralization process down to the local level. The fact that the current GOI decentralization process and its legal framework have not yet resulted in clear development roles and responsibilities for national, provincial and district level agencies is in itself an opportunity to incorporate disaster risk reduction as the process of clarifying these roles takes place. Finally, all programme activities, processes, and lessons-learned will be well documented and made easily accessible to individuals and organizations that wish to learn from, apply or improve on the approaches used. This information will be used not only in the national context, but also as part of broader multi-lateral, regional sharing programs developed and coordinated under the regional component of this programme by UNDP/RCB. Lessons learned about how to make disaster risk reduction a normal part of development will be promoted through a strong program of advocacy at the highest levels possible with Indonesian Government and society. II.a. Strategic Approaches The strategic approach of the programme is: • To establish disaster risk reduction policy, legal and regulatory framework integrated with the

development decision-making process at national, provincial and district levels with supporting legislation, policy, procedure, budgets, regulations, incentives, disincentives and enforcement processes. In simple terms this means that the programme will help turn national level policies and laws into practical procedures that are enacted by the provinces and districts as part of their own disaster risk sensitive development decision making and that make the consideration of disaster risks a normal part of broader private sector and community level development decisions.

• To establish and strengthen institutional systems that support decentralized disaster risk

reduction integrated with local level development planning and decision-making processes through strengthened institutional partnerships, crisis management systems, knowledge sharing networks, DRR enhanced education programmes, formalized professional development and educational programmes and access to strengthened disaster risk reduction information decision-making support systems. Simply put, this means that the programme will seek, for example, to help the GOI establish a National Platform for Disaster Management as explained in more details in the section Oversight and Implementation Arrangements at the later part of this document. It is also foreseen that the programme can support the

7

establishment of Sub-national Platforms in selected geographic areas. Other examples of what the programme will undertake are to help build the capacity of training institutions to teach local Governments actually how to do disaster risk reduction as a part of their day to day work; or help design the standards for a way of electronically sharing maps and databases of information needed to make informed decisions about disaster risk reduction by a range of users like local Governments, NGO’s, structural engineers, etc.; or to make currently unavailable information about district-by-district economic damage due to disasters easily available and understood by district level investment planners and development decision makers.

• To establish and strengthen education and awareness programs to make disaster

/development linkages and disaster risks understood along with a better understanding of what preparedness entails and how to respond to early warnings. This means the programme will build on years of UN know-how in developing education and awareness programs that change the way Indonesian society thinks about disasters. For example, the programme will seek to develop a social marketing strategy on that changes public perceptions to expect disaster risks to be reduced and not accept that they are inevitable; or work with the K-12 education system to make sure disaster risk concepts are embedded throughout national course curriculum; or work with universities to ensure that a consideration of disaster risk is integrated into all higher education curriculum.

• To demonstrate how disaster risk reduction actions are taken and physical changes made to

reduce disaster risks to and economic impact (development setbacks) on communities as an integrated part of local-Government development (city, provincial, district, sub-district, village), community based development, sectoral development, and hazard specific development programs and projects. More examples (in addition to those at the bottom of page 5) of how the programme seeks to demonstrate disaster risk reduction actions include things like making disaster risk assessments of provincial or district development projects as common as environmental impact assessments; or teaching communities how to identify and resolve vulnerabilities like local dams and dikes that cause flooding, or landslide prone areas and how to know when it has rained so much they should evacuate; or evaluation of road construction projects to ensure that they are located and constructed to still allow disaster relief to reach communities after a flood, earthquake, tsunami or landslide.

One small but crucial component of the programme will be the opportunity for sharing lessons learned between Indonesian programme participants and their counterparts working on similar issues in other countries in Asia. Opportunities for GOI officials for example to learn from, compare and share with other Government officials dealing with similar issues in say India or other Asian countries will be made available through exchange visits, study tours, workshops and the sharing of lessons learned materials. Crucial cross cutting issues that will be integrated into the program and its strategic approach include a multi-hazard approach, incorporation of gender perspectives, building on the cultural diversity and strengths of Indonesian communities and - key to decentralized disaster risk reduction - participation of communities and community based volunteers with a special emphasis on building the physical and livelihood resilience of the poorest segments of those communities.

The diagculminat

II.b. Progra The stratefour outp

Outpu Outpu

Outpu

Outpu

Elaboratio Output 1: The stratregulatorprovinciaincentive

ram below dting into the

amme Outpu

egic approacputs:

ut 1: Disast

ut 2: Instituestabl

ut 3: Commthat ca

ut 4: Local tools d

on of the abo

Disaster Risk

egic approay frameworkl and districts, disincentiv

depicts the ultimate vis

uts

ch and cross

er risk reduct

utional systeished, streng

munities and an be taken t

disaster risk developed ap

ove outputs a

Reduction Po

ch of Outpuk integrated t levels with ves and enfor

componentssion of Safer

cutting issu

tion policy, le

ems that sgthened and

decision makto reduce tho

reduction ppplied, docum

and their indi

olicy, Legal an

ut 1 is to eswith the d

supporting lrcement proc

s of the progr Communiti

es outlined a

egal and regu

support deintegrated w

kers better inose risks; and

processes anmented, and

icative activit

d Regulatory

stablish a disevelopment legislation, pcesses.

gramme andies.

above are em

ulatory frame

ecentralized with local leve

nformed on d

d methodolofed-back into

ties follows.

Framework E

saster risk redecision-ma

policy, proced

d their inter

mbedded in

ework establis

disaster risel developme

disaster risks

ogies and go policy fram

Established:

eduction polaking procesdure, budget

r-relationshi

the followin

shed;

sk reductioent;

and measure

uidelines anework.

icy, legal anss at nationats, regulation

p

g

on

es

d

nd al,

ns,

9

At this time within the GOI, the general public and the international community, there is an encouraging and growing recognition that long-term changes must be made to ensure that the regular setbacks to social, economic and physical development that presently occur as a result of both large and small disasters are avoided. This is evidenced by several concurrent actions with in the GOI. For example, currently work is being done jointly by BAPPENAS and BAKORNAS PB to develop a national action plan aimed at integrating disaster risk reduction with development per GOI Hyogo Framework for Action agreements. Meanwhile, the Disaster Management Law that will mandate a new legal framework that will make disaster risk reduction a normal part of the development process has been enacted since April 2007. In addition to this, in the Government Work Plan for 2007 (Presidential Regulation No. 19 of 2006) tabled in June 2006, BAPPENAS has included funds for prevention/risk reduction (pre-disaster) programmes that will support disaster risk and vulnerability mapping, strengthened early warning systems, community empowerment and awareness raising and improved crisis management systems. These efforts suggest that the timing is right for a programme such as this that takes a very broad view of disaster risk reduction that will further help the GOI in its initial efforts to put a policy, legal and regulatory framework in place to support the integration of disaster mitigation (risk reduction) as a normal part of the development process and certainly this is critical to ensuring that there is a long-term commitment to this important component of development and, more importantly, to avoid development decisions that actually increase disaster risks and lead to development setbacks. It is hoped that this programme will help strengthen and broaden current GOI efforts resulting in a significant recognition of disaster risk reduction in the next National Medium-Term Development Plan produced by BAPPENAS. Specific indicative activities envisaged over the life of the programme include but are not limited to:

1.1. Support the further refinement of National Action Plan (NAP) and development of Local Action Plan for selected sub-national Government units to mainstream decentralized disaster risk reduction in the development process: Stemming from the GOI acceptance of the Hyogo Framework of Action, Bappenas and Bakornas PB with support from UNDP have jointly developed and launched National Action Plan (NAP) on Disaster Risk Reduction whose goal is to substantially reduce “disaster losses in lives and in the social, economic and environmental assets of communities and countries”. Disaster Management Law has been enacted and the ancillary regulations to operationalise the law are in the process of being drafted and made into regulations. In addition, the Government Work Plan for 2007, Focus 3, 4 and 5 activities and budgets initiate a process of identifying policy, procedure and regulatory directions within Bakornas PB, BMG, Public Works and the Ministry of Environment. The legislation and workplan efforts will become key inputs to the refinement and improvement of the NAP to be more prescriptive in setting the implementation plan including time frame for supporting the implementation of disaster risk reduction initiatives stipulated in the current NAP. Simultaneously, development of Local Action Plans in a number of local Governments is underway and deserves support. Example programme inputs for this activity include the following:

• Technical assistance, expert support, advocacy and grants needed to refine and improve the NAP, to design guidelines how to prepare local action plans on disaster risk reduction, and to prepare such plans

• Consultation, consensus building, public fora and workshops to review, revise, adopt, and update NAP and local action plans as needed

1.2. Support to establish policy, legal and regulatory frameworks: The National Platform for Disaster Management, when established, is expected to, among other things, set the national umbrella policy, legal and regulatory framework for DM. Likewise the sub-national platforms, when established, will set one for their respective areas. This activity will be focused on

10

support for the development of the umbrella frameworks, particularly regarding their component of disaster risk reduction. Example programme inputs for this activity include the following:

• Grants, technical assistance and expert support to develop, replicate and implement those policy, legal and regulatory frameworks

• Consultation, consensus building, public forums and workshops to review, revise, adopt, and update policy, legal and regulatory frameworks

1.3. Support to establish regulatory, enforcement and incentive-disincentive procedures based on DRR legislation and policy: It is suggested that one purpose of the umbrella frameworks mentioned above is to outline the roles, responsibilities and overall policy for all GOI ministries and agencies at national and sub-national levels in integrating disaster risk reduction into their development activities. This output will support the work of selected GOI ministries and agencies in transforming the relevant elements of the umbrella frameworks into everyday working policy, procedure, regulations, budgets, incentive/disincentive programs and enforcement processes used to discharge the work of respective agencies. Example programme inputs for this activity include the following:

• Grants, technical assistance, expert support, consultation, consensus building, public forums and workshops to support the transformation of the umbrella frameworks into everyday working policy, procedure, regulations, incentive/disincentive programs and enforcement processes within GOI agencies at national, provincial and local levels.

1.4. Review, revision and updating process established for DRR policy, legal and regulatory framework improvement: One of the most elementary principles embodied in the disaster risk reduction framework in Annex 2 is the regular review, revision, updating and improvement of the overall process. This activity will support the establishment of that important part of the overall process embedded horizontally and vertically throughout the GOI at national and sub-national levels. Example programme inputs for this activity include the following:

• Grants, technical assistance, expert support, consultation, consensus building, public forums and workshops to embed a disaster risk reduction policy, legal and regulatory framework review, revision and improvement process within GOI agencies at national, provincial and local levels.

1.5. Good Practice, Lessons Learned and Process Documentation: In order to support a broader knowledge sharing process and fully support future evaluations and assessments of benchmarks, progress or setbacks in the development of disaster risk reduction policy framework, the processed used, lessons learned (what to do and what not to do) and good practices need to be documented and made widely available. This output is intended to put in place processes that will help achieve that end. Example programme inputs for this activity include the following:

• Technical assistance, consultation, public forums, workshops and lessons learned activities to support the capture and dissemination of the disaster risk reduction policy, legal, budgetary and regulatory framework development process.

Output 2: Institutional Systems that Support Decentralized Disaster Risk Reduction Integrated with Local Level Development: The strategic approach of Output 2 is to establish and strengthen institutional systems that support decentralized disaster risk reduction integrated with local level development planning and decision-making processes through strengthened institutional partnerships, crisis management systems, knowledge sharing networks, DRR enhanced education programmes, formalized professional development and educational programmes and access to strengthened disaster risk reduction information decision-making support systems.

11

Along with the establishment of an enabling policy, legal and regulatory framework, the need to strengthen or establish institutional systems and partnerships that will support decentralized disaster risk reduction is central to the long-term sustainability of this programme. The activities of Output 2 will be developed and implemented in support of the yet to be developed umbrella frameworks of the National Platform and sub-national platforms for disaster management and the NAP and LAP for DRR and other activities that address issues such as effective DRR information centres, training and formalized professional development for GOI and others needing specific skills to undertake disaster risk reduction and preparedness planning, development of education modules that will be integrated into existing educational program and establishing and making widely available disaster risk information databases, hazard and vulnerability maps and atlases, and economic damage information required to support practical disaster risk reduction decision making. Output 2 will focus on a number of indicative activities. It will support the establishment of a Programme Coordination and Implementation Support Unit (PCISU) within the Disaster Management Secretariat of BAPPENAS. It will also support BAKORNAS PB, Ministry of Home Affairs and other GOI agencies involved in disaster risk reduction at the national and local level. This output is also intended to support the development of a range of partnerships and knowledge sharing network such as a more formalized partnership arrangement among GOI, UN Agencies, INGOs, Red Cross/Crescent Societies and bi-lateral donors focused on the linkages between disasters and development or GOI knowledge sharing networks with national, regional and global institutions. The increasingly accepted significance of risk assessments has further underscored the urgent need for improved systems for the management of risk reduction information operating within a risk reduction information centre, which will transform into an emergency operating centre (EOC) during emergency phase. This arrangement is applicable both at the national and sub national levels. Output 2 activities will support the development of disaster risk management information systems down to at least the district level that provide disaster risk data and information in the form of tables and maps along with information on the economic impact of disasters to support investment in disaster risk reduction in the development planning and budgeting process in order to support the incorporation of decisions that make disaster risk reduction a part of development plans,. Output 2 activities will also support the substantial strengthening of a formalized programme for professional development of staff and professionals in the GOI at all levels as well as for local Government, NGO and community based organizations where staff core functions include disaster risk reduction and preparedness planning. The development and establishment of disaster risk reduction education modules in existing curricula of primary, secondary and higher education institutions will also be addressed so that disaster risk reduction education is a cross-cutting subject integrated into a range of educational programs adjusted to the level and needs of any given educational track. Activities under this output will also support the documentation of this institution building process, the documentation of the good practices that result, and will help establish regularly held lessons learned processes in order to continually improve and revise approaches to strengthening institutions supporting disaster risk reduction based on programme experiences. Specific indicative activities envisaged over the life of the programme include but are not limited to:

2.1. Programme Coordination and Implementation Support Unit (PCISU) established in BAPPENAS to support DRR program implementation: The PCISU will be the key focal point for providing support to BAPPENAS in its efforts to institutionalize disaster risk reduction, enact the Strategic Implementation Plan and decentralized disaster risk reduction related activities. It is

12

anticipated that the PCISU will eventually be absorbed as a functional part of BAPPENAS. Example programme inputs for this activity include the following:

• Grants, technical assistance, expert support, consultation, consensus building, public forums and workshops to support the disaster risk reduction related activities of BAPPENAS

2.2. Support to GOI and Other Key Partners for DRR institutionalization: A National Platform for Disaster Management and its Technical Working Groups (TWGs) of Risk Reduction, Emergency and Recovery will be set up to guide the process of developing an umbrella framework for DRR and improvement and update of National Action Plan. The same arrangement will be made for local level. The action plans and umbrella frameworks for DRR as well as the new disaster management law and its forthcoming ancillary regulations will help in the process of institutionalizing disaster risk reduction practices in ministries and agencies of the GOI as well as civil society organizations with special disaster functions and community linkages like the Indonesian Red Cross Society (PMI), NGOs, CBOs, academic institutions, research organizations, media or private sector groups such as professional associations, public service organizations, banks or insurance companies. Means of providing support for necessary activities that support disaster risk reduction within selected organizations such as these will be identified and provided. Example programme inputs for this activity include the following:

• Grants, technical assistance, expert support, consultation, consensus building, public forums and workshops to support the disaster risk reduction activities of GOI ministries, agencies and other key partners for institutionalization of disaster risk reduction

2.3. Support to establish or strengthen Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) Partnerships and Knowledge Sharing Networks: A more formalized partnership arrangement between GOI, UN Agencies, International Financial Institutions (IFIs) and bi-lateral donors focused on the linkages between disasters and development is greatly needed and will be established as a part of this activity. Also the current UN RC/HC system of coordination of international assistance during and after a disaster will be reviewed and strengthened (see also Indicative Activity 2.5 below). Within the UN system the UNDMT has already established a Technical Working Group for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNTWG-DRR) chaired by UNDP at the project implementation level to coordinate these kinds of programs. Further, the UNDMT at the senior programme management level and the UTWG-DRR at the programme implementation level will be the focal points within the UNCT for coordinating DRR activities within a common UN workplan based on agreed areas of cooperation with the GOI identified in the UNDAF (see Joint UN Strategic Plan p.45). Support will be provided to the activities of these groups such as support for joint projects, attending regional meetings, and retreats.

DRR convergence workshops have been held broadening the dialogue on DRR involving the UN Agencies, INGOs, IFRC, and donors. The workshops also led to the mapping out of DRR activities in view of HFA priorities of those actors for possible synergies. The convergence will be broadened to include lead and related GOI agencies, international financial institutions, bilateral development agencies, civil society and private sector partners to prepare for the National Platform for DM and its risk reduction technical working group. There is also a need for GOI disaster risk reduction knowledge sharing networks with national, regional and global institutions to be strengthened or identified and set-up. Examples of potential national partners again include the Indonesian Red Cross Society (PMI), NGOs, CBOs, academic institutions, research organizations, media or private sector groups such as professional associations like the Indonesian Disaster Mitigation Society (MPBI), public service organizations, banks or insurance companies. Examples of regional and global partners include ISDR, ESCAP, ACDM, ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), the Regional Coordinating Committee (RCC) for Disaster Management, ADPC and the Disaster Risk Reduction Focal Point

13

at ADB and the ProVention Consortium at The World Bank. Indicative programme inputs for this activity include the following:

• Grants, technical assistance, expert support, consultation, consensus building, public forums and workshops to develop mechanisms, partnerships and networks such as:

o UNDMT and its Technical Working Group for Disaster Risk Reduction with their UN Joint Strategic Plan

o GOI, UN Agencies, International Financial Institution and Bi-Lateral Donors, Partnership for Disaster Risk Reduction in Development Assistance Programs

o The National Platform and local platforms for Disaster Management and their respective technical working groups on DRR

o National GOI Partnerships and Knowledge Sharing Networks for Disaster Risk Reduction in Development

o Regional and Global Partnerships for Disaster Risk Reduction in Development

2.4. Development of multi-user disaster risk reduction and management information system(s): Good decisions about disaster risk reduction actions cannot be made without access to a complex range of information about disaster risks unique to a given community. This information sometimes crosses normal sectoral boundaries such as the economic impact disasters have had on a particular province, city, district or community overlaid on a map of those hazards related to human settlement areas, transportation corridors or telecommunications systems. Therefore, this activity will support the design, development and establishment of a disaster risk management information system(s) that will initially support broad disaster related development decision-making. For example, national disaster impact maps may be prepared that compare historic levels of disaster impact province-by-province or district-by-district to help prioritize identification of areas where disaster risk reduction programmes and investments will be most effective. However, a design and standards for a comprehensive, open access system will be developed to provide a framework so that over the long-term disaster risk management professionals become more common and sophisticated, the system would provide base information needed to do technical analysis required to identify and design disaster risk reduction programs.

Eventually this information system would make the combination or layering of geographically displayed information from a broad range of provider sources (i.e. BAKORNAS PB, Bakosurtanal, BMG, Ministry of Public Works, Ministry of Transportation, etc.) to a full range of different kinds of users (i.e. structural engineers, economists, community based organizations, spatial planners, local Government, BAPPENAS, etc.). Under a current program, a disaster database called DesInventar is being installed for BAKORNAS PB that will allow the kind of simple prioritization described above. The database already includes tsunami related damage information for Aceh and will be expanded to provide the same level of information down to at least the provincial and district level. A database called LAPBI set up at BAKORNAS PB will also be revitalized and linked to the DesInventar system. A database that utilizes the ECLAC model for recovery and reconstruction needs assessments that describes the economic impact sector by sector down to the district level has been modified to be used not just as a recovery needs tool, but as an economic planning tool and studies will be done to demonstrate its value in deciding where disaster risk reduction investments should be made. Finally, this activity will also support the Government Work Plan for 2007, Focus’ 4.1, 4.2 and 5.4 mapping activities. To provide informational support to pragmatic disaster risk reduction programmatic decision-making a comprehensive, geographical hazard and disaster risk “atlas” will be designed and launched based on the needs of a wide range of users. Most importantly, a framework and common standards that allows these diverse electronic information systems to be layered and combined will be designed to ensure that standards are set that will allow this kind of

14

interactive information use as systems grow and converge into one comprehensive system. Example programme inputs for this activity include the following:

• Technical assistance, grants, expert support along with user and information provider consultation, consensus building, public forums and workshops to support development of a disaster risk management information system(s)

2.5. DRR Information Management centres established at the national level, in selected province, and at the UN Humanitarian Coordinator/Resident Coordinator office: This activity will support improved systems for the management of risk reduction information housed within DRR information centres transformable into Emergency Operating Centres (EOCs) at national level under the National Disaster Management Agency and provincial levels the provincial disaster management agencies linked with modern telecommunications systems and operating as effective information management and resource coordination hubs as addressed in the Government Work Plan for 2007, Focus’ 4.3, 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3.

