BookPDF Available

FRAGILITY RISKS (CFR) IN DEVELOPMENT SECTORS: SIX PRINCIPLES FOR MANAGING SYNERGIES AND TRADE-OFFS

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Climate change impacts on natural and human systems are increasing. Often affecting fragile economic, social and political systems, climate change is considered to be a serious ‘threat multiplier’. In this document, the risks on these existing systems are understood as climate fragility risks (CFRs). Considering CFRs in the development sector is necessary in order to address an important layer of additional current and future risks, which are largely not well understood or taken into consideration in the present development programing. The CFRs approach proposed in this document is aimed at ensuring that no one is left behind, through addressing the disproportionality that climate change impacts bring. This document proposes six principles to manage CFRs in key development sectors, namely (1) implement interdisciplinary approach, (2) focus on vulnerable groups, (3) promote preventive and adaptive measures, (4) enhance inclusive and participatory governance, (5) allocate and manage finances for CFR effectively and efficiently, and (6) build resilient and green infrastructure.
Content may be subject to copyright.
FRAGILITY RISKS (CFR)
IN DEVELOPMENT SECTORS:
SIX PRINCIPLES FOR MANAGING
SYNERGIES AND TRADE-OFFS
GUIDANCE NOTES
Mikio ISHIWATARI
Riyanti DJALANTE
Aleksandrina MAVRODIEVA
Oscar A. GÓMEZ
S.V.R.K PRABHAKAR
Eiko WATAYA
Rajib SHAW
CLIMATE
2019
Ishiwatari, M., Djalante, R., Mavrodieva, A., Gómez, O. A., Prabhakar, S.V.R.K.,
Wataya, E., Shaw, R., 2019, Climate Fragility Risks (CFR) In Development Sectors:
Six Principles for Managing Synergies and Trade-Offs, The University of Tokyo,
The United Nations University - Institute for the Advances Study of Sustainability
(UNU-IAS), Keio University, Ritsumeikan Asia Pacic University, Institute for
Global Environmental Strategies (IGES), Integrated Research on Disaster Risk
(IRDR), Japan, 28 pages.
ii
ABOUT THIS PUBLICATION
AUTHOR TEAMS
SUGGESTED CITATION
This publication is developed by the author team below. It does not
reflect the opinion of the organization the authors represent.
Mikio ISHIWATARI
Visiting Professor, Graduate School of Frontier Sciences,
The University of Tokyo
Riyanti DJALANTE
Academic Programme Officer, The United Nations University -
Institute for the Advances Study of Sustainability (IAS)
Integrated Research on Disaster Risk (IRDR) Science Committee
Aleksandrina MAVRODIEVA
Graduate School of Media and Governance in Keio University
Oscar A. GÓMEZ
Assistant Professor, College of Asia Pacific Studies,
Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University
S.V.R.K. PRABHAKAR
Institute for Global Environmental Strategies, Japan
Eiko WATAYA
Graduate School of Media and Governance in Keio University
Rajib SHAW
Professor, Graduate School of Media and Governance in Keio University
Integrated Research on Disaster Risk (IRDR) Science Committee
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attributions-Non Commercial-Share Alike
4.0 International License.
Layout and cover photo by Dan Jezreel Orendain (MSc in Sustainability, UNU-IAS)
eISBN : 978-92-808-4594-5
iii
CLIMATE FRAGILITY RISKS (CFR)
IN DEVELOPMENT SECTORS:
Six Principles for Managing Synergies and Trade-Offs
iv
Photo by Orendain
v
Climate change impacts on natural and human systems are increasing. Often affecting
fragile economic, social and political systems, climate change is considered to be a
serious ‘threat multiplier’. In this document, the risks on these existing systems are
understood as climate fragility risks (CFRs).
Considering CFRs in the development sector is necessary in order to address an important
layer of additional current and future risks, which are largely not well understood or
taken into consideration in the present development programing. The CFRs approach
proposed in this document is aimed at ensuring that no one is left behind, through
addressing the disproportionality that climate change impacts bring.