An information centre for DRR transformable into an EOC will be established at the UN Country Office for improved communications and coordination of international assistance on DRR linked to the GOI information centres for DRR. Example programme inputs for this activity include:

• Technical assistance, grants, expert support, consultation, consensus building, public forums and workshops to support development of:

o DRR information centres at national and selected provincial levels o RC/HC DRR information centre established for improved GOI

communication and coordination of international assistance in DRR ring and after disasters

o Strengthened community based, multi-hazard early warning systems aligned with the DRR information system

2.6. Establish and strengthen professional development and educational programmes within existing institutional frameworks: These activities will focus on the substantial strengthening and development of formalized disaster risk reduction programmes to be integrated within existing training and educational programmes at existing institutions. This activity will support Government Work Plan for 2007, Focus’ 3.1 and 3.2 for strengthening the capacity of national and local level Government to undertake disaster prevention and mitigation. Modules will be developed for professional development programs for staff and professionals in the GOI (national and especially provincial, district and city officials), NGOs and community based organizations where staff core functions include disaster risk reduction and preparedness planning. A more expanded explanation of these approaches and related activities follows:

2.6.1. Establish specific formalized, competency based professional development programs for GOI staff and professionals: Initially, “quick-start”, short duration introductory programmes will be identified or developed to quickly inform senior GOI leadership in key positions about the principles of disaster risk reduction where their knowledgeable leadership will be needed to get this program up and running. At the same time, more in-depth training for senior GOI program implementation staff will be developed and established as a part of normally required, long-term professional development programmes. This training will also be made a part of the existing Public Administration leadership courses especially the General Course and National Resilience Course. Along with this, and building upon existing programs at national and international training and educational institutions, long-term, formalized professional development programs on disaster risk reduction will be developed tied to advancement to specific GOI positions and responsibilities at national and sub-national levels. Example programme inputs for this sub-activity include the following:

15

o Technical assistance, grants, expert support, consultation, consensus building, training and learning programs and workshops to support development and establishment of GOI professional development programmes such as:

“Quick start” introductory courses for key GOI leadership to enhance project initiation

Making disaster risk reduction modules a part of existing GOI Public Administration leadership courses

Professional development courses established within existing educational institutions

2.6.2. Disaster risk reduction, recovery and reconstruction skills of local Governments strengthened: UNDP has been made responsible for the coordination of recovery programs within the UN system and donor community. At the local level, this requires a great deal of work with the responsible local Government. Among city, provincial and district Government officials, skills and knowledge to prepare them for this important component of disaster management must be provided in a way that highlights the importance of not just a return to “normal” or “the way things were” but “building back better” by embedding disaster risk reduction principles in the design of recovery programs. This includes advance identification of recovery and reconstruction standards appropriate to the hazards and disaster risks of a given community and the ability to quickly identify recovery needs. The development and institutionalization of training programs to provide these skills will substantially enhance Indonesia’s local Government units’ ability to more effectively and quickly recover from disasters as well as the ability of the UN and donor community to assist in this process. Example programme inputs for this sub-activity include the following:

o Technical assistance, expert support, grants, training and learning programs and workshops to support development of local Government recovery skills

2.6.3. Strengthened institutional capacity to provide disaster risk reduction training and education programs for local government, NGO and CBO staff and professionals working on DRR programmes: This activity supports establishment and strengthening of formalized programmes for the professional development of staff and professionals at all levels but in especially local-level Government, NGO and community based organizations where staff core functions include disaster risk reduction and preparedness planning. Examples of needed training include disaster risk assessment and risk reduction courses, community based disaster risk reduction, etc. These programs will be built upon existing programs at national and educational institutions. Along with this, and building upon existing programs at national training and educational institutions, support will be provided for broader institutionalization of disaster risk reduction modules integrated within existing training and educational programmes already in place so that a broader segment of the public learns about disasters as a normal part of their primary, secondary, higher education process and then eventually in their continued education experience. Example programme inputs for this sub-activity include the following:

o Technical assistance, grants, expert support, and workshops to develop and establish:

• UNDMTP program revitalization (i.e. EMTP, SPHERE, DRR in Development Programming)

• Disaster risk reduction training and professional development programs for local governmentGovernment, NGO and community based staff

16

• Integration of disaster risk reduction modules in existing training and education programmes

2.7. Good Practice, Lessons Learned and Process Documentation: In order to support a broader knowledge sharing process and fully support future evaluations and assessments of benchmarks, progress or setbacks regarding approaches and processes used to strengthen institutions to better support disaster risk reduction, lessons learned (what to do and what not to do) and good practices need to be documented and made widely available. This output is intended to put in place processes that will help achieve that end. Example programme inputs for this activity include the following:

• Technical assistance, consultation, public forums, workshops and lessons learned activities to support the capture and dissemination of the disaster risk reduction institutional strengthening.

Output 3: Communities and decision makers better informed on disaster risks and measures that can be taken to reduce those risks As the GOI continues to decentralize development decision making to local levels, it is important that the general public understand better the importance of disaster risk reduction and the strong linkages between economic and physical development and the need for communities to make development decisions that incorporate a recognition of disaster risks unique to their communities. In particular, the fact that disasters are essentially caused by poor development decisions must become a normal part of the thinking of the new Indonesian culture of safety envisioned under this programme. While the recent two years of disasters has begun this change, presently this perspective is not fully understood by the public or most decision makers. Therefore, the strategic approach of Output 3 is to establish and strengthen education and awareness programs to make disaster/development linkages and disaster risks understood along with a better understanding of disaster risks, what preparedness entails and what measures to take to reduce risks. Specific indicative activities envisaged over the life of the programme include but are not limited to:

3.1. Develop and implement detailed public education and awareness strategy: The ability of disasters to set back development has been well demonstrated by the closely spaced series of disasters experienced by Indonesia over the last several years. However, neither the public nor the decision makers involved in making both large and small development related decisions, adequately understand the links between these disasters and development or the fact that development can be done in such a way as to reduce or increase the risk of disaster. Local communities and development decision makers must learn to understand what unique disaster risks they face and what can be done about them (disaster risk reduction). This activity will support the development of a detailed public education and awareness strategy that will be finalized in consultation with a broadly based partnership of GOI, public and private organizations, possibly under the auspice of the National Platform for DRR.

It will also support the BAPPENAS 2007 work plan Fokus 5.1 for public awareness raising and community preparedness. This detailed strategy should identify needed partnerships and networks (especially public/private) that can work together to put this strategy in place. The strategy should identify common, standard disaster risk reduction terminology (in Bahasa Indonesia) and utilize basic risk information and statistical loss data (see Activity 2.4) as the basis prioritizing its community, district and provincial focus. It should identify a range of DRR modules to be developed and made a part of existing and new education programs (see sub-

17

activity 2.6.3), continued education, professional development programs and training programs and should identify needed general and hazard based media campaigns. It should also identify a specific strategy that will address the complex issue of tsunami and multi-hazard early warning systems that will begin to clarify linkages between political levels of involvement and decision making and protocol in issuing tsunami and other types of disaster warnings, preparedness planning and evacuation planning by local authorities at national, provincial and district levels, community based preparedness and evacuation planning, scientific tsunami monitoring systems, general public tsunami warning programmes, other hazard warning programmes (i.e. floods, landslide and volcanic warning programs). Once developed it must be implemented through a range of partners identified in Activity 3.2 below. Example programme inputs for this activity include the following:

• Grants, technical assistance, expert support, consultation, consensus building, public forums and workshops to:

o Develop a detailed education and public awareness strategy that will change the broad understanding of disaster risk reduction and its links to development.

o Implement selected components of this strategy

3.2. DRR education and public awareness partnerships established: The detailed public awareness and social marketing strategy developed above and the approach to developing partnerships identified in it, this activity will support the identification and establishment of a range of disaster risk reduction education and awareness partnerships. Pending the final arrangement yet to be determined by the Programme Executive Board, it is foreseen that the Ministry of Education and/or Ministry of Information and Communications must be key lead GOI agencies involved in these partnerships and implementation of the detailed DRR education and awareness strategy. Along with GOI agencies, civil society (NGOs, CBOs, academic institutions, the media) and the private sector (professional associations, teachers associations, public service organizations, banks, and insurance companies) must also be made a part of DRR education and awareness partnerships. These partnerships are required to ensure a sustained and comprehensive effort not just on building awareness and understanding of disaster risks and what can be done about them, but on maintaining this understanding through continuous programmes once it is achieved. Example programme inputs for this activity include the following:

• Grants, technical assistance, expert support, consultation, consensus building, public forums and workshops to develop Partnerships and Knowledge Sharing Networks for Disaster Risk Reduction such as:

o Partnerships Supporting Disaster Risk Reduction Integration within existing Educational Programs (all levels)

o Partnerships of organizations and agencies that initiate community based disaster risk reduction (CBDRR) programs

o Public-Private Sector Partnerships for Disaster Risk Reduction o Multi-hazard Early Warning Systems Public Awareness Partnerships

3.3. Community Based, People Centred Early Warning Established as an Integral Part of Regional and National Tsunami and Multi-Hazard Early Warning Programs: Recognizing that the most difficult part of a tsunami early warning system (sustained public and local level awareness of what when warned or when they recognize signs of a tsunami) must still be put in place throughout Indonesia, this activity is aimed at supporting activities to help achieve this. Work is underway by UNESCO/IOC, WMO and UN/ISDR-PPEW and relevant agencies to establish an operational tsunami warning system throughout the Indian Ocean Region. In Indonesia support has been provided through UNDP to establish 25 sea level gauges to monitor tsunamis. Programs have been supported by UNDP and other agencies that promote people-centred, community based tsunami early warning and preparedness planning primarily in Aceh. Tsunami drills were conducted in commemoration of the tsunami anniversary (26

18

December 2006). Such drills will most likely take place annually for the foreseeable future. Support will be provided under this activity to help ensure that critical planning and linkages from community levels up to the national level takes place so that an operational, people-centred, multi-hazard system is put in place. This activity will support Government Work Plan for 2007, Fokus 5.1 for public awareness raising and community preparedness and will be strongly linked to Activities 2.5., 3.1. and 3.2. above and sub-activity 4.1.2. below.

• 3.4. Develop and implement specific public awareness programmes: While Activity 3.1. suggests

for developing and implementing the strategy for public education and awareness in general, there are a number of specific initiatives foreseen to be implementable under Activity 3.4. that will focus on ensuring the public, communities and development decision makers understand that there is a link between poor development decisions and disasters and generally what can be done to reduce the risk of disasters. This activity will support Government Work Plan for 2007, Fokus 5.1 for public awareness raising and community preparedness. Example programme inputs for this activity include the following:

• Grants, technical assistance, expert support, consultation, consensus building, public forums and workshops to develop and implement disaster risk reduction education and awareness programs such as:

o Disaster risk, preparedness and early warning awareness and knowledge programmes at provincial, district and community levels

o Disaster risk reduction knowledge integrated within existing primary and secondary educational programmes

o Disaster risk public awareness media programs that are hazard based o Private sector disaster risk public awareness programmes o Disaster risk public awareness and risk reduction knowledge sharing

integrated into women’s programmes o Disaster risk public awareness and risk reduction knowledge sharing

integrated into youth based programmes

3.5. Good Practice, Lessons Learned and Process Documentation: In order to support a broader knowledge sharing process and fully support future evaluations and assessments of benchmarks, progress or setbacks regarding approaches and processes used to educate or raise public awareness on disaster risk reduction, lessons learned (what to do and what not to do) and good practices need to be documented and made widely available. This output is intended to put in place processes that will help achieve that end. Example programme inputs for this activity include the following:

o Technical assistance, consultation, public forums, workshops and lessons learned activities to support the capture and dissemination of the process of strengthening education and awareness program designed to make development/disaster linkages generally understood.

Output 4: Local disaster risk reduction processes, and methodologies , guidelines and tools developed applied, documented, and fed-back into policy framework: The foundation and ultimate result that this programme and particularly Output 4 itself aspire to are to actually make communities throughout Indonesia safer over time as the country’s towns, villages and cities grow while applying disaster risk reduction principles as one of the imperatives of their development process. One of the most important things a community can do to achieve this is to include disaster risk reduction in its development programmes or at least consider disaster risks in all of its development decision-making. This programme will provide communities with opportunities to practice the process of considering disaster risks in their development decision-making process. This process will result in the field demonstration of safer development that will reduce risks examples of which might include preparedness and mitigation planning

19

through local disaster management agency and Bappeda based on a city wide hazard and disaster risk assessment. The empirical community and field level evidence and experiences that result from activities under Output 4 will directly contribute to the development of an effective disaster risk reduction policy, legal and regulatory framework that will support more similar future activities with development funds and initiatives outside of the programme. Therefore, the grassroots level projects implemented as a part of Output 4, will be specifically designed to contribute, from the bottom-up, to the formulation of disaster risk reduction policy, legislation and regulations. Output 4 will support projects that apply and demonstrate approaches to and benefits of disaster risk reduction as a part of grassroots development. These projects will be designed for easy scaling up and replication elsewhere in other projects using normal GOI development funds, bilateral development funds or IFI development funds. However support from Output 4 may also be used to support development of risk reduction strategies linked to funded development programmes being considered that might not otherwise take disaster risk reduction strategies into consideration. For example, standards might be developed for new earthquake resistant schools or community infrastructure or to retrofit existing schools or community infrastructure to be more earthquake resistant. These standards might then be used as the basis for a national school building or community infrastructure construction or retrofit programs funded by other sources. While there is usually an initial cost to disaster risk reduction, this cost is substantially lower than the cost of disaster recovering or the economic and developmental setbacks that occur as a result of not considering disaster risks in the first place. This fact has been well demonstrated by the cost of recovery from recent disasters in Indonesia compared to the much lower cost of disaster risk reduction programmes had they been done before the disaster. However, it is this additional cost of disaster mitigation that frequently keeps it from becoming a budgetary component of development programmes. BAPPENAS has indicated that one of its roles in this programme output will be to work with the Ministry of Finance to ensure that systems and budgets are put in place to so that the cost of disaster risk reduction is a budgetary and financial component/requirement of development programs. Output 4 activities will be one way to help demonstrate the cost benefit of disaster risk reduction that will help establish the financial and economic viability of investments in disaster risk reduction. Development programs where disaster risks are normally not considered will provide the opportunity to use Output 4 resources to do the studies and analysis that will show the economic benefits of mitigation as a part of a given development investment. In addition, the programme will support BAPPENAS to work with the International Finance Institutions (IFIs) such as The World Bank and the Asian Development Bank (ADB) to help ensure that large investment loan programs will not result in development that increases disaster risks. For example, Output 4 can support studies linked to micro-finance mechanisms or even large sectoral development programmes (i.e. transportation, tourism or telecommunications) where investments represent large loans that must be repaid to determine the risk of losing all or part of the investment due to disasters. The World Bank has had a focal point for coordination and integration of disaster risk reduction into its loan programs since the mid 1990s. ADB has just established a similar programme and has indicated interest in finding collaboration opportunities in common with this programme. Such a programme of technical assistance and grant support working in tangent with development finance programs represents a good marriage of resources.

20

Output 4 will support the identification, analysis and design of disaster resistant development (i.e. analysis of structural designs for earthquake resistant houses or pilot projects that demonstrate how disaster risks are incorporated into development). The strategic approach of Output 4 activities therefore, is to demonstrate how disaster risk reduction actions are feasible and physical changes are made to reduce disaster risks and economic impact (development setbacks) on communities. The mechanism will be arranged so as to make the initiatives an integrated part of development investment decision-making by local-Governments (city, provincial, district, sub-district, village), community based groups. The approach will also ensure a bottom up planning process potentially accommodated by the Musrenbang mechanism. The approach will also be targeted to influence the way of doing business of sectoral development agencies. The lessons learned will be used as the cornerstone for development of policy, legal and regulatory changes that support disaster risk reduction as a part the decentralized, provincial, district, city or community level development process (Musrenbang). Its activities will, among other things, support initiatives identified in the Government Work Plan of 2007 Fokus’ 3, 4 and 5. Specific indicative activities envisaged over the life of the programme include but are not limited to:

4.1. Make communities safer through local Government, community based, urban, hazard specific, sector specific and other disaster risk reduction projects and programmes: This activity will focus on the demonstration of disaster risk reduction programs that will result in actual mitigation of vulnerability in selected locations and sectors implemented through various approaches that include the local Government development process (city, provincial, district, sub-district, village), through community based groups and based on a hazard specific or sectoral approach. These activities will be linked to the Government Work Plan of 2007 activities and budgets. A more expanded explanation of these approaches and related activities follows:

4.1.1. Disaster risk reduction implemented through local Governments in selected provinces, districts and sub-districts: This sub-activity entails working with Government at the provincial, district, sub-district and village levels to identify and implement programmes that demonstrate the disaster risk reduction process. Decentralized disaster risk reduction, like decentralized governance is new for Indonesia. Getting it right will best be done at the district (Kabupaten) level where the emphasis of these programmes will be placed because under the new decentralized approach, it is the Bupati at the Kabupaten level who has the key responsibility for local level development, disaster preparedness, emergency response and recovery. However, it will also be important to demonstrate the disaster risk reduction process at the sub-district and village levels as well as at the provincial level. In provinces, projects will be done in partnership with the Office of the Governor, provincial disaster management agency, Bappeda, the provincial chapter of the Indonesian Red Cross Society (PMI), universities and NGOs (international, national and local). In Kabupatens partners will be similar to the above except that the Bupati and his office, Satlak and Bappeda Kabupaten will be the GOI focal points and similarly at the sub-district (Kecamatan) and village (Desa) levels. The projects will be mainstreamed into the Musrenbang process when feasible. In programmes at each level, activities will take a multi hazard approach and address the following kinds of issues: o preparation and maintenance of multi hazard contingency planning processes at

each level, supported by periodic exercises and drills o preparing a response resources inventory and a locally owned process for

maintaining them o public awareness campaigns that are province or Kabupaten specific and locally

owned or managed

21

o process for identifying key gaps in capacity (human resources, equipment, linkages etc) as well as longer term mitigation and prevention actions

o process for prioritizing and packaging these gaps and actions into budgeted projects to be built into development plans at the relevant level, as well as innovative resource mobilization actions (including local public private partnership)

Selection of provinces, kabupatens, kecamatans and desas will be based on geographical location, key hazard type, keenness on DRR by the local Government along with recognition that hazards retard development gains and where there is a critical mass of champions either in Government, local NGOs or arising from an innovative pilot programme. A preliminary list of provinces follows: o Priority One: Aceh (NAD), North Maluku, Central Sulawesi, Central Java, Nusa

Tenggara Timur. o Priority Two: Maluku; Yogyakarta; South East Sulawesi, Papua, West Kalimantan,

Central Kalimantan 4.1.2. CBDRR implemented through community groups in selected provinces, districts, sub-districts and villages: A wide range of community based disaster risk reduction (CBDRR) initiatives led by a range of international and national NGOs and local community based organizations and groups have taken place throughout Indonesia since 1998 and widely throughout Aceh. CBDRR is also an area where gender based contributions can be enormous. Also important is traditional indigenous knowledge and practice of local communities related to their understanding of natural hazard occurrence, early warning, anticipatory protective actions and patterns of natural resource use that minimize impact. Such practices are seen throughout Indonesia but are of especial note in coastal and fishing communities in Sumatra and Java, and forest communities and tribes in Kalimantan. As mentioned elsewhere, community based preparedness and evacuation planning will be the backbone of the development of effective early warning programmes, therefore, this sub-activity will be linked to the multi-hazard early warning systems activities described above in activities 2.3 and 3.4 below. These bottom-up strategies will strengthen community risk management approaches through community exchanges, training and simulations, building good practice models, strengthening partnerships, supporting community risk assessment and engaging communities in participatory planning processes. 4.1.3. Urban disaster risk reduction implemented in selected cities: Urbanization rates in Indonesia like the rest of Asia are high. Soon the population living in Indonesia’s urban areas will exceed those living in rural areas. The vast majority of this growth is taking place in so called “secondary” cities and urbanizing areas while relative growth rates for mega-cities like Jakarta are beginning to slow. These secondary cities and urbanizing areas, especially those subject to unplanned growth, where infrastructure and services are stretched to and beyond their limits, represent high concentrations of people, livelihoods, and industrial and economic investments that represent development patterns that frequently increase the risk of disaster rather than decrease it. In Indonesia, with its large number of cities and urbanizing areas, there is a strong case for a systematic approach to disaster risk reduction at the city level, and its effective integration into urban planning, development and governance. Activities will focus on the city (Kota) level Government and support the offices of mayors (Wali Kota) to work with their municipal disaster management agency and Bappeda to implement a comprehensive preparedness and mitigation programme while working with key partners such as the GOI agencies responsible for urban development and planning, transportation planning, public works, emergency response services, as well

22

as the Indonesian Red Cross Society (PMI), universities and NGOs (international, national and local). Activities will include development of hazard and vulnerability maps and atlases, multi-hazard risk assessments and city level preparedness and mitigation plans, including future settlement and growth planning workbooks, retrofit initiatives and heritage conservation. These activities also will aim to support implementation of the proposed actions (disaster risk reduction or mitigation) using finance and budgets normally available for development. It is expected that the improved and updated National Action Plan will devote a separate section to the issue of urban disasters and to effectively mainstreaming urban disaster risk reduction into national policy, guidelines and plans and budgets. 4.1.4. Hazard specific disaster reduction programmes implemented: The hazards themselves and their geographical locations of occurrence are linked to nature, habitat, the earth itself, landmass, ocean interaction, etc. Hazard determinants, like fault lines and watersheds do not respect administrative boundaries. The scientific institutions and professionals that study disaster phenomenon and plan and design mitigation measures and interventions look on the subject as a whole - while also categorizing it by hazard type. So too the sectoral ministries and related offices dealing with particular types of hazards are often different. For example, forests and land fires involves Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Industrial hazards involves Ministry of Industry, and earthquake vulnerability reduction involves Ministries of Public Works. Mitigation measures (a part of disaster risk reduction) are also hazard specific. A hazard specific approach to hazard assessment, mapping and analysis will require identification of certain hazard specific mitigation measures, hazard specific disciplines, related technical and research institutions and administrative ministries and technical departments of the Government who will be involved or linked to a given hazard.

It is then necessary to overlay this understanding of hazards and their mitigation with the integrated multi-hazard approach that will be encouraged at the local levels as a part of decentralized disaster risk management projects. Implementation will be through local authorities, duly integrated, for example, as a part of a district or Kabupaten or city level multi-hazard programme. Therefore, this activity will support the development and implementation of hazard specific programs based on suggested themes below. Example programme inputs for this sub-activity include the following: o Technical assistance, grants, expert support, and workshops to develop and

implement: Hazard Specific Recovery and Reconstruction Standards Developed for GOI

Adoption based on recent lessons learned Earthquake Disaster Risk Reduction Flood Preparedness and Disaster Risk Reduction Tsunami Disaster Risk Reduction Volcanic Hazard Preparedness Forest and Land Fire Prevention and Preparedness

4.1.5. Sectoral (transportation, telecoms, health, energy, etc.) disaster risk reduction programmes designed: These activities will address disaster risk reduction in specific sectors with specific emphasis on critical lifelines. For example transportation programmes might include a vulnerability and disaster risk assessment of key transportation corridors needed for relief and response routes and identification of landslide prone areas of road that should be retrofit with stronger road construction systems or realignment of road locations. In the health sector it might include an assessment of peak hospital response capacity compared to the number of injured

23

estimated in a risk assessment, structural retrofitting needs of hospitals and health clinics or assessment of basic emergency response capacities considering the unique disaster risk of the selected community(s). Example programme inputs for this sub-activity include the following: o Technical assistance, grants, expert support, and workshops to develop sector

based disaster risk reduction programmes for critical lifeline systems

4.2. Good practice, lessons learned and process documentation, monitoring and evaluation: In order to support a broader knowledge sharing process and fully support future evaluations and assessments of benchmarks, progress or setbacks regarding approaches and processes used to reduce disaster risk, lessons learned (what to do and what not to do) and good practices need to be documented and made widely available. This output is intended to put in place processes that will help achieve that end. Example programme inputs for this activity include the following: • Technical assistance, consultation, public forums, workshops and lessons learned activities

to support the capture and dissemination of the process used to reduce disaster risk and make communities safer

Part III. Management Arrangements III.a. Governing Principles The following principles will govern management and implementation arrangements:

• The depth, breadth and need for activities that could be undertaken under this programme are vast. Given that there will be resistance to the kinds of change proposed, the approach that will be taken will be to identify the activities that are perceived to have the highest possible potential for success and ultimately contribute the most to the outputs identified while avoiding activities or working with organizations where it is anticipated that resistance will be high;

• While starting at a central level implementation with BAPPENAS working in partnership with BAKORNAS PB (or its successor agency) and the Ministry of Home Affairs, the focus of the programme will be to put in place a process that decentralizes disaster risk reduction to the communities at the local level (sub-national, provincial, district, sub-district, village) where specific and unique disaster risks can be reduced the most effectively through a local development process that reduces rather than increases disaster risk;

• The programme provides grant and technical support to help put in place the policy, legal and regulatory framework, strengthened institutional framework, raised public awareness and implementation of disaster risk reduction programs to make communities safer based on a Strategic Implementation Plan developed to support these and other disaster risk reduction programmes;

• A flexible approach to programme development and implementation will be employed, through partnerships with Government, UN agencies, and with options for engaging a range of implementing partners including national and local NGOs, international NGOs, the private sector and others. Some of the Programme Outputs and/or their respective illustrative activities require elaboration even into separate detailed project documents turning the outputs and/or activities into objectives of the respective projects;

• Implementation of the programme will seek to employ modalities that strengthen sustainable, decentralized provincial and local capacities, within Government, civil society and the private sector;

• The management of the programme will promote strong collaboration and complementarities with other national and international assistance through joint priority setting, project formulation, implementation and monitoring/evaluation;

24

• Significant attention will be placed on documentation and dissemination of good practices, lessons learned and processes used as well as monitoring and evaluating effectiveness of the programs

III.b. Oversight and Implementation Arrangements: It is recognized that the effectiveness of SC-DRR will depend largely on the nature and quality of its policy, technical, programme coordination and oversight capacity. It is also clear that these functions will have to be located within appropriate GOI institutions to contribute to sustained institutional change. Given the current institutional landscape i.e. BAPPENAS’ current role as the lead agency for linking DRR to development planning functions it is decided that the programme be implemented by the National Development Planning Agency (Bappenas), through its Disaster Management secretariat, in close partnership with the National Disaster Management Coordination Agency (Bakornas PB). When the new Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana (National Disaster Management Agency) replacing the Bakornas PB, as governed by Disaster Management Law No 24 year 2007, is operational and ready, the Programme Executive Board will decide when the new agency will take over the implementation of the programme.

A programme Executive Board will be established comprising of representatives of Bappenas, Bakornas PB, Ministry of Home Affairs and UNDP for the purpose of oversight of the programme activities. The Chair of the Executive Board is the National Programme Director (NPD). The NPD is the Director for Regional Development II of Bappenas. The Deputy NPD is an official of the Bakornas PB. If the programme implementation responsibility is shifted to the new NDMA, the leadership structure of the Board will also be changed to reflect the new arrangement. The Board will ensure alignment of the direction and approach of the programme to the policies and directives provided by the multi stakeholder National Platform for Disaster Management1, yet to be established to advocate Disaster Management at different levels and provide coordination, analysis and advice on areas of priority requiring concerted action through coordinated and participatory processes. The programme will also contribute to the establishment of the National Platform out of which a Technical Working Group on Disaster Risk Reduction will be formed, along with two other working groups namely Emergency Response and Recovery. The Programme Executive Board will consult with the Technical Working Group on DRR of the National Platform on substantive issues regarding the implementation of the SC DRR programme. , Project Coordination and Implementation Support Unit (PCISU) will be established hosted in the Disaster Management Secretariat of the Bappenas. The PCISU will report regularly to the Executive Board, which will in turn provide strategic policy guidance and advice to ensure the relevance of the programme to GOI and UNDP priorities, to ensure that the GOI and UNDP are engaged in establishing priorities and strategies and to oversee and monitor programme directions, results and lessons learned. Likewise similar units will be established in other key agencies as needed to support their efforts of institutionalizing relevant initiatives within the programme. UNDP will provide support services to the Programme Executive Board, the Programme Management Unit within the Disaster Management of the Bappenas. The support will also be lent to delivery agents/partners of the programme, central to the implementation of the programme. UNDP’s support will include:

• Human resources management, including recruitment and contracting, of national and international technical advisors and programme support and monitoring staff;

1 This is an adaptation and expansion of the National Platform for DRR suggested by ISDR in ‘Guidelines National Platforms for Disaster Risk Reduction.

• C• Su

The CrisissuccessfusupportedCrisis PreAdviser aDisaster Roffice in Bprovide sand regioRCB Regiexchangelearned e The instit

ontracting ofupport for ov

s Prevention ul implementd by second

evention andt RCB as welRisk ReductioBangkok, the specialized teonal counterponal Program

e programmelsewhere and

utional arran

f partners anverall financia

and Recovetation of th

ded technicad Recovery ill as from theon Regional RCB’s South

echnical assispart activitiesmme will alsoes and bi-lad in this prog

ngements and

d procuremeal manageme

ry Unit (CPRis programml expertise oncluding thee Disaster ReProgramme

-South Progrstance whens such as theo develop anteral or mul

grams are sha

d organigram

ent of serviceent;

U) of UNDP me. The CPon disaster rie Regional Deduction Unie staff basedram and ESCA

n needed ande regional tsund coordinatlti-lateral stuared and com

mme of the PC

s for the deliv

Jakarta will sPRU team is isk reductionDisaster Riskt of BCPR, G in BangkokAP. In additid linkages beunami early wte regional le

udy tours to mpared within

CISU.

very of the p

support manand will co

n from UNDPk Reduction

eneva, and tk, OCHA andon, to helpinetween natiowarning progessons learne

help ensuren the Asia reg

rogramme;

nagement anontinue to bP’s Bureau foand Recover

the UNDP RC OCHA’s ISD

ng identify anonal programgram, UNDP ed workshope that lessongion.

nd be or ry

CB DR nd ms

‘s ps, ns

When thethe progrto align w This progprogrammDevelopmmechanisother proThis projinitiativesCapacity III.c. Delive Delivery olocal andinternatioto use, ppossible, Implemenappropriainvitationcontext a

e new Badan ramme, the P

with BNPB new

gramme will fme entitled ment” (see asm, the prog

ojects initiatedect is also cs at the regioDevelopmen

ery Arrangem

of the varioud national aonal organizariority will blocal and pro

nting partneate, includingns to bid, etcand circumst

National PenProject Execuw structure.

facilitate initi“Joint UN

lso Draft Joiramme outpd through otcollaboratingonal level andnt in Risk Red

ments:

s activities ofauthorities, nations. In make given to p

ovincial capac

ers will be g competitivec.). Modalitieances. Deliv

nanggulangautive Board w

ation of a larStrategic P

nt Programmuts and activher UNCT ag with the U

d also countryuction)

f this programnational NGOking decision

prospects forcities will be

selected ande processes (es for deliveryvery arrangem

an Bencana (Bwill decide if

rger and at thlan on Disa

me Documenvities will be encies.

UNDP Regiony level. (See

mme will be Os, civil socns about wha efficiency adirectly enga

d engaged (grant applicay arrangemements may i

BNPB) take othe organigr

he same timeaster Risk Rnt in Annex integrated a

nal Centre inalso Annex 6

undertaken ciety groups,at implementnd effectiven

aged.

through a ation processents will be tnclude mech

over the implramme shoul

e operate witReduction fo

4, page 45) and mutually

n Bangkok in6, Regional P

through part, the privatetation approaness in deliv

range of mses, requests tailored as rehanisms such

ementation old be change

thin a joint Uor Sustainab

Through thy supportive o

n Disaster risProgramme fo

tnerships wite sector, anach or partne

very. Whereve

echanisms afor proposal

equired by thh as Letters o

of ed

N le

his of

sk or

th nd er er

as ls, he of

27

Agreement for implementation of specific components or activities by Government departments and UN partners, provision of technical assistance and capacity building to Government and civil society, and implementation of services through international NGOs, national and local NGOs, the private sector or others. III.d. Coordination Arrangements: In addition to the mechanisms supporting this programme, to ensure effective coordination of inputs, the UN and UNDP will support coordination fora. These fora will be charged with formulation of common coordinating and strategic frameworks, including practical operating principles to be applied by agencies working in support of specific sectors and thematic activities. III.f. Assets and Equipment: UNDP will keep separate records for equipment and vehicles purchased for the purposes of this programme. As per UNDP rules and regulations, equipment and vehicles purchased with programme funds will remain UNDP property until formally transferred or otherwise disposed off. Transfer/disposal of vehicles will be decided following a joint consultation between the Coordination Committee for International Technical Cooperation (CCITC) of GOI and UNDP. Part IV. Monitoring and Evaluation IV.a. Monitoring Framework An overall monitoring framework will be designed to ensure effective multi-stakeholder (UNDP, Government, civil society, community, donors) monitoring of activities supported through the programme, through on-site monitoring, regular reporting, and financial expenditure tracking. The monitoring framework for this programme is intended to achieve the following purposes.

• Results-Orientation: Ensure appropriate measurement and assessment of programme performance to effectively improve performance and achieve results.

• Quality Assurance: Ensure quality in project activities supported through this programme to ensure best possible benefit for beneficiaries, through monitoring programme delivery and identifying issues that need corrective action and ensure that additional assistance is provided early.

• Accountability: Ensure accountability in the use of programme resources through heavy emphasis on financial reviews to make sure that funds are being appropriately used to achieve project outputs, and that the implementing agents have sufficient controls in place to demonstrate that funds are being used appropriately.

• Transparency: Ensure transparency in programme activities, finances, and results to all stakeholders.

• Learning: Ensure that the programme has learning mechanisms for purposes of improving ongoing implementation and guiding new initiatives, and to identify key lessons learned and successes stories from programme implementation in relation to mainstreaming disaster risk reduction into the development planning and implementation processes of UNDP, the Government and development partners.

In order to achieve these purposes, the monitoring framework for this programme will seek to apply the following measures:

• Appropriate Resourcing of Monitoring: The programme will dedicate staffing to ensure proper implementation of monitoring systems, including monitoring officers and financial monitoring assistants, as well as financial resources for monitoring purposes.

28

• Lessons from Previous Programmes: The programme will seek to address lessons from previous evaluations and assessments of UNDP/CPRU programmes regarding monitoring systems.

• Field-Oriented: Priority is placed on active on-site field monitoring and regularly scheduled field visits to all activities supported by this programme, to ensure close interaction with implementing agents.

• Template-Based System: The programme will seek to apply a template-based system to structure monitoring information and ensure its collection on a regular basis.

• Joint Monitoring: Monitoring should include joint monitoring activities with Government and other partners at various levels.

• Operational Effectiveness: Ensure proper application of UNDP's internal control framework, and reviews of operational effectiveness.

• Downward Accountability: The programme will seek to identify monitoring approaches that promote downward accountability in the monitoring framework.

IV.b. Financial Monitoring The programme’s financial resources will be managed through a series of controls at various levels. All financial transactions are monitored, recorded, analyzed and reported through UNDP’s newly introduced ATLAS Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system. Approved project budgets and expenditures will be publicly posted in project areas, as well as on the UNDP website. Payments to the implementing partner and delivery agents/responsible partners will generally be made directly by UNDP. Payments are made on the basis of payment schedules articulated in the contract or partnership agreement with the implementing agent. Payment schedules are linked into achievement of agreed deliverables and outputs. Implementing partners are closely monitored in the field through UNDP field monitoring teams. Field monitors confirm delivery of activities and outputs against agreed schedules, and review and confirm whether by implementing agents have appropriate control mechanisms in place. All partners and contractors receiving funds from UNDP are subjects to financial monitoring by the UNDP programme support team, which includes qualified auditors who serve as finance monitors. Financial monitoring includes:

• Monitoring and reviewing financial reports of implementing agents against agreed project budgets to ensure fairness of expenditure;

• Verifying accuracy and completeness of financial information, including review of supporting documents and test of expenditure details;

• Requesting clarification or additional information as required to verify and justify expenditures;

• Providing advice and technical assistance to implementing partners and contractors on measures necessary to enhance their project financial management in line with UNDP standards and norms;

• Payments by implementing agents that are not in line with approved expenditures and which do not have adequate supporting details and documentation can be rejected for reimbursement by UNDP.

29

IV.c. Audit The programme will be audited in line with the rules and regulations of UNDP and the Government of Indonesia for nationally implemented UNDP-supported programmes IV.d. Monitoring Plan

ID Event Description Schedule 1 Field implementation

monitoring Ongoing monitoring of field implementation by implementing partners and grantees, including field verification, review of progress reporting, and analysis of financial expenditure.

Ongoing/Continuous

1 Quarterly and Annual Reviews

Quarterly Meetings of the Project Board to review progress, address issues, and provide programme and policy guidance

Quarterly

2 Mid-Term Evaluation Mid-term evaluation to assess progress towards programme results articulated in the Results Framework and provide recommendations.

50% programme completion

3 Final Programme Evaluation

Final programme evaluation to assess achievement of programme results articulated in the Results Framework and document lessons learned.

100% programme completion

4 Audit Annual audit in line with UNDP and Government rules and regulations.

Annual

Part VI. Legal Context This document together with the CPAP signed by the Government and UNDP which is incorporated by reference constitute together a Project Document.

(a) The Revised Basic Agreement for Technical Assistance signed 29 October 1954 between the United Nations, the International Labour Organisation, the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, the International Civil Aviation Organisation, and the World Health Organisation and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia,

(b) The Standard Agreement on Operational Assistance signed 12 June 1969 between the

United Nations, the International Labour Organisation, the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, the International Civil Aviation Organisation, the World Health Organisation, the International Telecommunication Union, the World Meteorological Organisation, the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Universal Postal Union, the Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organisation and the United Nations Industrial Development Organisation and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia,

(c) The Agreement signed 7 October 1960 between the United Nations Special Fund and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia, and

(d) all CPAP provisions apply to this document.

30

Additionally, this document together with the CPAP signed by the Government and UNDP which is incorporated by reference constitute together the instrument envisaged in the Supplemental Provisions to the Project Document, attached hereto as Annex 5. Consistent with the above Supplemental Provisions, the responsibility for the safety and security of the implementing partner and its personnel and property, and of UNDP’s property in the implementing partner’s custody, rests with the implementing partner. The implementing partner shall: a) put in place an appropriate security plan and maintain the security plan, taking into account

the security situation in the country where the project is being carried; b) assume all risks and liabilities related to the implementing partner’s security, and the full

implementation of the security plan. UNDP reserves the right to verify whether such a plan is in place, and to suggest modifications to the plan when necessary. Failure to maintain and implement an appropriate security plan as required hereunder shall be deemed a breach of this agreement. The implementing partner agrees to undertake all reasonable efforts to ensure that none of the UNDP funds received pursuant to the Project Document are used to provide support to individuals or entities associated with terrorism and that the recipients of any amounts provided by UNDP hereunder do not appear on the list maintained by the Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 1267 (1999). The list can be accessed via http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/committees/1267/1267ListEng.htm. This provision must be included in all sub-contracts or sub-agreements entered into under this Project Document. ”

31

Section II – Results and Resources Framework

Intended Outcome as stated in the Country Programme Results and Resource Framework: UNDAF Outcome (3): Protecting the Vulnerable and Reducing Vulnerabilities Country Programme Outcome (4.2): Capacities of Government and communities for disaster preparedness and reduction have been developedApplicable MYFF Service Line: Service Line (4.5) –Disaster Reduction Partnership Strategy: This programme is implemented in partnership with the GOI National Development Planning Agency (BAPPENAS). Strategic partnerships will be established with other key GOI agencies (national, provincial, district levels) such as BAKORNAS PB and its member ministries, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Information and Communications, other relevant GOI ministries and agencies, civil society (NGOs, CBOs, academic institutions, research organizations, media), private sector (professional associations, public service organizations, banks, insurance companies) and regional/international stakeholders as well as with other UN agencies.Project title and ID (ATLAS Award ID): MAINSTREAMING DISASTER RISK REDUCTION INTO DEVELOPMENT IN INDONESIA (MDRRD)

Intended Outputs

Output Targets 2 (Five Year Programme)

Indicative Activities

Responsible parties

Inputs

1. Disaster risk reduction (DRR) policy, legal and regulatory framework established

First 5 Months: • National Action Plan (NAP)

prepared as basis for DRR Local Action Plan (LAP)

• Good practice and process documentation systems established

Year 2: • 5 Year DRR LAP developed,

adopted and initiated by GOI

Years 2-5: • Establish DRR policy, legal

and regulatory components of NAP and LAP within GOI and other institutions

• Establish DRR policy, legal and regulatory framework

1.1 Support preparation of a NAP and Local Action Plan DRR (LAP) to mainstream decentralized disaster risk reduction in the development process 1.2 Support to establish policy, legal and regulatory frameworks 1.3 Support to establish regulatory, enforcement and incentive-disincentive procedures based on DRR legislation and policy 1.4 Review, revision and updating process established for LAP and DRR policy, legal and regulatory framework improvement 1.5 Good practice, lessons

• BAPPENAS & UNDP Subcontracting/partnerships: • Ministry of Finance • BAKORNAS PB • BAKORNAS PB members • Ministry of Finance, • DRR related GOI ministries • HLSC & TWGs • DPR • BMG • Provincial Governors • BAPPEDA • SATKORLAK • DPRD • District Heads • Provincial, district and sub-

district level Government

• Employee Costs • International Consultants

(TA) • Local Consultants (TA) • Contractual Services

(companies & individuals) • Professional Services • Travel Costs • Grants • Rental - Premises • IT Equipment • Communications & Audio

Visual Equipment • Other Equipment • Materials and Goods • Supplies • Audio Visual & Print

Production Costs

2 Output targets are indicative and depend on further assessments and budget availability.

32

Intended Outputs

Output Targets 2 (Five Year Programme)

Indicative Activities

Responsible parties

Inputs

with supporting financial, incentive-disincentive and enforcement systems

• Regular DRR lessons learned review and revision process established

learned and process documentation, monitoring and evaluation

• TNI • Police • Indonesian Red Cross • Local and national NGOs

Universities • Private Sector

• Sundries / Miscellaneous

2. Institutional systems that support decentralized disaster risk reduction (DRR) established, strengthened and integrated with local level development

First 5 Months: • High Level Steering

Committee (HLSC) and Technical Working Groups (TWGs) TORs prepared

• Programme Coordination and Implementation Support Unit (PCISU) for DRR established in BAPPENAS

• Initial DRR program support needs for implementing partners identified

• Good practice and process documentation systems established

Year 2: • HLSC and TWGs,

established and guiding LAP development and implementation process

• Decentralized DRR Advocacy Network(s) established at national level and in selected provinces

• Common UN/Donor/NGO DRR strategic plan in place

• GOI Coord./Harmonization Mechanisms/Partnerships for DRR established with

2.1 PCISU established in BAPPENAS to support DRR program implementation 2.2 Support to GOI agencies and other key partners for DRR institutionalization 2.3 Support to establish or strengthen DRR Coordination Mechanisms/Partnerships and Knowledge Sharing Networks (including UNDMT and UNTWG-DRR) 2.4 Development of a multi-user disaster risk management information system(s) 2.5 DRR Information Management centres established at the national level, in selected province, and at the UN Humanitarian Coordinator/Resident Coordinator office 2.6 Establish and strengthen professional development and educational programmes within existing institutional framework starting with high level national training 2.7 Good practice, lessons learned and process documentation, monitoring

• BAPPENAS & UNDP Subcontracting/partnerships: • Ministry of Finance • BAKORNAS PB • BAKORNAS PB members • DRR related GOI ministries • UN Agencies • HLSC & TWGs • DPR • HLSC & TWGs • BMG • Provincial Governors • BAPPEDA • SATKORLAK • DPRD • District Heads • Provincial, district and sub-

district level Government • TNI • Police • Indonesian Red Cross • NGOs & CBOs • Universities • Private Sector • UN-TWG • Local and national NGOs

• Employee Costs • International Consultants

(TA) • Local Consultants (TA) • Contractual Services

(companies & individuals) • Professional Services • Travel Costs • Grants • Rental - Premises • IT Equipment • Communications & Audio

Visual Equipment • Other Equipment • Materials and Goods • Supplies • Audio Visual & Print

Production Costs • Sundries / Miscellaneous

33

Intended Outputs

Output Targets 2 (Five Year Programme)

Indicative Activities

Responsible parties

Inputs

UN Agencies, donors, national and intl. organizations

Years 2-5: • Establishment of DRR

systems within GOI and other agencies DRR related ministries, public and private organizations and NGOs at natl, provl and district levels

• Identification, design & Implementation of DRR institutionalization projects

and evaluation.