This document proposes six principles to manage CFRs in key development sectors,
namely (1) implement interdisciplinary approach, (2) focus on vulnerable groups, (3)
promote preventive and adaptive measures, (4) enhance inclusive and participatory
governance, (5) allocate and manage finances for CFR effectively and efficiently, and
(6) build resilient and green infrastructure.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
KEY MESSAGES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
v
vi
1INTRODUCTION TO CLIMATE FRAGILITY:
Increasing Impacts of Climate Change
and its Risks
1
2Rationale for Considering Climate
Fragility Risks in Development Sectors 4
3Six Principles for Considering Climate-
Fragility Risks in Development Sector 6
3.1 PRINCIPLE 1: Implement interdisciplinary approach 7
3.2 PRINCIPLE 2: Focus on vulnerable groups 8
3.3 PRINCIPLE 3: Promote preventive and adaptive measures 11
3.4 PRINCIPLE 4: Enhance inclusive and participatory
governance 12
3.5 PRINCIPLE 5: Allocate and manage the nances for CFR
effectively and efciently 13
3.6 PRINCIPLE 6: Build resilient and green infrastructure 15
4CONCLUSION 19
REFERENCE 20
1
1INTRODUCTION TO CLIMATE
FRAGILITY: INCREASING IMPACTS
OF CLIMATE CHANGE AND ITS RISKS
Conceptualizing climate fragility risks (CFRs) and the
aim of the document
It is increasingly recognized that linkages
between climate change and fragility
exist. Fragility is connected to political
and economic insecurity, poverty, inequality,
resource depletion, public health, conict and
violence, increased numbers and severity of
disasters, and human migration. e issues
within this very complex nexus between
climate change and fragility aect both the
basic, immediate, human security, and the
long-term development goals, essential for
securing life with dignity and environmental
sustainability.
The 2015 independent G7-commissioned
report “A new climate for peace” stresses upon climate
change as an ultimate “threat multiplier”. Climate
change has the potential to aggravate already fragile
settings and may contribute to social upheaval and
even to violent conict. The report recommended
taking action now, sending a strong message that
climate change would put serious pressure on our
economic, social and political systems (Rüttinger, et. al,
2015). In its 2015 report Promoting Climate-Resilient
Peacebuilding in Fragile States, the International
Institute for Sustainable Development, reiterated on the
statement that climate change is a “threat multiplier”
that has the potential to exacerbate existing challenges
through:
a) increasing competition for natural resources,
where climate change can lead to depletion, or
redistribution, of water and food resources;
b) increasing displacement and migration
of people, due to more frequent extreme weather
events, more severe disasters, resource scarcity, and
competition, which could also potentially escalate into
conicts, violence and/social unrest;
c) increasing the burden on state institutions,
where managing the new threats would require new
policies, more funds, and political will, which a number
of states might not be able to easily adjust to (Crawford,
et. al, 2015).
Climate change will worsen slow onset climate
events impacting crop productivity, water availability,
and sea level rise, leading to rising the number of
migrants. That same year the UN made a global
assessment on food security, concluding that climate
change and conict would be responsible for increased
levels of hunger, affecting approximately 815 million
people around the world. The increasing severity of
weather events, such as associated with the El Niño,
coupled with ongoing conicts, and governance issues,
has led to exacerbated famines and malnutrition,
undermining health and well-being, but also to internal
displacement and cross-country migration. In 2017,
research found that “each degree-Celsius increase in
global mean temperature would, on average, reduce
global yields of wheat by 6.0%, rice by 3.2%, maize
by 7.4%, and soybean by 3.1%”. Limited resources
also affect food prices, increasing economic and
political volatility, as was showcased during the 2017
presidential elections in Kenya, where high food prices,
following a severe drought in the country, became
one of the major discussion points during the election
campaigns (Vivekananda, et. al, 2017).
According to the 2015 GAR Report, by 2050,
40 per cent of the global population will be living in
river basins, and a signicant fraction is already living
in low-elevation coastal zones already, under severe
water stress (UNISDR, 2015). At the same time, a great
number of people in the developing world rely on rain-fed
agriculture for their livelihoods, where water resource
facilities are not well developed. Rain-fed agriculture
is easily affected by climate change, increasing food
insecurity and loss of livelihoods. It is expected that
climate change will increase ood volumes in major
rivers in South Asia and South-East Asia, while at the
2
same time available water will decrease in major rivers in
conict-affected countries in the Middle East (Ishiwatari,
2017). Simultaneously, in other regions, the number of
people exposed to droughts could rise by between 9 and
17 per cent by 2030 under scenarios where emissions
growth rates aren’t reduced (Winsemius, et al., 2015).
The world is increasingly divided, and some
regions fall into cycles of conict and violence (UNDP
undated). Armed conict risks are further enhanced
by climate-related disasters, especially in ethnically
fractionalized countries (Schleussner 2016). In the
last decade, disasters and conict have increasingly
displaced people (IDMC, 2018) while in 2017 alone,
there were 30.6 million new displacements associated
with conict and disasters across 143 countries and
territories. In the future, it is expected that millions of
people will be displaced by climate change and internal
climate migrants are rapidly becoming the human face of
climate change. According to the new World Bank report
“Groundswell - Preparing for Internal Climate Migration”,
without urgent global and national climate action, Sub-
Saharan Africa, South Asia and Latin America could
see more than 140 million people move within their
countries’ borders by 2050 (Rigaud et al. 2018).