3. Education and awareness programs strengthened to make development/disaster linkages understood

Year 2: • Detailed DRR Public

Awareness Strategy based on LAP developed

• DRR public awareness partnerships established with educational institutions, media, civil society and the private sector

• Good practice and process documentation systems established

Years 2-5: • Detailed DRR Public

Awareness Strategy implemented

• Identify, design and implement public awareness & educational programmes

• Regular DRR Public Awareness Strategy lessons

3.1. Develop and implement detailed public awareness and social marketing strategy 3.2. DRR education and public awareness partnerships established 3.3 Community based, people centred, multi-hazard early warning systems established 3.4 Develop and implement specific education and awareness programmes 3.5 Good practice, lessons learned and process documentation, monitoring and evaluation

• BAPPENAS & UNDP Subcontracting/partnerships: • BAKORNAS PB • Ministry of Education • Ministry of

Communications • Ministry of Finance • BAKORNAS PB members • DRR related GOI ministries • UN Agencies • HLSC & TWGs • DPR • BMG • Provincial Governors • BAPPEDA • SATKORLAK • DPRD • District Heads • Provincial, district and sub-

district level Government • TNI

• Employee Costs • International Consultants

(TA) • Local Consultants (TA) • Contractual Services

(companies & individuals) • Professional Services • Travel Costs • Grants • Rental - Premises • IT Equipment • Communications & Audio

Visual Equipment • Other Equipment • Materials and Goods • Supplies • Audio Visual & Print

Production Costs • Sundries / Miscellaneous

34

Intended Outputs

Output Targets 2 (Five Year Programme)

Indicative Activities

Responsible parties

Inputs

learned review and revision process

• Police • Indonesian Red Cross • NGOs & CBOs • Universities • Private Sector • Local and national NGOs

4. Local disaster risk reduction processes and methodologies , guidelines and tools developed applied, documented, and fed-back into policy framework

First 5 months: • Identify & design initial DRR

projects and programmes • Good practice & process

documentation systems established

Years 2-5: • Design and implement DRR

projects and programmes identified in the LAP

• Identify, design and implement DRR sectoral, sub-national, local-Government and community based programmes and projects

4.1 Make communities safer through a) local Government, b) community based, c) hazard specific, d) urban, e) sector specific and other disaster risk reduction projects and programmes 4.2 Good practice, lessons learned and process documentation, monitoring and evaluation

• BAPPENAS & UNDP Subcontracting/partnerships: • BAKORNAS PB • Ministry of Finance • IFIs • BAKORNAS PB members • DRR related GOI ministries • UN Agencies • HLSC & TWGs • DPR • BMG • Provincial Governors • BAPPEDA • SATKORLAK • DPRD • District Heads

• Employee Costs • International Consultants

(TA) • Local Consultants (TA) • Contractual Services

(companies & individuals) • Professional Services • Travel Costs • Grants • Rental - Premises • IT Equipment • Communications & Audio

Visual Equipment • Other Equipment • Materials and Goods • Supplies • Audio Visual & Print

35

Intended Outputs

Output Targets 2 (Five Year Programme)

Indicative Activities

Responsible parties

Inputs

• Provincial, district and sub-district level Government

• TNI • Police • Indonesian Red Cross • NGOs & CBOs • Universities • Private Sector • UNDP for TA, Monitoring • Local and national NGOs • TA providers

Production Costs • Sundries / Miscellaneous

36

Section III – Risk Log

ID

Type

Date Identified /

Author

Description

Comments

Status

Status Change

Date

Owner

1 Financial Programme Formulation

Misappropriation or misuse of project funds.

Rigorous monitoring of MDRRD support, with emphasis on field validation of outputs, beneficiary interviews and surveys, and review of financial expenditure. Measures such as independent, third party monitoring will be used to mitigate corruption risks.

To be factored into design and implementation of monitoring systems.

N/A Programme Manager

2 Institutional Programme Formulation

Capacity of project implementing partners hinders speed or quality of program implementation.

Need to ensure partnerships arrangements factor in need for awareness raising, technical assistance and/or training to implementing partners.

To be factored into programme formulation.

N/A Programme Manager

3 Institutional Programme Formulation

Resistance to changes required to establish disaster risk reduction approaches or to fundamental principles embodied in disaster risk reduction.

Need to ensure initially that potential partners are fully supportive institutionally to the proposed changes or that if alternatives do not exist (as in the case of ministries) adequate arrangements are made factor in need for awareness raising, technical assistance and/or training for institutional partners.

To be factored into programme formulation and monitored by programme management and board.

N/A Programme Manager

4 External Programme Formulation

After programme provides technical and general support to identify development related investments to reduce disaster risks financial resources are not made available from normal development budgets.

Need to establish partnerships with range of financial institutions willing to provide resources for actual risk reduction measures identified to be incorporated in the development process identified as a result of the programme activities. Need to identify potential funding sources as part of the initial project sub-activity design process.

To be factored into programme formulation and monitored by programme management and board.

N/A Programme Manager

5 External Programme Formulation

Redirection of project staff effort or financial resources to immediate relief / response / recovery efforts due to future natural disasters.

Need to establish the fact that this program is focused on development and any redirection of program resources must be directly linked to disaster risk reduction activities.

To be factored into programme formulation and monitored by programme management and board.

N/A Programme Manager

37

Section IV - Total workplan and budget (5 year programme) Safer Communities Through Disaster Risk Reduction (SC-DRR) in Development PRODOC AND ATLAS BUDGET

Project ID

Expected Output Act. ID

Deliverable / Activity Description Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 R.Pty Fund Donor Acct Description Amount (USD)

Disaster risk reduction policy, legal and regulatory framework established

1.1 Support preparation of a GOI National Action Plan (NAP) to mainstream decentralized disaster risk reduction in the development process

X X X X X

GOVT TBD TBD 71300 Local Consultants 6,000 GOVT TBD TBD 71600 Travel 20,000 GOVT TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 10,000 GOVT TBD TBD 72600 Grants to Institutions 5,000 GOVT TBD TBD 74200 Audio Visual & Print Prod Costs 5,000 GOVT TBD TBD 74500 Miscellaneous Expenses 1,619 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 2,381

TOTAL 50,000 1.2 Support preparation of a GOI Local

Action Plan (LAP) to mainstream decentralized disaster risk reduction in the development process

X X X X X

UNDP TBD TBD 71100 ALD Employee Costs 132,000 GOVT TBD TBD 71300 Local Consultants 42,000 GOVT TBD TBD 71600 Travel 30,000 GOVT TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 15,000 GOVT TBD TBD 72600 Grants to Institutions 300,000 GOVT TBD TBD 74200 Audio Visual & Print Prod Costs 3,000 GOVT TBD TBD 74500 Miscellaneous Expenses 1,810 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 26,190

TOTAL 550,000 2 Support to establish policy, legal and

regulatory frameworks

X X X X X

GOVT TBD TBD 71300 Local Consultants 92,000 GOVT TBD TBD 71600 Travel 137,250 GOVT TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 50,000 GOVT TBD TBD 74500 Miscellaneous Expenses 8,940 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 14,410

TOTAL 302,600 3 Support to establish regulatory,

enforcement and incentive-disincentive procedures based on DRR legislation and policy X X X X X

GOVT TBD TBD 71300 Local Consultants 192,000 GOVT TBD TBD 71600 Travel 137,250 GOVT TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 30,000 GOVT TBD TBD 74500 Miscellaneous Expenses 8,940 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 18,410

TOTAL 386,600 4 Review, revision and updating process

established for Strategic Implementation Plan and DRR policy, legal and regulatory framework improvement X X X

GOVT TBD TBD 71300 Local Consultants 36,000 GOVT TBD TBD 71600 Travel 9,000 GOVT TBD TBD 74200 Audio Visual&Print Prod Costs 25,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72600 Grants to Institutions 90,000 GOVT TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 28,000 GOVT TBD TBD 74500 Miscellaneous Expenses 2,476 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 9,524

TOTAL 200,000 5 Good practice, lessons learned and

process documentation, monitoring and evaluation (includes UNDP backstopping )

X X X X X

UNDP TBD TBD 71300 Local Consultants 20,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71400 Contractual Services-Individual 20,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71600 Travel 17,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 20,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72200 Equipment and Furniture 10,000

38

UNDP TBD TBD 72600 Grants to Institutions 10,000 UNDP TBD TBD 74200 Audio Visual&Print Prod Costs 5,000 UNDP TBD TBD 74500 Miscellaneous Expenses 3,525 UNDP TBD TBD 75100 GMS 5,276

TOTAL 110,801 SUB TOTAL 1,600,000

1 PCISU established in BAPPENAS to support DRR program implementation

X X X X X

GOVT TBD TBD 71300 Local Consultants 200,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71400 Contractual Services-Individual 110,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71600 Travel 129,600 UNDP TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 45,000 UNDP TBD TBD 73100 Rental and maintenance premises 158,000 UNDP TBD TBD 73400 Rental and maintenance other equipment 119,305 UNDP TBD TBD 75100 GMS 38,095

TOTAL 800,000 2 Support to GOI and other key partners

for DRR institutionalization

X X X X X

UNDP TBD TBD 71100 ALD Employee Cost 150,000 GOVT TBD TBD 71300 Local Consultants 736,000 GOVT TBD TBD 71600 Travel 231,600 GOVT TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 50,000 GOVT TBD TBD 72600 Grants 250,000 GOVT TBD TBD 74500 Miscellaneous Expenses 10,971 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 71,429

TOTAL 1,500,000 3 Support to establish or strengthen

Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) Partnerships and Knowledge Sharing Networks X X X X X

UNDP TBD TBD 71200 International Consultants 20,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71400 Contractual Services-Individual 80,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71600 Travel 40,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 40,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72800 Information Technology Equipmt 10,476 UNDP TBD TBD 75100 GMS 9,524

TOTAL 200,000 4 Development of multi-user disaster

risk reduction and management information system(s)

X X X X X

UNDP TBD TBD 71100 ALD Employee Costs 120,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71300 Local Consultants 336,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71600 Travel 175,800 UNDP TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 52,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72400 Communic & Audio Visual Equip 50,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72600 Grants 150,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72800 Information Technology Equipmt 50,000 UNDP TBD TBD 74500 Miscellaneous Expenses 18,581 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 47,619

TOTAL 1,000,000 5 DRR Information Management

centres established at the national level, in selected province, and at the UN Humanitarian Coordinator/Resident Coordinator office X X X X X

UNDP TBD TBD 71100 ALD Employee Costs 160,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71300 Local Consultants 416,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71600 Travel 177,600 UNDP TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 187,400 UNDP TBD TBD 72200 Equipment and Furniture 250,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72400 Communic & Audio Visual Equip 250,000 GOVT TBD TBD 72600 Grants 395,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72800 Information Technology Equipmt 250,000 UNDP TBD TBD 74500 Miscellaneous Expenses 5,429 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 104,571

39

TOTAL 2,196,000 6.1 Establish specific formalized,

competency based professional development programs for GOI staff and professionals

X X X X X

GOVT TBD TBD 71200 International Consultants 65,000 GOVT TBD TBD 71300 Local Consultants 95,000 GOVT TBD TBD 71600 Travel 55,000 GOVT TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 96,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72600 Grants 70,000 UNDP TBD TBD 74500 Miscellaneous Expenses 3,762 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 19,238

TOTAL 404,000 6.2 Disaster risk reduction, recovery and

reconstruction skills of local Governments strengthened

X X X X X

UNDP TBD TBD 71300 Local Consultants 33,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71600 Travel 89,700 UNDP TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 100,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72600 Grants 252,000 UNDP TBD TBD 74500 Miscellaneous Expenses 1,490 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 23,810

TOTAL 500,000 6.3 Strengthened institutional capacity to

provide disaster risk reduction training and education programs for local government, NGO and CBO staff and professionals working on DRR programmes

X X X X X

UNDP TBD TBD 71200 International Consultants 72,000 GOVT TBD TBD 71300 Local Consultants 180,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71600 Travel 156,300 GOVT TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 96,000 GOVT TBD TBD 72600 Grants 446,000 UNDP TBD TBD 74500 Miscellaneous Expenses 2,081 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 47,619

TOTAL 1,000,000 7 Good practice, lessons learned and

process documentation, monitoring and evaluation (includes UNDP backstopping )

X X X X X

UNDP TBD TBD 71300 Local Consultants 20,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71400 Contractual Services-Individual 40,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71600 Travel 6,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 30,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72200 Equipment and Furniture 15,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72600 Grants to Institutions 75,000 UNDP TBD TBD 74200 Audio Visual&Print Prod Costs 3,000 UNDP TBD TBD 74500 Miscellaneous Expenses 1,476 UNDP TBD TBD 75100 GMS 9,524

TOTAL 200,000 SUB TOTAL 7,800,000

TBD

3. Education and awareness programs strengthened to make development/disaster linkages understood

1 Develop and implement detailed public awareness and social marketing strategy

X X X X

UNDP TBD TBD 71100 ALD Employee Costs 504,000 GOVT TBD TBD 71300 Local Consultants 36,000 GOVT TBD TBD 71600 Travel 69,300 UNDP TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 30,000 GOVT TBD TBD 72600 Grants to Institutions 300,000 UNDP TBD TBD 74200 Audio Visual&Print Prod Costs 5,000 UNDP TBD TBD 74500 Miscellaneous Expenses 8,081 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 47,619

TOTAL 1,000,000 2 DRR education and public awareness

partnerships established

X X

GOVT TBD TBD 71600 Travel 46,800 UNDP TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 60,000 GOVT TBD TBD 72600 Grants 80,000 GOVT TBD TBD 74500 Miscellaneous Expenses 3,677 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 9,524

40

TOTAL 200,000 3 Community based, people centered,

multi-hazard early warning systems established

X X X X

UNDP TBD TBD 71200 ALD Employee Cost 144,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71300 Local Consultants 72,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71600 Travel 105,000 GOVT TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 36,000 GOVT TBD TBD 72600 Grants 400,000 UNDP TBD TBD 74500 Miscellaneous Expenses 4,905 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 38,095

TOTAL 800,000 4 Develop and implement specific

education and awareness programmes

X X X X

UNDP TBD TBD 71100 International Consultants 72,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71300 Local Consultants 72,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71600 Travel 61,500 GOVT TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 18,000 GOVT TBD TBD 72600 Grants to Institutions 250,000 UNDP TBD TBD 74500 Miscellaneous Expenses 2,690 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 23,810

TOTAL 500,000 Good practice, lessons learned and

process documentation, monitoring and evaluation (includes UNDP backstopping )

X X X X

UNDP TBD TBD 71300 Local Consultants 30,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71400 Contractual Services-Individual 45,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71600 Travel 5,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 15,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72200 Equipment and Furniture 15,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72600 Grants to Institutions 75,000 UNDP TBD TBD 74200 Audio Visual&Print Prod Costs 3,000 UNDP TBD TBD 74500 Miscellaneous Expenses 2,476 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 9,524

TOTAL 200,000 SUB TOTAL 2,700,000

TBD

4. Local disaster risk reduction processes and methodologies , guidelines and tools developed applied, documented, and fed-back into policy framework

1.1 Disaster risk reduction implemented through local GOVTs in selected provinces, districts and sub-districts

X X X X X

UNDP TBD TBD 71100 ALD Employee Costs 576,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71300 Local Consultants 140,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71600 Travel 70,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 380,000 GOVT TBD TBD 72600 Grants to Institutions 325,000 UNDP TBD TBD 74500 Miscellaneous Expenses 10,905 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 75,095

TOTAL 1,577,000 1.2 CBDRR implemented through

community groups in selected provinces, districts, sub-districts and villages

X X X X X

GOVT TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 350,000 GOVT TBD TBD 72600 Grants to Institutions 350,000 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 35,000

TOTAL 735,000 1.3 Urban disaster risk reduction

implemented in selected cities X X X X X

GOVT TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 350,000 GOVT TBD TBD 72600 Grants to Institutions 350,000 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 35,000

TOTAL 735,000 1.4 Hazard specific disaster reduction

programmes implemented X X X X X

GOVT TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 350,000 GOVT TBD TBD 72600 Grants to Institutions 350,000 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 35,000

TOTAL 735,000 1.5 Sectoral (transportation, telecoms, X X X X X GOVT TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 350,000

41

health, energy, etc.) disaster risk reduction programmes implemented

GOVT TBD TBD 72600 Grants to Institutions 350,000 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 35,000

TOTAL 735,000 2 Suppot to Regional Programme

UNDP TBD TBD 71100 ALD Employee Cost 60,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71200 International Consultants 60,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Service-Companies 563,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72600 Grants 30,000 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 35,650

TOTAL 748,650 3 Good practice, lessons learned and

process documentation, monitoring and evaluation (includes UNDP backstopping )

UNDP TBD TBD 71300 Local Consultants 100,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71400 Contractual Services-Individual 300,000 UNDP TBD TBD 71600 Travel 100,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72100 Contractual Services-Companies 35,000 UNDP TBD TBD 72200 Equipment and Furniture 30,000 UNDP TBD TBD 74200 Audio Visual&Print Prod Costs 25,000 UNDP TBD TBD 74500 Miscellaneous Expenses 14,143 UNDP TBD TBD 75000 GMS 30,207

TOTAL 634,350 SUB TOTAL 5,900,000

GRAND TOTAL 18,000,000

42

Annex 1: Clarification of Terms Capacity building Efforts aimed to develop human skills or societal infrastructures within a community or organization needed to reduce the level of risk. Consequence Management: Procedures and actions that enable effective monitoring, warning and mobilization of people prior to a crisis event and those activities that are designed to enhance community capacities following a crisis event. Crisis: A severe situation or impending situation that has resulted or is likely to result from an emerging event. An event for this purpose may be a defined as a conflict situation or natural hazard – flood, earthquake, volcanic eruption, drought or storm-surge threat. Crisis Prevention : The implementation of proactive development and livelihood enhancement initiatives that are designed to avoid or significantly reduce the likelihood of conflict, or designed to eliminate or significantly reduce the level of community risk associated with specific natural hazards. Disaster A serious disruption of the functioning of a community or a society causing widespread human, material, economic or environmental losses which exceed the ability of the affected community or society to cope using its own resources. Disaster risk reduction (disaster reduction) The conceptual framework of elements considered with the possibilities to minimize vulnerabilities and disaster risks throughout a society, to avoid (prevention) or to limit (mitigation and preparedness) the adverse impacts of hazards, within the broad context of sustainable development. Disaster risk management The systematic process of using administrative decisions, organization, operational skills and capacities to implement policies, strategies and coping capacities of the society and communities to lessen the impacts of natural hazards and related environmental and technological disasters. This comprises all forms of activities, including structural and non-structural measures to avoid (prevention) or to limit (mitigation and preparedness) adverse effects of hazards. Early warning The provision of timely and effective information, through identified institutions, that allows individuals exposed to a hazard to take action to avoid or reduce their risk and prepare for effective response. Risk Management: The International ( Australia and New Zealand) Risk Management Standard AS-NZS: 4360-1999) is recognized globally as the benchmark process for undertaking comprehensive risk management relative to conflict and natural hazard events. This process is articulated in the following diagram. Subsequently, a matrix of the elements of the Programme Document is presented in relation to this RM Standards.

43

Annex 2: Risk Management Standard AS-NZS: 4360 - 1999

44

Annex 3: Disaster Risk Reduction Problems Assessment The following table articulates what could be described as the key elements of a best practice disaster management system. The identified problems result from a detailed analysis of the Indonesian situation against each of the criteria. It is recognised that the attainment of some of these criteria may take time to achieve, may not be achieved to the level required or simply, may not be achievable. The list provides a benchmark that can be used as a starting point for accessing overall progress of national efforts at establishing a disaster risk reduction process is a part of development. The assessment was conducted before the Indian Ocean Tsunami 2004. For the record, it is presented in its original version illustrating the then problems to be addressed, some of which are no longer relevant and over taken by event, contributing to the preparation of the SC DRR Programme Document.

Criteria Problems To Be Addressed Governance High level of political commitment and action to crisis management at all levels

Political focus is on response and there is little support or awareness on the benefits of prevention and mitigation strategies. National plan (Propenas), provincial strategic plan (Renstra), district strategic plan if mentioning disaster management mostly focused in emergency response. The politician or the high-level political figure lack of DM perspectives.

Risk reduction fully integrated within development planning at all levels

Planning frameworks do exist for this to occur on a sustainable basis. However there is very little knowledge and understanding at the provincial or district levels as to how disaster management enhances development planning or how to integrate end-to-end, people-centered early warning systems.

Policy, legal and planning frameworks that are widely known and understood, and provide clear direction to crisis prevention and emergency response, people-centered EWS, functional and planning systems and their operating synergies

No disaster management policy, legal or planning frameworks exist. Role ambiguity will impact on the success of disaster reduction programmes and effectiveness of emergency response.

Strong institutional frameworks that are vertically and horizontally integrated in their decision making, planning and operations

Very weak horizontal systems. The lack of coordination was recognized through consultations as being the major issue of concern.

Strong regional and national networks that provide ongoing opportunity for identifying emerging issues and maintaining best practice.

Weak national and regional networks. Limited capability to monitor emerging issues and very weak regional networks that often result in missed professional support opportunities made worse by poorly defined institutional roles, responsibilities and budget.

A visible and highly effective crisis prevention and consequence management focal point that is providing

BAKORNAS PB role has not been adjusted since the introduction of the Regional Autonomy Law. Many Government agencies and NGOs expressed concern that the Secretariat needs to find its niche or it will remain ineffective.

45

Criteria Problems To Be Addressed sound strategic leadership A skilled and competent workforce that is able to effectively undertake their core roles and responsibilities

Limited comprehensive disaster risk management skills among professional staff. There is no progressive professional development strategy. This limits their ability to provide guidance and support to strengthen provincial, district and community capacity.

An accredited training system that is providing competency and skills based training against uniform standards

Training is ad hoc and fragmented. There is no uniform design and no national system for accreditation, evaluation and maintenance of material. Local learning through community-to-community exchanges is yet to be developed.

Integrated application of Information Communication Technology (ICT) for decision making and coordination

ICT application at BAKORNAS PBP is un-sustained and linkages with other organizations are inadequate.

Risk Management and awareness included within school curriculum

Some elements of preparedness are taught to children. A number of Government departments and NGOs have expressed a desire to take disaster and crisis management to the classroom and unless this is coordinated there is a risk of inconsistency in messages and duplication of effort. Multi-hazard and multi-sectoral awareness initiatives need to be developed and sustained through strategic, intermittent intervals.

Community Risk Reduction A formal risk management process that is providing comprehensive and consistent hazard and risk analysis outputs, including awareness initiatives, local Government and community consultations, updating maps and data to guide disaster resilient growth and environmental management.

There appears to be no formal risk management model utilized by Government agencies and NGOs to guide growth and expansion of community settlements and services. At present the full analysis of risk is not moving past the hazard analysis and mapping stage devoid of community input and lacking capacity to integrate new support for community-oriented initiatives including people-centered EWS.

Technical risk assessments translated and communicated for easy use and application by local Government and community officials

Only one NGO indicated that they were utilizing the outputs of formal hazard and risk mapping undertaken by departments. Traditional risk assessment models may not identify all risk nor communicate through awareness initiatives and the education system useful information and early warnings and as such may give false hope or expectations regarding community safety.

Good community access to hazard and risk information and advice

Not available. This will impact significantly on the ability of communities to identify all risk scenarios.

Good community organization to support, apply and control the programme

Local Government, local disaster management support entities, NGOs and CBOs not coordinated nor community institutions or community organizations in disaster management established.

A high level of community participation in the

Communities rarely involved in formal risk assessments other than with NGOs (NGO efforts to work with Satlak). There can

46

Criteria Problems To Be Addressed identification, planning and treatment of risks and people-centered EWS.

be no ownership or commitment to addressing risk if community members are not involved in the process.

A network of well resourced local committees organized around valid boundaries (physical, social, cultural) with strong Government and NGO relationships

Committees tend to be established around individuals and in the main have an ad hoc relationship with Government and NGOs. This limits the resources available for risk reduction. Local Government leadership to develop a risk reduction agenda through community consultation yet to be developed.

Insurance companies and Government lending institutions and micro credit schemes support homeowners and small business to take mitigation efforts.

No support from institutions and no incentive for small business or communities to undertake mitigation. Community and local Government capacity to prepare and implement capital investment programmes to improve and make more resilient the built environment needs to be developed.

Consequence Management Fully integrated Preparedness and Response Plans at all levels.

Not in place. This results in role ambiguity and increased unlikelihood of timely warnings and support to affected communities.

National and Provincial emergency operations centres that has good outreach systems and communication networks.

A facility exists within BAKORNAS PB Secretariat, however there is no infrastructure and very little capability to coordinate the national information and resource management functions during crisis or disaster situations. Provincial centres are almost non-existent.

Agency business continuity and response plans that detail arrangements for: • The provision of services

relative to assigned disaster management and emergency response roles and responsibilities

• Protecting agency staff and assets and thus ensuring continuity of business.

Most agencies have solid plans detailing their actions during disaster situations. These are however, not integrated horizontally across Government resulting in uncoordinated response. Very few agencies have business continuity plans, which means that they are not preserving the business environment that enables them to provide response services.

Community education and awareness programmes that focus on: general hazard information, disaster response issues such as the dead and missing, community settlement maps specific community risk scenarios, and early warning systems.

Education and awareness programmes tend to focus on preparedness to hazards such as floods, earthquake, etc. The critical issue for effective community safety is that members are made aware of specific community risk scenarios and practice response through simulations and are thus empowered to take action.

Print and broadcast media fully engaged in promoting disaster management and community safety issues.

Media ambivalent of efforts to reduce impact of hazards. Media not involved in the translation of warnings into layman’s language and in general are greatly under utilized. Media not involved in establishing and/or correcting perceptions of disaster risks.

47

Annex 4: Joint UN Strategic Plan on Disaster Risk Reduction For Sustainable Development (2007 – 2010)

Joint UN Strategic Plan on

Disaster Risk Reduction For Sustainable Development (2007 – 2010)

Draft 22 August 2006 Joint Programme Umbrella Document

Country: Indonesia UNDAF Outcome: Protecting the vulnerable and reducing vulnerabilities “By 2010, Government and civil society will have better policy, legal

frameworks and mechanisms to protect vulnerable people and reduce vulnerabilities.”

Expected Outcome: Reduced vulnerability of people and communities affected by natural disasters through a shift from crisis response to crisis prevention and disaster risk reduction in development

Expected Outputs: 1) Risk Monitoring 2) Risk Reduction 3) Risk Impact Management

Partners: Bakornas PB Secretariat, Bappenas, Bakornas PB Member Ministries, Other Related GOI Ministries, GOI sub-national partners, RC Office, UN Agencies, UNDMT, UNTWG on DRR, private sector, and NGOs

Executive Summary Reducing disaster vulnerability requires a new way of working comprehensively across almost every sector of human activity. This umbrella or chapeau document reflects that new approach within the UN system in Indonesia. UN seeks to expand this approach to its GOI partners and civil society in Indonesia as well as other bi-lateral agencies and international financial institutions. This document reflects a Joint Programme among UN Disaster Management Team (UNDMT). The outcomes under this Joint Programme have been taken from the UNDAF. The activities and sub-activities for the Joint Programme are based on a comprehensive framework of disaster risk reduction (DRR) actions developed by ISDR under the Hyogo framework. They were used during a September 2005 UN/INGO/Donor Convergence Workshop in Indonesia to review nationwide DRR programmes. The work plan activities represent disaster risk reduction components of on-going or soon to be approved UNCT projects. The Joint Programme initially seeks to enhance overall coordination, gap identification and integration of disaster risk reduction activities in UNDMT projects. Later through similar meetings the Joint Programme will seek to broaden this mechanism to include the related agencies of the Government of Indonesia, international financial institutions, bilateral development agencies, other UN agencies, civil society and private sector partners. Programme oversight and guidance will come from the RC with support from the UNDMT. Two funding methods will be used. The programme will start with parallel funding. A trust fund will be established for pass-through funds. UNDP will be the Administrative Agent for the trust fund. The Administrative Agent will provide financial and progress reports. Project implementation level coordination and management will be by the UNDMT’s Technical Working Group for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNTWG-DRR) assisted by a Joint Programme Coordinator and support staff hired to help manage interagency coordination. The overall target budget figure for the five-year programme stands at USD (TBD).

48

Section 1: Background and Analysis This umbrella document reflects a joint programme between members of the UN Disaster Management Team (UNDMT) in Indonesia. The UNDMT members in Indonesia currently include FAO, OCHA, UNAIDS, UNDP, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNICEF, WFP and WHO. These activities fall under the outcomes of the United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) for Indonesia covering the period 2006-2010 based on a Common Country Assessment (CCA) for Indonesia carried out prior to the development of the UNDAF. At a subsequent UNDAF prioritization workshop attended by the Government of Indonesia (GOI), civil society and other development partners, “protecting the vulnerable and reducing vulnerabilities” was identified as one of three areas of cooperation where the UN system could work together most effectively to support the achievement of Indonesia’s MDGs. The UNDAF also mainstreams UN system support for to the GOI Master Plan for Rehabilitation and Reconstruction of Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam and North Sumatra into the three UNDAF outcomes. The UNDAF puts special emphasis on promoting MDG achievement, good governance and mitigation of immediate and long-term vulnerabilities of local populations and communities as a part of this process. It also includes support to the development of early warning systems and preparedness. Most UN agencies have been directly involved with recovery and reconstruction projects and mutual coordination of their activities all of which all have a primary component of mainstreaming disaster risk reduction (mitigation) into project activities. This programme represents the next obvious step towards coordination and synergizing long-term disaster risk reduction activities as a part of normal UN Agency programme development activities. Since the 2004 Tsunami and Earthquake that so dramatically affected North Sumatra and NAD, there have been a series of disasters some of which include the recent tsunami and earthquake in Southern Java (17 July 2006), the floods in Sulawesi (June 2006), the earthquake and volcanic eruptions in Yogyakarta and Central Java (June 2006), and before that earthquakes in Nabire, Alor (2004) and Bengkulu (2000), floods (2003), landslides and previous volcanic eruptions of Mount Merapi (2002), ENSO (1997/98) and forest fires (1998). These disasters, the effectiveness of response activities, the recovery and reconstruction costs and resulting setback to development and achievement of MDGs have highlighted for the GOI, public and international community as never before the importance of introducing and enacting reforms that will reduce the impact of disasters on development gains. As a result, a number of important disaster risk reduction initiatives have been taken by the GOI which include 1) drafting by Parliament of national disaster management legislation 2) development of a National Action Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction that will be a component of the National Development Plan and 3) preparation of a GOI Work Plan with a substantial budget for prevention and risk reduction programmes which are described in more detail as follows:

1) Preparation and review by Parliament of “The Draft Bill On Disaster Management” whose aims include protection of communities from disaster risk that build on local cultures and their risk reduction practices, implementation of disaster relief in a planned, integrated and coordinated fashion, strengthening and synchronization of disaster risk reduction regulations and development of public/private partnerships to achieve the aims of the law.

2) Joint development by BAPPENAS and BAKORNAS PB of a “National Action Plan for Disaster

Risk Reduction” (RANPRB) as a component of the National Development Plan which references the UN Economic and Social Council call for Governments to “maintain and strengthen National Action Planning for Disaster Reduction” to ensure attainment of sustainable development targets and the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015 call for integrated disaster risk reduction mechanisms supported by adequate institutional capacity and budgetary resources.

49

3) Preparation of the Government Work Plan for 2007 (Presidential Regulation No. 19 of 2006)

tabled in June 2006, in which BAPPENAS included substantial funds for prevention and risk reduction (pre-disaster) programmes that will support disaster risk and vulnerability mapping, strengthened early warning systems, community empowerment and awareness raising and improved crisis management systems in addition to recovery and reconstruction programmes in North Sumatra and NAD as well as Central Java and Yogyakarta.

In September 2005, capitalizing on the normal annual UN/INGO/Donor meeting the UNDMT’s Technical Working Group for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNTWG-DRR) took the opportunity to hold a Convergence Workshop to identify and map country wide all disaster management activities taking place with support from the UN/INGO/Donor community. A framework of disaster risk reduction actions developed by ISDR was used as the matrix for analyzing the comprehensiveness of the activities identified. The resulting picture confirmed that relief and response needs primarily drove disaster related projects rather than the need for disaster risk reduction (DRR) or mitigation before disasters. It also confirmed that disaster risk reduction (DRR) work being done was not based on prioritized national vulnerabilities. The meeting underscored the need for 1) GOI leadership with UN support to prioritize, coordinate and synergize disaster risk reduction activities throughout the country and 2) the need for partnerships with educational institutions, private sector, the media and most importantly local communities in order to shift the emphasis from relief and recovery reaction to disaster risk reduction integrated with development. The meeting also illustrated that starting within the UN System, the UNDMT’s UNTWG-DRR could play an important role in initiating a more comprehensive system wide approach to making disaster risk reduction a normal part of the UN project programming process. Given the above, the strategic approach of this joint programme is to build a cross-sectoral, multi-agency approach to disaster risk reduction within the UNCT starting with the leadership of the RC and the UNDMT working through their Technical Working Group on Disaster Risk Reduction (UNTWG-DRR) as a programme implementation level coordination mechanism. Through current UNTWG-DRR meetings disaster risk reduction components of member UN agency programmes are shared, discussed and improved. However, this mechanism combined with a joint programming process can play a key role in making disaster risk reduction a normal part of agency wide programme development and help ensure that these activities coincide with broad GOI disaster risk reduction priorities and programmes. For example, UNDP has just designed a disaster risk reduction project that will produce four key outputs:

1) Disaster risk reduction policy, legal and regulatory framework established 2) Institutional systems that support decentralized disaster risk reduction established,

strengthened and integrated with local level development 3) Education and awareness programmes established and strengthened to make

development/disaster linkages understood 4) Disaster risk reduction to make communities safer demonstrated

This UNDP project will help to establish or strengthen many disaster risk reduction systems that are a critical part of the development process in Indonesia. However, for example, health sector project activities mutually identified and coordinated with WHO will have a much greater likelihood of being effective over the long-term than working separately.

50

Therefore, initially, this Joint Programme will further formalize these kinds of cross-sectoral relationships, enhance overall coordination, build synergies, help identify gaps and ways to integrate of disaster risk reduction activities in UNDMT projects. Later, through more meetings and coordination efforts like the UN/INGO/Donor Convergence Workshop, the Joint Programme seeks to broaden this mechanism to include the related agencies of the Government of Indonesia, international financial institutions, bilateral development agencies, civil society and private sector partners. Section 2: Management and Coordination Arrangements A Steering Committee co-chaired by the Senior Leadership of BAKORNAS PB and the Resident Coordinator will be established. Its membership will include the BAPPENAS, BAKORNAS PB member ministries, BAKORNAS PB UNDMT members (FAO, OCHA, UNAIDS, UNDP, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNICEF, WFP and WHO) will provide leadership, strategic guidance and programme oversight for the Joint Programme. Agency heads will represent each UN Agency. Government counterpart agency heads will also be members of the Steering Committee. As the Joint Programme develops a forum and formal mechanism will be established stemming from the UNDMT and the UNDMT’s Technical Working Group for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNTWG-DRR) to identify, bring into the programme and coordinate other activities and resources focused on disaster risk reduction. As previously mentioned, this will include related agencies of the Government of Indonesia, international financial institutions, bilateral development agencies, other UN agencies, civil society and private sector partners. Two funding methods will be used. The programme will start with parallel funding. A trust fund will be established by UNDP as the Administrative Agent for pass-through funds. Where warranted for future activities that need multiple agency efforts, joint proposals will be developed to mobilize more resources for cross-sectoral disaster risk reduction programmes. Within the UN system, Programme oversight and guidance will come from the RC/HC function and the UNDMT. UNDP will be the Administrative Agent for the trust fund. The Administrative Agent will provide financial and progress reports. Project implementation level coordination and management will be by the UNDMT’s Technical Working Group for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNTWG-DRR). A Joint Programme Coordinator with support staff will be hired by UNTWG-DRR to help manage interagency coordination. Through the efforts of the Joint Programme Coordinator, the UNTWG-DRR will do the day-to-day project coordination and management. The UNTWG-DRR will report regularly to the Steering Committee, which will in turn provide strategic policy guidance and advice to ensure the relevance of the programme to GOI priorities, to ensure that the GOI is engaged in establishing priorities and strategies and to oversee and monitor programme directions, results and lessons learned. The UNTWG-DRR is and will continue to be supported by seconded technical expertise in disaster risk reduction from UNDP’s Bureau for Crisis Prevention including the Regional Disaster Adviser and from the Disaster Reduction Unit of BCPR, Geneva, the UNDP RCB Regional Disaster Risk Reduction programme staff based in Bangkok, OCHA and OCHA’s ISDR office in Bangkok, the South-South Programme and ESCAP. The programme will be reviewed through quarterly and annual review meetings consisting of the Steering Committee and respective GOI and other partners. The Joint Programme Coordinator through the UNTWG-DRR will provide regular feedback to all UN Agencies through monthly progress reports. The overall direction of programmes under the various UN Agencies will be provided by programme coordinators from those agencies in consultation with the heads of those agencies.

51

Project officers from each involved agency will carry out regular programme monitoring of parallel programmes of the various UN Agencies. Section 3: Common Work plan and Budget The programme workplan activities represent disaster risk reduction components of on-going or soon to be approved UNCT projects. Future programmes with disaster risk reduction components will be added over time as they are developed. The common work plan is guided by the UNDAF outcomes. The expected outputs are as follows:

1. Risk Monitoring 2. Risk Reduction 3. Risk Impact Management

The activities and sub-activities (see following list) for the Joint Programme are based on a comprehensive framework of disaster risk reduction (DRR) actions developed by ISDR and . This framework of activities was used as the basis the September 2005 UN/INGO/Donor Convergence Workshop in Indonesia to review nationwide disaster risk reduction programmes.

1. Risk Monitoring 1.1 Identification

1.1.1 Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis 1.1.2 Hazard Analysis and Monitoring 1.1.3 Risk Identification and Impact Assessment 1.1.4 Early Warning

1.2 Assessment 1.3 Monitoring 1.4 Multi-Tasks

2. Risk Reduction

2.1 Awareness 2.1.1 Knowledge Development 2.1.2 Information 2.1.3 Education and Training 2.1.4 Research

2.2 Governance 2.2.1 International, National and Local Levels 2.2.2 Governance Institutional Framework 2.2.3 Policy Development 2.2.4 Legislation and Codes 2.2.5 Organizational Development 2.2.6 Community Action

2.3 Mitigation 2.3.1 Environmental Management 2.3.2 Social and Economic Development 2.3.3 Physical and Technical Measures 2.3.4 Networking and Partnerships

2.4 Multi-Tasks

3. Risk Impact Management

52

3.1 Warning Preparedness 3.2 Emergency Response 3.3 Recovery 3.4 Multi-Tasks

Section 4: Signatures of national counterparts and participating UN organizations 1 Signatures of the Steering Committee Co-Chairs: Senior Leadership of Bakornas PB and the UN Resident Coordinator 2 Signatures of Government counterparts: Bappenas, Bakornas PB Secretariat, Bakornas PB Member Ministries, Other Related GOI

Ministries, GOI sub-national partners 3 Signatures of the agencies’ representatives in the country:

FAO, OCHA, UNAIDS, UNDP, UNESCO, UNFPA, UNICEF, WFP and WHO

53

Work Plan Year 2005 - 2006

EXPECTED OUTPUTS3

& MONITORING ACTIVITIES4

Key Activities/Annual Output targets

List all the activities to be undertaken during the year towards stated output

TIMEFRAME RESPONSIBLE PARTY

PLANNED BUDGET

Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Source of Funds

Budget Description

Amount

1) Risk Monitoring

1.1 Identification 1.1.1 Vulnerability and

Capacity Analysis 1.1.2 Hazard Analysis and

Monitoring 1.1.3 Risk Identification and

Impact Assessment 1.1.4 Early Warning

1.2 Assessment 1.3 Monitoring 1.4 Multi Tasks

2) Risk Reduction 2.1 Awareness 2.1.1 Knowledge

Development 2.1.2 Information 2.1.3 Education and Training 2.1.4 Research

3 State the outputs that the programme is expected to achieve/contribute to. Include relevant indicators/benchmarks 4 List monitoring activities such as Field Monitoring Visits, Technical Backstopping Missions, Evaluations, Annual Programme Reports.

54

2.2 Governance 2.2.1 International, National

and Local Levels 2.2.2 Governance Institutional

Framework 2.2.3 Policy Development 2.2.4 Legislation and Codes 2.2.5 Organizational

Development 2.2.6 Community Action

2.3 Mitigation 2.3.1 Environmental

Management 2.3.2 Social and Economic

Development 2.3.3 Physical and Technical

Measures 2.3.4 Networking and

Partnerships

2.4 Multi-Tasks 3) Risk Impact Management

3.1 Warning Preparedness 3.2 Emergency Response 3.3 Recovery 3.4 Multi-Tasks

TOTAL

55

ANNEX 5: Supplemental Provisions to the Project Document

The Legal Context General responsibilities of the Government, UNDP and the executing agency 1. All phases and aspects of UNDP assistance to this project shall be governed by and carried out in accordance with the relevant and applicable resolutions and decisions of the competent United Nations organs and in accordance with UNDP's policies and procedures for such projects, and subject to the requirements of the UNDP Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting System. The Government shall remain responsible for this UNDP-assisted development project and the realization of its objectives as described in this Project Document. 3. Assistance under this Project Document being provided for the benefit of the Government and the people of Indonesia, the Government shall bear all risks of operations in respect of this project. 4. The Government shall provide to the project the national counterpart personnel, training facilities, land, buildings, equipment and other required services and facilities. It shall designate the Government Co-operating Agency named in the cover page of this document (hereinafter referred to as the "Co-operating Agency"), which shall be directly responsible for the implementation of the Government contribution to the project. 5. The UNDP undertakes to complement and supplement the Government participation and will provide through the Executing Agency the required expert services, training, equipment and other services within the funds available to the project. 6. Upon commencement of the project the Executing Agency shall assume primary responsibility for project execution and shall have the status of an independent contractor for this purpose. However, that primary responsibility shall be exercised in consultation with UNDP and in agreement with the Co-operating Agency. Arrangements to this effect shall be stipulated in the Project Document as well as for the transfer of this responsibility to the Government or to an entity designated by the Government during the execution of the project. 7. Part of the Government's participation may take the form of a cash contribution to UNDP. In such cases, the Executing Agency will provide the related services and facilities and will account annually to the UNDP and to the Government for the expenditure incurred. (a) Participation of the Government 1. The Government shall provide to the project the services, equipment and facilities in the quantities and at the time specified in the Project Document. Budgetary provision, either in kind or in cash, for the Government's participation so specified shall be set forth in the Project Budgets. 2. The Co-operating Agency shall, as appropriate and in consultation with the Executing Agency, assign a director for the project on a full-time basis. He shall carry out such responsibilities in the project as are assigned to him by the Co-operating Agency. 3. The estimated cost of items included in the Government contribution, as detailed in the Project Budget, shall be based on the best information available at the time of

56

drafting the project proposal. It is understood that price fluctuations during the period of execution of the project may necessitate an adjustment of said contribution in monetary terms; the latter shall at all times be determined by the value of the services, equipment and facilities required for the proper execution of the project. 4. Within the given number of man-months of personnel services described in the Project Document, minor adjustments of individual assignments of project personnel provided by the Government may be made by the Government in consultation with the Executing Agency, if this is found to be in the best interest of the project. UNDP shall be so informed in all instances where such minor adjustments involve financial implications. 5. The Government shall continue to pay the local salaries and appropriate allowances of national counterpart personnel during the period of their absence from the project while on UNDP fellowships. 6. The Government shall defray any customs duties and other charges related to the clearance of project equipment, its transportation, handling, storage and related expenses within the country. It shall be responsible for its installation and maintenance, insurance, and replacement, if necessary, after delivery to the project site. 7. The Government shall make available to the project - subject to existing security provisions - any published and unpublished reports, maps, records and other data which are considered necessary to the implementation of the project. 8. Patent rights, copyright rights and other similar rights to any discoveries or work resulting from UNDP assistance in respect of this project shall belong to the UNDP. Unless otherwise agreed by the Parties in each case, however, the Government shall have the right to use any such discoveries or work within the country free of royalty and any charge of similar nature. 9. The Government shall assist all project personnel in finding suitable housing accommodation at reasonable rents. 10. The services and facilities specified in the Project Document which are to be provided to the project by the Government by means of a contribution in cash shall be set forth in the Project Budget. Payment of this amount shall be made to the UNDP in accordance with the Schedule of Payments by the Government. 11. Payment of the above-mentioned contribution to the UNDP on or before the dates specified in the Schedule of Payments by the Government is a prerequisite to commencement or continuation of project operations. (b) Participation of the UNDP and the executing agency 1. The UNDP shall provide to the project through the Executing Agency the services, equipment and facilities described in the Project Document. Budgetary provision for the UNDP contribution as specified shall be set forth in the Project Budget. 2. The Executing Agency shall consult with the Government and UNDP on the candidature of the Project Manager5 a/ who, under the direction of the Executing Agency, will be responsible in the country for the Executing Agency's participation in the project. The Project Manager shall supervise the experts and other agency personnel assigned to the project, and the on-the-job training of national counterpart personnel. He shall be responsible for the management and efficient utilization of all UNDP-financed inputs, including equipment provided to the project. 5 May also be designated Project Co-ordinator or Chief Technical Adviser, as appropriate.

57

3. The Executing Agency, in consultation with the Government and UNDP, shall assign international staff and other personnel to the project as specified in the Project Document, select candidates for fellowships and determine standards for the training of national counterpart personnel. 4. Fellowships shall be administered in accordance with the fellowships regulations of the Executing Agency. 5. The Executing Agency may, in agreement with the Government and UNDP, execute part or all of the project by subcontract. The selection of subcontractors shall be made, after consultation with the Government and UNDP, in accordance with the Executing Agency's procedures. 6. All material, equipment and supplies which are purchased from UNDP resources will be used exclusively for the execution of the project, and will remain the property of the UNDP in whose name it will be held by the Executing Agency. Equipment supplied by the UNDP shall be marked with the insignia of the UNDP and of the Executing Agency. 7. Arrangements may be made, if necessary, for a temporary transfer of custody of equipment to local authorities during the life of the project, without prejudice to the final transfer. 8. Prior to completion of UNDP assistance to the project, the Government, the UNDP and the Executing Agency shall consult as to the disposition of all project equipment provided by the UNDP. Title to such equipment shall normally be transferred to the Government, or to an entity nominated by the Government, when it is required for continued operation of the project or for activities following directly therefrom. The UNDP may, however, at its discretion, retain title to part or all of such equipment. 9. At an agreed time after the completion of UNDP assistance to the project, the Government and the UNDP, and if necessary the Executing Agency, shall review the activities continuing from or consequent upon the project with a view to evaluating its results. 10. UNDP may release information relating to any investment oriented project to potential investors, unless and until the Government has requested the UNDP in writing to restrict the release of information relating to such project. Rights, Facilities, Privileges and Immunities 1. In accordance with the Agreement concluded by the United Nations (UNDP) and the Government concerning the provision of assistance by UNDP, the personnel of UNDP and other United Nations organizations associated with the project shall be accorded rights, facilities, privileges and immunities specified in said Agreement. 2. The Government shall grant UN volunteers, if such services are requested by the Government, the same rights, facilities, privileges and immunities as are granted to the personnel of UNDP. 3. The Executing Agency's contractors and their personnel (except nationals of the host country employed locally) shall: (a) Be immune from legal process in respect of all acts performed by them in their official capacity in the execution of the project; (b) Be immune from national service obligations; (c) Be immune together with their spouses and relatives dependent on them from immigration restrictions;

58

(d) Be accorded the privileges of bringing into the country reasonable amounts of foreign currency for the purposes of the project or for personal use of such personnel, and of withdrawing any such amounts brought into the country, or in accordance with the relevant foreign exchange regulations, such amounts as may be earned therein by such personnel in the execution of the project; (e) Be accorded together with their spouses and relatives dependent on them the same repatriation facilities in the event of international crisis as diplomatic envoys. 4. All personnel of the Executing Agency's contractors shall enjoy inviolability for all papers and documents relating to the project. 5. The Government shall either exempt from or bear the cost of any taxes, duties, fees or levies which it may impose on any firm or organization which may be retained by the Executing Agency and on the personnel of any such firm or organization, except for nationals of the host country employed locally, in respect of: (a) The salaries or wages earned by such personnel in the execution of the project; (b) Any equipment, materials and supplies brought into the country for the purposes of the project or which, after having been brought into the country, may be subsequently withdrawn therefrom; (c) Any substantial quantities of equipment, materials and supplies obtained locally for the execution of the project, such as, for example, petrol and spare parts for the operation and maintenance of equipment mentioned under (b), above, with the provision that the types and approximate quantities to be exempted and relevant procedures to be followed shall be agreed upon with the Government and, as appropriate, recorded in the Project Document; and (d) As in the case of concessions currently granted to UNDP and Executing Agency's personnel, any property brought, including one privately owned automobile per employee, by the firm or organization or its personnel for their personal use or consumption or which after having been brought into the country, may subsequently be withdrawn there from upon departure of such personnel. 6. The Government shall ensure: (a) prompt clearance of experts and other persons performing services in respect of this project; and (b) the prompt release from customs of: (i) equipment, materials and supplies required in connection with this project; and (ii) property belonging to and intended for the personal use or consumption of the personnel of the UNDP, its Executing Agencies, or other persons performing services on their behalf in respect of this project, except for locally recruited personnel. 7. The privileges and immunities referred to in the paragraphs above, to which such firm or organization and its personnel may be entitled, may be waived by the Executing Agency where, in its opinion or in the opinion of the UNDP, the immunity would impede the course of justice and can be waived without prejudice to the successful completion of the project or to the interest of the UNDP or the Executing Agency. 8. The Executing Agency shall provide the Government through the resident representative with the list of personnel to whom the privileges and immunities enumerated above shall apply.

59

9. Nothing in this Project Document or Annex shall be construed to limit the rights, facilities, privileges or immunities conferred in any other instrument upon any person, natural or juridical, referred to hereunder. Suspension or termination of assistance 1. The UNDP may by written notice to the Government and to the Executing Agency concerned suspend its assistance to any project if in the judgment of the UNDP any circumstance arises which interferes with or threatens to interfere with the successful completion of the project or the accomplishment of its purposes. The UNDP may, in the same or a subsequent written notice, indicate the conditions under which it is prepared to resume its assistance to the project. Any such suspension shall continue until such time as such conditions are accepted by the Government and as the UNDP shall give written notice to the Government and the Executing Agency that it is prepared to resume its assistance. 2. If any situation referred to in paragraph 1, above, shall continue for a period of fourteen days after notice thereof and of suspension shall have been given by the UNDP to the Government and the Executing Agency, then at any time thereafter during the continuance thereof, the UNDP may by written notice to the Government and the Executing Agency terminate the project. 3. The provisions of this paragraph shall be without prejudice to any other rights or remedies the UNDP may have in the circumstances, whether under general principles of law or otherwise.

60

ANNEX 6: Regional Programme for Capacity Development in Risk

Reduction

UNDP Regional Centre in Bangkok Programme of Work

2007-2009 A. Overview 1. Basic data

1.1 Implementing organisation: UNDP Regional Centre in Bangkok

1.2 Contact person/s in organisation: Elizabeth Fong, Regional Manager

1.3 Project title: Regional Programme for Capacity Building in Risk Reduction

1.4 Geographical focus: Indonesia, Maldives, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Tamil Nadu, India

2. Timeframe 2.1 Start date: 1 November 2007

2.2 End date: 31 October 2009

3. Financial data (US$)

3.1 Total resources from ISDR US $ 998,046.40 3.2 Total resources from DFID US $ 711,788 3,3 Total resources proposed from BCPR US $ 400,000 3.4 Total existing balance from Norway (as of July 31) US $ 588,230 3.5 Total project cost US $ 2,698,058

4. Summary

This work programme seeks to contribute to an expected outcome of building resilience of communities and nations to natural disasters through “increased capacities of countries affected by the Indian Ocean Tsunami in post disaster recovery and disaster risk reduction” under the Regional Programme on Capacity Building for Sustainable Recovery and Risk Reduction (RP)6. Since the launching in November 2005 within the UNDP Regional Centre in Bangkok, the RP has provided in country technical advice, facilitated cross learning events and initiated partnerships that resulted to positive progress in developing capacities. These include improved information management capacity, better early warning and risk assessment practices and improved skills of specialists in disaster reduction and early recovery. Meanwhile, the unprecedented tragedy resulted to a significant shift of political commitment and public expectations for increased efforts in risk reduction. At the country level-Sri Lanka, Indonesia and India enacted new disaster management laws while Thailand and Maldives are currently

6 LPAC Minutes June 22 and BPAC approval July 1, 2005

61

considering draft disaster management bills. All these legislative changes reflect increased focus on comprehensive disaster risk management and continuing efforts in building better early warning systems, emergency response and recovery capacities. At the international level, all these countries are undertaking the initial steps in forming national platforms and developing stakeholders’ consensus for national action plans to implement commitments under the Global Hyogo Framework of Action. Noting these recent achievements and the increased burden of countries to operationalise meaningful risk reduction and meet HFA commitments, the RP will cooperate with the ISDR Secretariat in continuing to contribute to capacity development of stakeholders involved in implementing the Hyogo Framework of Action. The continuation of this programme will benefit stakeholders that are engaged in early warning systems, and those engaged in building and applying risk knowledge that will reduce impacts of disasters, strengthen disaster preparedness and enhance post disaster recovery management. At the end of the programme that will be funded by ISDR and UNDP7, the following results are expected:

1. Enhanced institutional systems for building risk knowledge and application in planning and decision making for risk reduction, response and recovery.

2. The effectiveness and coherence of end to end early warning systems are enhanced in two countries.

3. Within the context of the ISDR System, the capacities of national platforms and institutions for disaster risk reductions are strengthened in three (3) countries.

B. Context and Justification 1. National /Regional Context While most humanitarian organizations continue to focus on re establishing normalcy in the 5 most tsunami affected countries, UNDP in 2005, embarked on establishing the foundation for disaster risk reduction through the various programmes of Country Offices and the Regional Centre in Bangkok (RCB). In these countries, UNDP support for new institutional arrangements are either planned or established. However, most national disaster management organizations (NDMOs) historically had narrow scope of experiences in disaster risk reduction -with recent involvement on preparedness, emergency response and recovery. Several NDMOs continue to have relatively low level of political influence, inadequate funding and limited professional expertise in disaster risk reduction. On the other hand, these countries have newly enacted laws and are involved in ongoing processes of revising or establishing new policies with broader stakeholders’ participation. These conditions offer unique opportunity to undertake meaningful steps towards comprehensive disaster risk management. These include that since the tragic event in 2004:

The Government of Sri Lanka has passed a Disaster Management Act which created a new Ministry for Disaster Management and Human Rights and an operational entity under it called the Disaster Management Centre (DMC). The new Ministry, following extensive consultation, have completed a Road Map for Safer Sri Lanka that elaborates on risk reduction process and activities.

The Government of Indonesia has enacted the new Disaster Management Law initiated by the Legislative branch and civil societies, which encompasses a comprehensive disaster management approach. A process to operationalise the law through a set of ancillary regulations including one that prescribe the improvement of mandate, structure, and

7 Additional resources from DFID (for Indonesia and regional cross learning events) are approved and supplementary funds from BCPR are proposed and under consideration.

62

professionalisation of the national disaster management agency. Additionally a strategic process generated by the National Development Agency and the Disaster Management Coordinating Agency was completed early this year producing a strategic national action plan on disaster risk reduction for meeting the commitments of the Hyogo Framework for Action.

Stakeholders in Maldives, consider the tsunami as a catalyst for enacting new laws that will establish institution/s who will take lead over a full range of actors in disaster risk management. The President decreed that the Ministry of Defence is the focal organization for disaster management and the first ever Disaster Management Act is under consideration by the Government and civil societies. The establishment of a national platform is underway led by the Ministry of Defence.

The Government of Thailand is reviewing existing laws pertaining to preparedness and response including discussions on institutional arrangements for early warning systems. A proposed Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Act is currently under consideration alongside with a multi stakeholders’ process of developing a strategic national action plan for disaster risk reduction.

There is clearly a stronger commitment in these countries to address disaster reduction in a strategic way. This positive trend at the country level is further complemented by an articulation of a global level commitment to promote a strategic and systematic approach to reducing vulnerabilities and risks to hazards through the Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) 2005-2015: Building the Resilience of Nations and Communities to Disasters. The HFA process also calls for the need to enhance international and regional cooperation and assistance in the field of disaster reduction. In relation to this, the UNDP’s Regional Programme for Capacity Building for Sustainable Recovery and Risk Reduction (RP) is seen by the Country Offices and BCPR Disaster Reduction Unit as well placed to fulfil the following “niche” roles which it has been doing since its launching in November 2005 (see Annex A)8. These roles are:

1. Identifying and facilitating opportunities for cross learning in key disaster risk reduction competencies9 in different countries. This involves the transfer of knowledge, technology and expertise to enhance capacity building for disaster risk reduction and recovery.

2. Identifying and providing access to knowledge and expertise available from UNDP, ISDR Systems, OCHA etc i.e. toolkit, practice notes etc. to disaster prone countries/areas10. These include sharing of research findings, lessons learned and best practices.

3. Supporting the establishment of disaster loss data bases and ongoing compilation of information on disaster risk and impact for all scales of disasters in a way that can promote/support sustainable development and disaster reduction.11

4. Brokering and facilitating multi sectoral/regional/international agency support enabling the pooling of technical and financial assistance in support of national level disaster reduction processes.12

8 Annex A: UNDP Regional Programme Progress Report as of June 2007 9 Regional cross learning events were conducted in 2006-2007, including Disaster Risk Reduction Workshop, Surge Capacity for Early Recovery, Regional Workshop to Enhance Reliability of Disaster Loss Data and its Application to Disaster Reduction, Regional Workshop on Improving Risk Knowledge; Sharing Experiences in Risk Assessment and Technical Clinics to Enhance Disaster Loss Databases. 10 Primarily in the 5 tsunami affected countries, but beneficiaries also included Nepal, Philippines, Cambodia, Vietnam, Bhutan, Pakistan and Bangladesh. 11 This included direct support for compiling historical disaster loss data bases in all tsunami affected countries and regional events associated with the Global Risk Identification Programme (GRIP). 12 Ongoing activities include establishing an end-to-end early warning system with IOC UNESCO and IFRC; with ISDR Secretariat into Indonesian NAP-HFA process and risk assessment for the “safe islands” concept of Maldives with UNEP.

63

5. Participating in policy dialogue and knowledge management networking in order to enhance governance for disaster risk reduction13.

6. Providing additional resources to overcome bottlenecks in implementation of DRR activities14.

On the thematic angle, UNDP has supported the Tsunami Affected Countries in end to end early warning systems (EWS); building risk knowledge; and learning and training in disaster reduction and early recovery. The overall goal of these interventions is to support national and local authorities and communities at risk in accessing EWS and risk reduction knowledge through cross learning, and obtaining evidences to strengthen policy making, decision making, contingency and emergency management planning, preparedness, response and recovery. 2. Problem Analysis An important lesson learned is that disaster risk reduction in developing countries at best evolved gradually, following a major disaster (such as the tsunami) when political attention is high, public demand for preparedness, early warning and coping resources are popular and many external stakeholders, particularly among humanitarian organizations are present. However, interests and resources wane as new crisis occur and/or different priorities dominate the attention of the public. Thus, many countries have not formed capacities in the fundamentals of risk reduction15, although some countries manifest good practices in some aspects. At the country level, there are limited incentives, resources, enabling policy environment and limited stakeholder support to disaster risk management in general, thus prohibiting meaningful achievements. Specific lessons learned during the implementation of the UNDP’s Regional Programme16 further indicate the following:

• National and local authorities need tools to prevent, prepare and support local responses of the most vulnerable communities. The most urgent tools demanded are functional Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) of a truly end to end early warning systems that are linked with communities as well as national and international EWS and better operational capability aided by information and communication technology17. Local Governments and Civil Societies also need better risk knowledge at local level such as those provided by local level disaster loss data bases and comprehensive and low level risk assessment resolution. These will enhance evidence based decision making such as those related to poverty reduction, land use planning, sectoral development programming, preparedness, contingency planning, response and

13 Current focus is a policy study to identify gaps in the Institution and Legislative Systems on EWS in cooperation with USAID-IOTWS 14 In the past, this included providing “demand driven” technical expertise in a) DRR programming in Indonesia; b) policy development in Maldives; c) supporting involvement of media in Thailand’s early warning system development; d) study on the extent of integrating disaster reduction into recovery in Sri Lanka; e) providing technical assistance to COs in India and Sri Lanka in implementing the ISDR funded EWS projects; f) methodological guidance for community risk assessment in Sri Lanka ;and g) establishment of ICT based Disaster Resource Network in Sri Lanka and Maldives based on Indian expertise. 15 ISDR Framework-fundamentals include: risk assessment, awareness, knowledge development, public commitment, application of risk reduction measures, early warning, preparedness, response, recovery in the context of sustainable development. 16 These lessons learned are derived from various national and regional workshops, meeting reports, studies and evaluation reports. 17 Based on India Disaster Resource Network http://www.idrn.gov.in/, The RP is promoting its application in Maldives and Sri Lanka

64

recovery. Multi-hazard approach is needed, as well as information about emerging risk i.e. impact of climate change and environmental degradation to promote sustainability and detailed risk reduction initiatives at local level.

• Communication and dialogue among international, national, state/provincial officials, district officials and community authorities, organizations and leaders are essential. These processes are better structured when common success or benchmark indicators for disaster reduction including comprehensive early warning systems and recovery planning are referred to. For example, the national action planning processes in relation to HFA promote better clarity of the common direction to be taken in disaster reduction18. The multi level discussion of SOP in early warning systems in Indonesia guided by “best practices” from the Pacific Ocean19 has promoted better consensus of what priorities must be taken.

• Continuously building and using risk knowledge is important. This involves collecting and improving reliability of disaster loss data, vulnerability assessment and supporting broader risk assessment20. Although perceived to be less urgent than establishing early warning systems, good risk knowledge that is based on analysis of hazards, vulnerabilities, capacities and the relationships with development choices stakeholders make is essential in ensuring sustainable recovery and development. In all the tsunami affected countries, there is lack of risk knowledge at different levels and its integration with development planning21 which negatively affects the risk reduction efforts. Due to lack of understanding of risks, it has been difficult task for the authorities to plan and implement mitigation, preparedness and response measures22.

• Several studies commissioned by UNDP23 to examine the UN’s work, role and capacities for disaster management make note of the fact “ that the present approach of the UN system still emphasizes far too much responding to disasters rather than addressing risk management”. It is further observed in the tsunami countries that although there is an increase in number of people skilled in managing humanitarian responses, competent human resources are inadequate in the areas of recovery, early warning systems, risk assessment and broader disaster reduction leadership such as those who are involved in the HFA processes. Thus support for training and learning events are important to develop the management and specialists skills of those who will lead and develop the mechanisms for meeting the HFA commitments, EWS, recovery, building and using risk knowledge and other relevant specialization.

3. Added value of the Project The continuation of the Regional Programme at UNDP Regional Centre in Bangkok with ISDR cooperation in the next phase provides a unique opportunity as this will involve combination of country level and regional activities and cross sectoral and partnership approaches. This modality of

18 ISDR Secretariat and UNDP RP are cooperating in support of the SNAP in Indonesia which involves sub national and national level consultation or “socialization”. 19 Under a Letter of Agreement between UNDP and IOC UNESCO, experts from Japan Meteorological Agency, International Tsunami Information Centre provide technical assistance. Additionally an informal coordinating group which also included GTZ, IFRC, and USAIDIOTWS (and various USA agencies) is also moving towards similar EWS goals. 20 Risk=Hazard x Vulnerability/Capacity 21 In particular disaster impacts to achieving Millennium Development Goals 22 A UNDP supported study on “Risk Profile of Maldives” brought forward a debate on the risk issues associated with the Government of Maldives -“Safe Islands” policy. UNDP is currently working with UNEP in supporting the Government in more detailed vulnerability assessment of 9 islands earlier selected as “safe islands” where population settlements are encouraged. 23 Concept Paper, A new start for the UN Disaster Management Training Programme, January 2005

65

engaging the RCB offers significant advantages over the option of ISDR Secretariat working on these activities directly with Country Offices independently. The UNDP RCB is created in response to UNDP Country Offices demand for pooling of accessible expertise in various areas including crisis prevention and recovery, south-south cooperation, gender, environment, governance, poverty reduction (MDGs), management practice etc. In the immediate aftermath of the tsunami and recent catastrophic events, the RCB was called upon to augment expertise of Country Offices in various aspects including procurement, capacity assessment, damage and needs assessment and in overall programming of UNDP interventions in support of Government. The location of the Regional Centre in Bangkok is also advantageous as many UN agencies including ISDR Secretariat, UNESCAP, and international NGOs such as IFRC, OXFAM, IUCN etc hold regional office in Bangkok. This proximity will enable ease in cooperation that will result to pooling of resources in support of country needs in disaster risk reduction and recovery. The continuation of the Programme will further build on the ongoing activities24 in the five tsunami affected countries and when demand is stated, could extend its support to UNDP Country Offices in other disaster prone countries as secondary target countries. The key advantages of these include:

o Ongoing regional programme has government approval in all these countries and several country offices have ongoing DRM programme arrangements. Thus there will be no need for additional administrative and political processes for implementing these planned activities.

o Availability of UNDP’s corporate tools in disaster reduction (building risk knowledge, capacity assessment, disaster reduction training, early recovery etc), governance and other thematic capacities.

o A group of professionals work at the Regional Centre Bangkok (RCB) led by the CPR Team Leader in collaboration with the Regional Disaster Reduction Advisers (RDRAs and specialists staffs in Delhi and Bangkok), National Disaster Reduction Advisers (NDRAs in Sri Lanka and Indonesia) and DRM staffs (and UN Volunteers) at the country levels. Sri Lanka and Indonesia CPR Teams in particular have big number of staffs in these two countries at the national and field level, which are often called upon by Governments for advice in programming and implementation of DRR.

o The UNDP-CPR team in Asia has well established partnership with key regional organizations including ASEAN, SAARC, ESCAP, ADPC, ISDR Secretariat, ADRC, ADB, IFRC etc. Operational relationships are well established with the UNOCHA, IOC-UNESCO, ISDR, IFRC, UNEP and USAID-IOTWS programmes under which a common workplan for capacity development in tsunami affected countries is established.

The programme’s focus of following up on the Hyogo Framework of Action is an important value added approach. The HFA puts into an officially and politically negotiated document, the key indicators that should be achieved in DRR. It also incorporates more clearly the roles of the different levels of organization. While the awareness of the importance of the HFA is still growing, the HFA should be seen as a benchmark for what ought to be achieved. Accordingly, this proposed programme will be measured in relation to the HFA in the long term, and DRM benchmark processes in the short term. This include indicators in risk identification, use of risk knowledge (including EWS), risk reduction projects etc. For instance the Regional Programme using ISDR funding support shall provide coherence to EWS initiatives in each country. In the immediate term, linkages (both institutional and technical) between national and lower administrative levels will be strengthen and tested. These efforts among other things shall be deliberately linked to the HFA processes as well.

24 Regional Programme on Capacity Building for Sustainable Recovery and Risk Reduction in Tsunami Affected Countries (RP) and ongoing and country level programmes in Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Maldives and India.

66

Goal: Build resilience of communities and nations to natural disasters through “increased capacities of countries in post disaster recovery and disaster risk reduction.”

N3 Within the context of the ISDR System, the capacities of national platforms and institutions for disaster risk reductions are strengthened.

C. Description of the project 1. Conceptual Framework

The diagram below show the relationships of Goal, Outcome, Outputs and further elaborated in the narrative, in the log frame and workplan.

N1 Enhanced institutional systems for building risk knowledge and application in planning and decision making for risk reduction, response and recovery.

N2 The effectiveness and coherence of end to end early warning systems are enhanced.

R1 Regional partnerships/mechanisms in support of national level DRR R2 Regional cross learning support for capacity development of national platforms and institutional systems for risk knowledge and EWS

67

2. Overall Goal The overall goal of the Regional Programme is to build resilience of communities and nations to natural disasters through “increased capacities of countries in post disaster recovery and disaster risk reduction.” This will be undertaken by directly contributing to capacity development of stakeholders involved in early warning systems, building and applying risk knowledge that will reduce impacts of disasters, strengthen disaster preparedness and enhance post disaster recovery management.

3. Expected Outcome, Outputs and Activities

The current phase of the Regional Programme is funded by the Government of Norway under the tsunami flash appeal. Funding is expected to be fully spent by end of 2007, thus, starting in October, an evaluation of the RP will be conducted to determine achievements, lessons learned and challenges. Noting the confirmation of additional funding by ISDR Secretariat and DFID, the evaluation process shall also be used to further elaboration of the RP workplan and detailed activities with the Country Offices and relevant stakeholders. Regular monitoring and evaluation and recent regional workshops however clearly indicate the focus and priorities for the next phase. These essentially involved the descriptions of outcome-outputs and activities stated below: Expected Outcome 1: Enhanced institutional systems for building risk knowledge and

application in planning and decision making for risk reduction, response and recovery

The Indian Ocean Tsunami of December 2004 exposed the serious weakness of the disaster risk management community in anticipating risks due to inadequate recording of disaster events and risk assessments. The accumulation of risk information through data base of disaster histories and risk mapping was at best fragmented and unsystematic in many Asian countries. In almost all countries, there are no consistent criteria of defining a disaster and the accuracy and credibility of reporting of damages raise concerns. More importantly, agencies that have collected data and undertaken risk assessment would need further support in facilitating risk evaluation for decision making and use in development planning. In these tsunami affected countries, the Regional Programme is replicating DesInventar25, to assist the Governments build historical disaster loss databases. Based on a relational database structure and a disciplined expert assisted structure for data collection and classification, DesInventar permits the homogeneous capture, analysis and graphic representation of information on disaster occurrence and loss. Notable achievements to date include the increasing use of the data base and analysis by the Government focal organizations in Sri Lanka, Indonesia and in Tamil Nadu, India26. Furthermore, in the last three years, an increasing number of UNDP Country Offices (COs) have responded to government request for support in risk assessment initiatives. These include Regional Programme and COs collaboration in support of local level risk mapping process in Sri Lanka, the Maldives Island Risk Assessment associated with the “safer island” policy, and a risk assessment process in selected districts in Tamil Nadu in India. In addition to these countries, UNDP-BCPR is 25 Developed by the Network for Social Studies on Disaster Prevention in Latin America (LA RED) in late 1993 and used by more than 20 countries, 26 IndisDATA (Tamil Nadu): http://www.indisdatatn.gov.in/ (in English) Indonesia: http://desinventar.un.or.id/ (English and Bahasa) Sri Lanka: http://www.desinventar.lk (in English)

68

collaborating with COs in similar risk assessment processes in Nepal, Bhutan and Pakistan. The Bangladesh Comprehensive Disaster Management Programme (CDMP) has also supported the completion of risk assessment processes in 50 sub districts and is currently reviewing its experiences as basis for expanding coverage to another set of 50 sub districts. Following the devastating tropical cyclones and landslides in the Philippines, the UNDP CO supports a risk assessment process in a number of provinces identified by the Government as priority areas for enhancing preparedness and overall disaster reduction. Noting the progress achieved so far, the RP is continuing to undertake the following: Output 1. Coherent and systematic building of risk knowledge by NDMOs/Planning Agencies. The RP team will analyze the results and recommendations made during the Regional Workshop on Building Risk Knowledge in June-July 2007, conducted in cooperation with BCPR-GRIP. The RP is planning to follow up in each country to assess the availability, usage and needs of risk and loss assessment related information in support of country strategy for disaster reduction and recovery. This will include elaborating on a draft tool and checklist introduced during the workshop to assess capacity and needs in undertaking and using risk assessment studies. Each country will then be supported in facilitating self assessment of capacity and needs as well as in developing a coherent and multi stakeholders’ plans to address these. The support will also seek the formal adoption of the plan as part of the agenda of the National Platform/s.

Output 2. Improved information management systems for monitoring disaster risks and inventory of

resources The RP team will undertake country level assessment of needs as basis for specific technical assistance for improving inventory of disaster loss data bases and online inventory of resources. A preliminary baseline discussion was undertaken during the recent Regional Workshop which resulted to a list of competencies where improvements are necessary. These include: 1) analysis of disaster loss data, 2) applications of disaster loss data to risk assessment, 3) sustainability and institutionalization, 4) dissemination of information, 5) enhanced compatibility, 6) regional integration, 7) loss assessment methodologies, and 8) quality assessment of loss data. In providing technical assistance, the RP will work closely with GRIP partners to discuss nature of expertise required and organization responsible for implementing technical advice. Under this, it is expected that the RP and GRIP will support technical assistance missions, training of trainers and/or national level learning event, supporting maintenance of operations and online disaster loss data bases and inventory of resources, supporting National DesInventar Associates, upgrading and maintenance of hardware and software, promoting periodic dissemination of and use of information by national platform/s and relevant stakeholders including producing case studies of existing practice in using risk assessment for /emergency response/development/recovery/risk reduction. Output 3. Risk assessments are conducted in support of planning and decision making in 3 countries

and 1 Indian State During the next phase, the RP seeks to support the development of standard methodologies for comprehensive risk assessment and development of guidelines on implementation and usage of such studies. This will be undertaken under a continuing cooperation with GRIP and ICG/IOTWS Working Group 3: Risk Assessment. The RP will finalize agreement of a common workplan with ICG in

69

October 200727 to develop a standard methodology and funds will be used to support joint workshops with them, as well as to fund Consultant/s and ICG national experts in providing specific technical assistance to participating countries. In cooperation with experts from the region,28 national level learning events will be supported and funds will be used for promoting periodic dissemination of and use of information by national platform/s and relevant stakeholders including documenting case studies of practice in using risk assessment in decision making and planning. Output 4. Demonstrations of linking risk and loss information to decision-making in selected

countries are supported, documented and shared. The RP will support processes at the country level to demonstrate the applications of risk and loss information to decision making. Subject to further consultation with stakeholders at the country level, the following maybe pursued: In Maldives risk assessment is intended to guide safer islands policy and planning. The RP will support the UNDP CO and the Government of Maldives (GoM) in the formation of national mechanism29 to evaluate risk assessment report, its implication to national level policy development, island level planning, identification and prioritization of risk treatment options and accountability. The process will also support the use of risk information into planning of an end to end EWS30. In Sri Lanka where the Disaster loss data base is fully operational, the RP will support the processes of producing a National (Risk) Vulnerability Atlas in support of the proposed National Disaster Management Plan. The process will also support the use of risk information into planning of an end to end EWS31. During a recent RP mission, agreement is reached to focus in demonstrating the applications of these into preparedness, response and disaster reduction planning in 3-5 priority districts. The Disaster Management Center in cooperation with UNDP CO and the RP shall conduct further analysis of information in relation to poverty and other vulnerability indicators. This exercise seeks to guide both disaster and development planning processes that may be adapted nationwide. In Tamil Nadu, India the RP will support the completion of a District level Vulnerability Atlas and disaster loss data base in support of preparedness and response plans. The process will also support the use of risk information into planning of an end to end EWS32. In Indonesia- both BAKORSUTANAL and BAPPENAS are interested in the applications of disaster loss data base. BAKOSURTANAL as the leading authority and mapping agency of the Government of Indonesia seeks to use the data base for their ongoing risk assessment. BAPPENAS on the other hand seeks to use the information to guide disaster risk reduction and development planning processes. With the signing of the DFID funded programme in Indonesia and with the enactment of

27 ICG Working Group 3 meeting in Bandung, Indonesia and Tsunami Risk Assessment Workshop in Dubai-October 4-6, 2007 28 RP will seek secondment arrangement with national agencies i.e. PHIVOLCS in the Philippines, BAKOSURTANAL in Indonesia and other national experts composing the ICG WG3 29 A national workshop to form a national platform is planned in August 2007 30 UNDP Maldives has substantial support to EWS in the country. Additional resources are likely to be mobilized from the UNESCAP Regional Trust Fund, hence risk assessment products maybe applied to these. 31 Risk Assessment products will be linked with SOP Development with IOC UNESCO. Additional resources are likely to be mobilized from the UNESCAP Regional Trust Fund, hence risk assessment products maybe applied to these. 32 Risk Assessment products will be linked with previously funded ISDR EWS. Additional resources are recently received from the German Government for enhancing EWS , hence risk assessment products maybe applied to these.

70

the new Disaster Management Law, it is expected that the institutional hosting of the data base shall be resolved soon. Given the experiences at the country level, the RP will support documentation of the processes and produce a regional compilation of case studies, lessons learned on application of risk assessment. This can constitute the regional contribution to the Global Assessment Report where BCPR GRIP33 is contributing. An important conclusion derived so far with the data bases in Indonesia, Sri Lanka and Tamil Nadu indicate the increasing sensitivity of these countries to localized events called “extensive risk”. “Extensive risk would appear to be characterized by large numbers of frequently occurring but highly localized events, such as landslides, flash floods, fires and storms, mainly associated with climatic hazard, affecting specific groups of people and economic assets spread over extensive areas. Extensive risk and intensive risk (large scale disasters) are not mutually exclusive categories. Extensive risk may unfold within intensive risk hotspots, for example specific impacts of flash floods on marginal urban settlements within an earthquake prone mega-city. Similarly, extensive risk may become more intensive over time through the effects of concurrent processes of urbanization, environmental degradation and the productive transformation of new territories. The initial data presented in Disaster Risk Reduction: 2007 Global Review suggests that extensive risk does not necessarily make a significant contribution to overall global disaster mortality. However, it may represent the bulk of mortality in countries not exposed to large-scale hazard events34. At the same time, it may represent a significant and unreported source of economic loss, in particular livelihood loss and disruption, for marginal rural and urban populations. Unlike the large-scale catastrophes occurring in intensive risk hotspots, the issue of extensive risk has been largely ignored by the humanitarian community, the media and the private sector. In a recent IFRC report, it was described as uncounted risk35 within an overall typology of neglect. Yet given its initial characterization in Disaster Risk Reduction: 2007 Global Review, extensive risk may be challenging the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals in many countries, due to rapidly increasing asset and livelihood loss and the erosion of scarce development gains amongst the poorer sectors of society. It may also be highly sensitive to global climate change.” 36 During the recent RP missions in Indonesia and Sri Lanka37-the stakeholders are sufficiently concerned that although tsunami had been the most damaging event in recent history, emphasis on actions to address extensive risk through local level capacity development and community based disaster risk management will have to be pursued. Given the above, using DFID funding, the RP shall cooperate with the ISDR system38 in seeking the following results:

• The application of the methodology to national disaster loss databases in Indonesia and Sri Lanka in order to extract and display the human and physical loss patterns and trends

33 Further discussion with BCPR on GRIP’s financial and technical support will be undertaken. 34 Prior to the tsunami for example- Maldives, Sri Lanka and Thailand were not known to be exposed to intensive risk-but Desinventar data indicate high frequency of localized landslides, floods and storm swelling etc. 35 World Disaster Report, (IFRC,2006); Neglected Crisis (Wisner, Lavell, Walters) 36 Draft proposal for Extensive Risk Analysis, ISDR System Global Assessment Report 37 Regional Workshop on CBDM in Colombo (July 30-31, 2007) 38 Preliminary discussion with Andrew Maskrey on Proposal for Extensive Risk Analysis” during the Regional Workshop on Building Risk Knowledge, July 2007.

71

associated with extensive risk. In principle, the analysis will examine all those national databases where data quality and coverage is deemed adequate.

• The identification of the causal factors that explain the loss patterns and trends associated with extensive risk, through either the exploration of correlations with national datasets on urbanization, economic and social development, environmental change and other variables or else through location specific case studies.

• The analysis of the loss data in specific countries and sub-national contexts, in order to interpret the impact of extensive risk on poverty, gender, livelihoods and the achievement of the MDGs. It is expected that this analysis may include the calculation of the economic losses in different sectors as well as the application of specific methodologies of livelihood analysis in order to model the impact of extensive risk.

Outcome N2 The effectiveness and coherence of end to end tsunami early warning systems are

enhanced in two countries (Indonesia and Sri Lanka) Output 1. A common framework for enhancing end to end EWS is implemented by stakeholders

(international, regional, national, sub national, civil societies) The RP will continue the cooperation with its programme partners and other IO Consortium members and other relevant stakeholders. Starting in August 2007, the RP will initiate regional meetings/discussions to agree on a common framework for supporting and enhancing EWS in Maldives39, Indonesia and Sri Lanka. As needed, MoU that specify terms of references and roles and responsibilities will be developed. Based on agreed UNDP role, the RP shall conduct missions, attend interagency meetings, and progress reporting. At the country level, this is expected to support the establishment/strengthening of a sub committee on EWS under the national platform. Output 2: EWS is enhanced through SOP development/testing and support to national planning

(Indonesia and Sri Lanka) In cooperation with IOC UNESCO and ICG Working Groups, the RP will support the development of a coherent Standard Operating Procedure for tsunami EWS including training of key organizations and individuals40. This process may involved gathering baseline information41, conducting training needs analysis and developing a training strategy, including supporting regular testing of SOP. Stakeholders’ discussion in the first quarter of this cooperation will ensure that the RP role is strategic and shall not duplicate existing initiatives. Based on this consultation, the RP may support the development of a long term national plan for systematic strengthening of early warning systems covering the 4 elements of people centered early warning system. Outcome N3 Within the context of the ISDR System, the capacities of national platforms and

institutions for disaster risk reduction strengthened. Output 1. Capacity assessment and development are undertaken in support of DRR priorities.

Institutional capacity assessments and targeted capacity building undertaken in 3 countries (Indonesia, Sri Lanka and Maldives)

39 Maldives is a member of the IO Consortium and the RP will facilitate a common framework of support. However, in country work of UNDP RP maybe limited in comparison with Sri Lanka and Indonesia. 40 A common template that is coherent with all Indian Ocean countries to ensure inter-operability and enhanced mechanisms for verification of early warning. 41 A Draft ILS Study on EWS In Sri Lanka, Indonesia and Thailand is produced by the Regional Programme.

72

The RP shall work closely with CADRI in achieving this outcome. CADRI partners are now starting to compile tools that three agencies (UNDP-BCPR, OCHA and ISDR) have used for capacity assessment. Ultimately, the RP can contribute towards building over the long-term a package of tried and tested tools with user guidance that can then be made available for different purposes and adapted to different contexts e.g. capacity assessment of national platforms, of national disaster preparedness capacities and mechanisms, of UN country teams. In November 2007, using the ISDR funds, the RP will support the involvement of selected Country Offices (Maldives, Sri Lanka and Indonesia) in meetings with CADRI to get more clarity on the different capacity assessment contexts that need to address and why, review tools available, define country level needs-including the purposes and scopes of the assessment, and the end-users of the data, and need for participation and local ownership. Assuming strong interest and support are available in these countries, the RP shall be involved in conducting assessment and prepare assessment report, facilitating of validation of report by the National Platform and more importantly, support development of result oriented work plans. During this process, the RP will support documenting change in practice, progress, lessons learned in Capacity Development for DRR. Output 2 Regional partnerships/mechanisms in support of national level activities (Risk Knowledge

and EWS) operationalised Using ISDR and DFID funds, the RP will contribute to strengthening of existing mechanisms for exchange of experiences and expertise among the targeted countries. These partnerships include the ASEAN, SAARC, ICG Working Group 3 and 642. The RP shall organize regional meetings to operationalise partnership in support of building risk knowledge at the national level. It is also expected that joint missions and national learning events maybe conducted under this cooperation. With ICG Working Group 3- the cooperation with RP will result to a standardized methodology for risk assessment. Output 3 Cross learning support for capacity development in disaster risk reduction, recovery and

specialized skills in early warning and building and applying risk knowledge provided. Using the ISDR funds, the RP shall develop and conduct a regional learning/training event focusing on disaster risk reduction for National Platforms. This shall be based on results of capacity assessment process with CADRI. Further details will be developed later. Using DFID funds, the RP shall continue regional learning events that it successfully conducted using funds from the Government of Norway. These include regional training events on risk knowledge (including EWS) and Early Recovery (in continuous build up of regional surge capacity). The RP shall also continue to be actively involved in strengthening the Community of Practice (DRM-Asia) in disaster risk reduction. Discussion with BCPR Delhi shall be conducted to identify in a proactive manner future joint activities. 4. Stakeholders and Beneficiaries

42 The Indonesian BMG is chair of the (Subcommittee Meteorology and Geophysics while Sri Lanka is Chair of ICG Working Group 3

73

At the national level, the Regional Programme shall continue to work primarily with the UNDP Country Offices and their Implementing Partners at the national and local levels. They will be the direct beneficiaries of the Programme. Depending on the programmatic scope of disaster reduction and recovery programmes, the list of national stakeholders vary from one country to another but these generally include the Government, Civil Societies, Academic and Technical Institutions and the Private Sector. The ultimate and indirect target groups of the programme are the vulnerable communities who are intended to benefit from improved capacity in disaster reduction. These communities are those targeted by UNDP Country Offices in their national DRM programmes43; from previous UNDP-ISDR initiatives as well as by IFRC. 5. Sustainability and Disaster Risk Reduction The continuation of the Regional Programme beyond the tsunami “flash appeal” stage should be undertaken as a clear manifestation of UN and donor commitment to promote disaster reduction in a sustained way. It is well noted that the Governments of these affected countries have now taken an unprecedented attention towards disaster risk management as evidenced by new institutional and policy arrangements, increase in budget, and general openness towards collaborating with international organizations and civil societies vis a vis disaster risk management matters. Thus in elaborating on the activities of the next phase, the RP shall engage these stakeholders in designing the specific workplan based on evaluation of the current phase, realities, lessons learned and emerging opportunities for disaster reduction. More concretely, the RP shall undertake missions and regional meetings from August 2007 to consult and obtain further ownership and consensus for a common direction of the next phase of the Programme. The Regional Programme, to ensure sustainability of results shall also continue to support “drivers of change”, such as for example, the HFA process and partnerships approach towards end to end EWS. In concrete terms, UNDP shall cooperate closely with partners in the ISDR System in following up multi lateral frameworks and declarations such as those under the HFA and the specific agenda of the ICG Working Groups. This involves the RP actively seeking guidance from these institutional platforms as well as sharing reports regularly. Further at the national and local levels, the current practice of obtaining government approval and working under Letter of Agreement with partner institutions shall be continued. This ensures that the RP will continue to identify needs and value added support in a cooperative way and project management responsibilities are shared among partners. Future agreements shall include schemes for hand over and sustainability of specific activities. The RP shall also be more active in knowledge networking by actively seeking opportunities to document programme practices and interventions such as in developing and conducting training activities, building and using risk knowledge, promoting end to end EWS, supporting efforts for community level vulnerability reduction etc and their effective dissemination through the UNDP corporate knowledge networking efforts and other means. 6. Partnerships

43 Sri Lanka is focusing on 3-5 vulnerable Districts identified through the DesInventar, Indonesia is in the process of prioritising vulnerable provinces, while Maldives have identified 13 priority islands.

74

At the regional level, the Regional Programme shall continue to work with ISDR Secretariat (Bangkok Office) based on the ISDR System. Under more specific agenda, the UNDP RP shall continue to work with IOC UNESCO, IFRC, OCHA, UNESCAP, UNEP and relevant political (like the ASEAN and SAARC) and regional training and technical institutions (like the ICG Working Groups). The RP shall also continue working with other bilateral programmes with similar goals such as the GTZ and USAID-IOTWS. At the global level, the Regional Programme shall continue to work with relevant UNDP programmes like the Global Risk Identification Programme (GRIP), International Recovery Platform (IRP), Capacity Development for Risk Reduction Initiative (CADRI), Mainstreaming Disaster Reduction and the Global Surge Project. Outcome Outputs Partners Expected Outcome 1: Enhanced institutional systems for building risk knowledge and application in planning and decision making for risk reduction, response and recovery

Output 1. Coherent and systematic building of risk knowledge by NDMOs/Planning Agencies. Output 2. Improved information management systems for monitoring disaster risks and inventory of resources Output 3.Risk assessments are conducted in support of planning and decision making in 3 countries and 1 Indian State Output 4. Demonstrations of linking risk and loss information to decision-making in selected countries are supported, documented and shared.

ISDR Secretariat, GRIP partners, UNEP ICG Working Group

Outcome N2 The effectiveness and coherence of an end to end tsunami early warning systems are enhanced in two countries (Indonesia and Sri Lanka)

Output 1. A common framework for enhancing end to end EWS is implement by stakeholders (international, regional, national, sub national, civil societies) Output 2: EWS is enhanced through SOP development/testing and support to national planning (Sri Lanka)

ISDR Secretariat IOC UNESCO IOTWS, IFRC UNESCAP ICG Working Group

Outcome N3 Within the context of the ISDR System, the capacities of national platforms and institutions for disaster risk reduction strengthened.

Output 1. Capacity assessment and development are undertaken in support of DRR priorities Output 2 Regional partnerships/mechanisms in support of national level activities (Risk Knowledge and EWS) operationalised Output 3 Cross learning support for capacity development in disaster risk reduction, recovery and specialized skills in early warning and building and applying risk knowledge provided.

ISDR Secretariat, CADRI Partners, IFRC, IOC UNESCO, IOTWS, UNESCAP

D. Implementation 1. Implementation Arrangements The direct responsibility for implementing this programme shall be with the UNDP Regional Centre in Bangkok who has a team of professionals dedicated to work on crisis prevention and recovery (CPR Team). The CPR Team at RCB is composed of a Team Leader, two Regional Disaster Reduction Advisors. Additionally since November 2005, a Regional Programme (RP) Team was

75

organized whose sole responsibility is to manage a capacity building programme for the tsunami affected countries. In 2007, BCPR has also appointed two National Disaster Reduction Advisers in Sri Lanka and in Indonesia who has huge number of DRM specialists working at the national and sub national levels. Discussions are also underway for engagement of UN Volunteers in these countries acting as national specialists (Programme Officers) during the period of the project. Their role would be further elaborated during the discussions with national host institutions44, but they will generally act as national level focal persons of activities that will be implemented under the ISDR funded interventions. Additionally, short term Consultants to augment expertise at the national level is also planned. The continuation of the Regional Programme at UNDP Regional Centre in Bangkok with ISDR and DFID cooperation in the next phase provides added value as this will involve combination of country level and regional activities and cross sectoral and partnership approach. This modality of engaging the RCB offers significant advantages over the option of ISDR Secretariat working on these activities directly with Country Offices independently. The UNDP RCB is created in response to UNDP Country Offices demand for pooling of accessible expertise in various areas including crisis prevention and recovery, south-south cooperation, gender, environment, governance, poverty reduction (MDGs), management practice etc. In the immediate aftermath of the tsunami and recent catastrophic events, the RCB was called upon to augment expertise of Country Offices in various aspects including procurement, capacity assessment, damage and needs assessment and in overall programming of UNDP interventions in support of Government. The location of the Regional Centre in Bangkok is also advantageous as many UN agencies including ISDR Secretariat, UNESCAP, and international NGOs such as IFRC, OXFAM, IUCN etc hold regional office in Bangkok. This proximity will enable ease in cooperation that will result to pooling of resources in support of country needs in disaster risk reduction and recovery. The current monitoring and evaluation scheme shall be continued with further revisions to reflect baseline information (from a scheduled evaluation of the current phase of the RP) and additional reporting requirements of ISDR and DFID. Currently, the RP complies with the UN system wide reporting of the programme under the tsunami flash appeal. It is expected that there are no significant risk associated with the achievement of results. However, due to the unique and unprecedented intensity of interest accorded to the disaster management sector in the tsunami affected countries, the RP is concerned about stakeholders’ fatigue in participating in “capacity assessments, lessons learned and attendance to other international workshops and conferences, and coordination meetings at various levels.” 2. Inputs The project implementation will be coordinated by the UNDP Regional Programme and the UNDP CO in each country to ensure coordination and synergy with other on-going DRM activities. National specialists, short term consultants and support staff will be hired to implement activities in the countries. Government counterpart agencies will provide in-kind input to the project implementation by assigning its officials and office space as required. Additional inputs will be sought from UNDP relevant programme’s such as the Global Risk Identification Programme (GRIP), International Recovery Platform (IRP), Capacity Development for Risk Reduction Initiative (CADRI), Mainstreaming Disaster Reduction and the Global Surge Project. On specific activities, the project will continue to collaborate with IOC UNESCO and IFRC. 44 Annex__TOR for UNV In Sri Lanka

76

The Project will be implemented by a team of professionals based at UNDP Regional Centre in Bangkok, who will be responsible for overall implementation of the project. Inputs from International consultants will be required to support implementation of specific specialized inputs on disaster inventories, on-line resource networks and early warning systems. UNDP proposes that DFID and ISDR share the cost of the activities mentioned herein. Additional funding may be raised from other potential donors. 3. Total Summary Budget ITEMS ISDR DFID BCPR Norway Total Travel and Mission (local and international) $ 226,500.00 30,000

Contractual Services (incl. Consultants’ travel) $ 442,500.00

130,000

Workshop Costs (regional and national incl. travel ) $ 219,500.00

190,000

Publications $ 21,000.00 16,500 Equipment $ 15,000.00 0

Administrative, OH etc $ 73,546.40 45,288

Salaries $ 0 300,000 400,000 122,640 TOTAL $ 998,046.40 711,788 400,000 588,230 2, 731291

Annex A

The R

A:

Regional Pro

UND

ogramme onReducti

DP Regional

n Capacity Bion in Tsuna

Program

As of

l Centre in B

Building forami Affecte

me Summa

f June 2007

Bangkok

r Sustainabed Countries

ary

ble Recoverys

y and Risk

78

I. Introduction The Indian Ocean Tsunami disaster of 26 December 2004 was one of the most devastating natural disasters in recent history in both scale and complexity. The extent and scope of the disaster led to one of the largest mobilization of resources by the UN system to meet the challenges of the emergency and the recovery phases. To respond to the recovery phase of the tsunami, UNDP designed a Regional Programme on Capacity Building for Sustainable Recovery and Risk Reduction in Tsunami Affected Countries. The Programme commenced implementation in November 2005 through UNDP Regional Centre in Bangkok and held consultations with the UNDP COs and relevant stakeholders and obtained approval from the Government of each of the 5 tsunami-affected countries, viz. Sri Lanka, India, Maldives, Indonesia and Thailand. The Programme has completed most of the planned activities and outputs as identified and confirmed by the five tsunami affected countries. In addition, the implementation team conducted regional and national learning events; held discussions with relevant organizations and participated in regional inter-agency coordination meetings to promote disaster risk reduction in these countries and in the region. A summary of key activities and achievements is outlined below: II. Progress and Achievements by Component Information Management

1. In the Indian State of Tamil Nadu, the entire database built from government records is made available on-line at http://www.indisdata-tn.gov.in. The historical disasters data was collected from relevant government agencies and all the 30 districts of Tamil Nadu with the support of the Office of the Commissioner for Revenue and Administration (CRA). The on-line database was registered under “.gov.in” domain which is exclusively reserved for government agencies.

2. In consultation with the CRA’s office, Loyola College, Chennai was identified as the nodal agency to undertake detailed analysis from the historical database. A draft of the analysis is to be completed in July. This report will be published and shared at a stakeholders meeting and will be disseminated widely.

3. Earlier a Stakeholders’ Meeting was organized in September 2006 to share the preliminary findings from the historical disasters database. A number of officials from all the 30 districts of Tamil Nadu were imparted hands-on training on the DesInventar tool in September 2006.

4. In Indonesia, the historical disasters database is now accessible at http://www.desinventar.un.or.id/ and is available in English and Bahasa Indonesia. Institutional ownership of the historical database is still uncertain, although the recent enactment of a Disaster Management Law will clarify organizational roles and responsibilities. It is expected that with the start of a DFID supported DRM programme, the maintenance of the disasters database will be continued and the efforts made so far will guide prioritization of the DFID-UNDP-GoI programme.

79

5. Preliminary findings from the historical disasters database were shared at a Stakeholders’ Meeting in Jakarta in November 2006.

6. In Maldives, The Ministry of Defense and National Security has recently appointed a dedicated full-time staff to work at National Disaster Management Centre (NDMC). The NDMC is further identifying a full-time staff to continue building historical disasters database and the Maldives Disasters Resource Network (MDRN). Both have not been fully populated with data due to lack of a dedicated staff.

7. In Sri Lanka, the DesInventar Associate completed validation of data for 11 out of 25 districts. The entire database is available online at http://www.desinventar.lk. The historical disasters database was publicly introduced in a stakeholders meeting on 25 June 2007 in Sri Lanka.

8. An analytical report based on the database was published by the Disaster Management Centre (DMC) and was disseminated at the stakeholders meeting in June in Colombo. The DMC plans to continue to validate the data from the remaining districts of Sri Lanka.

9. Earlier a Stakeholders’ Meeting and a Training Workshop on DesInventar Methodology was conducted in Colombo during October 2006.

10. In Thailand, the implementation of the historical database has been relatively slow, although the Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation (DDPM) of the Royal Government of Thailand has consistently shown keen interest in the methodology. The DDPM constituted a Task Force to oversee the implementation of the disaster loss database. The Task Force had its 1st meeting in July 2006. On the request of DDPM, the RP will impart hands-on training to its officials on the DesInventar tool in late August 2007. The RP provides continuing technical advice to the DDPM and participated recently in the review of the proposed Rules of Engagement during emergencies. The RP reiterated the usefulness of disaster loss data bases for evidence based policy and decision making.

11. At the regional level, a regional workshop on Building Risk Knowledge was organized in Bangkok during 28-30 June (risk assessment) followed by training on global risk identification (loss databases) during 2-4 July 2007. The workshop was organized in collaboration with UNDP-BCPR’s Global Risk Identification Programme (GRIP) and attracted 50 participants from 10 countries (Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Indonesia, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka, and Thailand) in the region. Relevant experts representing BCPR, ISDR, OCHA, CADRI and IOTWS-ICG Working Group 3 on risk assessment also attended the workshop. The loss database workshop included 35 participants from 9 countries (Bhutan, India, Indonesia, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka, and Thailand) in the region, including resource persons a from, Munich Re, Asian Disaster Reduction Centre (ADRC), ISDR, Centre for Research on Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED), La Red, ESCAP, and CADRI. Both workshops allowed extensive discussion and sharing of experiences with some countries going as far as to identify their needs in this area.

12. In the past, the Regional Programme has conducted Regional Workshops to address issues on information management:

i. Regional Training Workshop on DesInventar Methodology, Bangkok in February 2006 to impart hands-on training to the Associates from the tsunami affected countries

80

ii. Regional Workshop to Improve the compilation of reliable disaster loss data, April 2006 to review the current status of disaster loss data collection

iii. Regional Workshop on Improving Risk Knowledge, November 2006 to share the progress on building disaster loss database and to identify the needs of the countries.

13. Additionally, with the support of the Regional Programme, the Maldives and Sri Lanka are in the process of adapting the IDRN (India Disaster Resource Network) to their national contexts. The IDRN system provides an on-line inventory of disaster risk management resources (equipment, expertise, and supplies) available at district level. This inventory can assist district governments to identify and mobilize resources needed during emergencies. A detailed plan to support the adaptation of IDRN to different national contexts has been discussed in consultation with the national governments of Sri Lanka and Maldives. In the past, the joint Disaster Risk Management (DRM) programme of Government of India and UNDP-India made available two experts to support development of on-line resource inventories in Sri Lanka and Maldives. The RP hopes to continue to encourage such collaboration and solutions exchange between countries with common needs and issues.

14. In Sri Lanka, data collection for Sri Lanka Disaster Resource Network (SLDRN) is on-going. The SLDRN is already contextualized and made available at http://www.sldrn.lk.

15. In the Maldives, the NDMC will appoint a dedicated staff to continue with the data collection for the MDRN (Maldives Disaster Resource Network). Overall, the progress on the implementation of MDRN has been slow due to the non permanent but evolving nature of institutional structure in Maldives and lack of a dedicated staff.

Training and Learning

16. The Regional Programme successfully completed Regional Training on Enhancing Capacity for Disaster Recovery in March 2007. This training was result of a three-stage process to develop surge capacity training. First, in March 2006, the programme conducted a planning meeting including experts from BCPR Geneva and recovery specialists from Country Offices throughout the region involved in recent disaster recovery operations and programming with the objective of identifying the capacities and core competencies that need to be developed based on lessons learned from those operations. This planning meeting was intended then to inform and serve as the basis for a training development and design workshop conducted in September 2006, launching the curriculum development process. Finally, the regional training was conducted in March 2007. The materials developed will be disseminated widely.

17. The Regional Programme conducted a regional workshop on Disaster Risk Reduction in June 2006, adapting the materials previously developed and tested by BCPR in the Caribbean for use in the Asian regional context. The training workshop was attended by staffs from 8 Country Offices, including participants from the World Bank, FAO and UNICEF.

18. Following the regional workshop on Disaster Risk Reduction, the Indonesia team committed to undertake a similar national workshop with RP support. This workshop was conducted in April 2007 in Jakarta where the RP provided technical advice on the agenda and presentations. The purpose of the National Disaster Risk Reduction

81

workshop was to strengthen the capacity of operational and programmatic units within UNDP Indonesia to play a strategic role in reducing disaster risks.

Early Warning Systems

19. In Thailand, the RP signed a Letter of Agreement (LOA) with National Disaster Warning Center (NDWC) to increase the understanding of roles and responsibilities among provincial and district level officials on warning dissemination, communication and subsequent actions to be taken. Support was provided to train provincial level officials (from Governors to DDPM authorities at the provincial level) on how to interpret and understand warning messages and their response implications for local authorities in the 6 most tsunami-affected provinces. The cooperation with NDWC ended in June 2007 with a workshop aimed at improving NDWC staff’s ability to interact with the mass media in disseminating early warning messages. As a follow-up to the activities conducted under the LOA, the Royal Thai Government conducted a nation-wide tsunami early warning exercise on 25 July 2007.

20. In Sri Lanka and Maldives, participatory multi-hazard risk training for communities was organized in May and June 2006 to use practical tools to get better involved in managing and reducing the risks they face. It was also significant in that it was a first attempt between communities and the government on how to nurture dialogue to communicate needs and work on joint assessments and perception of risks.

21. The Regional Programme supported publication of “Risk Profile of the Maldives”. This government accepted by report as a basic guide to the risk profiles of the different atolls and highlighted the need for more detailed studies at the island level, in particular for islands that have been chosen to become “Safe Islands”. The original designation of the Safe Islands, an initiative whereby the state is attempting to congregate local island populations into specifically selected islands, was not previously based on any risk analysis. As a result, detailed sectoral analyses for the housing, fisheries and tourism sectors were undertaken in collaboration with UNEP to ensure that prevention, mitigation and preparedness measures are addressed to secure the life, assets and development gains.

22. In Tamil Nadu, the RP provided technical support to a local EWS consultant to complete a medium term plan for conducting local level risk assessment. These risk assessment activities will be implemented through the funding support from the Government of Germany to UNDP Chennai Office. The Regional Programme also provided technical support to the Cuddalore district’s end-to-end Early Warning System to assess the technical aspects of district EWS and assess how community-based risk mapping can be developed.

23. The RP entered into a formal agreement with IOC-UNESCO to support end-to-end Early Warning Systems in Indonesia by developing two-way approach: first, a top-down approach with IOC-UNESCO by strengthening the national level rapid decision making when a tsunami bulletin is received and SOP development from national to the local levels; secondly with the IFRC partnership-beginning at the grassroots level to ensure local villages have the appropriate linkages with local authorities, who should be prepared to respond and act upon warnings. All of these elements combined should ensure greater sustainability.

24. The SOP included identification of roles and responsibilities of the authorities at the national, regional and local levels to adapt an official and coherent procedure to be used in the case of a Tsunami. These SOP was tested during organized exercises/drill

82

on the 26th of December in Bali, Padang and Aceh. The RP support included the review, refinement and optimization of existing Standard Operating Procedures for all administrative levels and technical support from experts from the International Tsunami Information Center, Pacific Tsunami Warning Center and the Japan Meteorological Agency to the BMG and other major stakeholders of EWS in Indonesia, coordinating information sharing through their specialized network, and supporting planning for the drill/exercise.

25. In Aceh, Indonesia the RP supported national consultant and IOC-UNESCO technical advisor provided technical inputs to a provincial multi-stakeholders workshop to develop and improve Aceh’s capacity for tsunami EWS. The workshop was held during 30 April and 1 May 2007 and was attended by about 80 participants. This allowed participatory revision and adaptation of local SOPs, and a full assessment of present tsunami EWS in Aceh.

26. The RP continued to collaborate with USAID-IOTWS, ICG WG3, IOC-UNESCO, UNESCAP, ISDR Consortium and UN-ESCAP on various aspects of the implementation of activities on early warning systems.

27. At the regional level, the Institutional and Legal Systems (ILS) for EWS for Sri Lanka, Thailand and Indonesia were reviewed by an ILS consultant to identify the gaps and provide recommendations. The reports for the three countries have been shared with relevant key stakeholders and are expected to be finalized soon based on the comments.