Climate change affects different groups of
people in different ways. It has been widely recognized
that the effects of climate change affect the poorest
levels of society most severely and deepen existing, or
create new, social inequalities. The evidence also shows
that disadvantaged groups suffer disproportionately
from both direct and indirect effects of climate hazards,
where the destruction of crops, for instance, is the direct
loss, but subsequent raise in food prices and degraded
diet are possible indirect impacts. At the same time,
socially and geographically disadvantaged people – in
particular people facing discrimination based on gender,
race, age, class, caste and disability – are suffering the
most (Islam & Winkel, 2017). Increasing demand for
basic resources in countries and regions with growing
populations, lack of good institutions and governance
systems limiting the negative effects of increased
production and urbanization, improper resource
management and weak governance mechanisms
will further aggravate the impacts of climate change
(Rüttinger, et. al, 2015).
Furthermore, climate risks are not limited to
specic countries, or communities. Climate change does
not recognize boundaries, even if it affects different
countries in different ways. Water resource management
is only one of many examples where it is visible that
the effects of climate change transcend national
borders and could result in complex political struggles
between states sharing the same water source. With
the expansion of markets and trade, increased food and
water scarcity and decreased production in one area
can lead to economic losses and scarcity in other places
across the globe (Rüttinger et. al, 2015). Climate change
is, therefore, a shared responsibility for all countries to
bear.
The G7 Foreign Ministers’ Meeting held in
2016 recognized the urgency of addressing CFRs and
stressed the importance of aligning foreign policy efforts
in reducing fragility risks and in increasing resilience
against the harmful effects of climate change (Ministry
of Foreign Affairs 2017a). CFRs must be managed
properly and in line with the principles of the 2030
Agenda “to leave no one behind”. Two of the Sustainable
Development Goals (SDG) need to be achieved in an
integrated way - Goal 16 aims to nd lasting solutions to
conict and insecurity; Goal 13 aims to take necessary
actions to adapt to the negative effects of climate
change.
In this document, the risks on the natural
and human systems are understood as CFRs. Various
studies cover how CFRs affect security, diplomacy and
foreign affairs and how countries and international
communities address CFRs. However, there is a gap in
considering CFRs from a development perspective. This
document aims to examine CFRs from a development
perspective and to propose six principles for improved
decision- and policy-making for managing CFRs.
It has been widely recognized
that the eects of climate
change aect the poorest levels
of society most severely and
deepen existing, or create new,
social inequalities.
3
2011 THAILAND FLOOD CASE
STUDY: LINKS BETWEEN CFRS
AND DEVELOPMENT
The flood disaster in Chao Phraya River
demonstrates that climate extreme events
increase tensions in various areas. The flood left
more than 800 dead and damaged agricultural
land of over 18,000 km2. The following tensions
are observed:
1. Water use: Dams at upstream were
required to perform difficult operations to reduce
the damage caused by floods. Dam operators
stored water as much as possible for hydropower
generation and irrigation but had to reduce the
water level of the reservoirs to secure more
storage capacity to prepare for flooding.
2. Rural and Bangkok metropolitan areas:
The government made efforts to protect Bangkok
metropolitan areas, which is an economically
and politically important area for the country.
Temporary dykes were strengthened around
the metropolitan areas but caused more severe
inundation in surrounding rural areas.
3. Financial support: Some affected people,
in particular those in Bangkok, complained
of unfair and insufficient financial support
and slow process of payment. They conducted
demonstration activities and blocked highways
and protested in front of government offices.
4. Political instability: All tensions became
political issues, leading to political instability.
Source: TAMADA, Y., HOSHIKAWA K., and FUNATSU
T., Eds. (2013) Thailand’s 2011 Flood: The
Record and Lessons, Josei-Bunseki Report No.22,
Institute of Developing Economies, JETRO: Chiba.
Source: http://www.env.go.jp/earth/tekiou/report2018_full.pdf
4
2RATIONALE FOR CONSIDERING
CLIMATE FRAGILITY RISKS IN
DEVELOPMENT SECTORS
CFRs are likely to undermine development efforts
CFRs aect a wide range of development sectors, such as water, agriculture, and environment,
leading to complex situations of causing migration and losing livelihood (Figure 1).
Disasters caused by climate change and tensions in fragile zones may damage outputs of
development projects. Conducting capacity-building programs and constructing facilities are
dicult in fragile and conict-aected environments. It is even possible that development
projects adversely aect fragility situations if failing to consider societal backgrounds and
relationships among various groups.
Managing CFRs is crucial for the development of fragile and conict-affected areas. Over half of the
deaths caused by climate-related disasters in Asia for the last decade occurred in the four most fragile countries
(Peter 2018). Fragile and conict-affected states have limited institutional capacity in disaster risk reduction,
water resource management, food security, health, agriculture, and other areas that might be affected by climate
change. Furthermore, fragile and conict-affected states may be unwilling to respond to the needs of affected
people (USAID 2018).
Figure 1: Links between climate change and fragility in the development sector.
5
New approaches for dealing with CFRs are needed in
development programs and projects
Development projects impact local politics and power dynamics and are rarely neutral. While some of the
planned impacts do provide positive results, such as improved capacity and strengthened institutions, it is very often
the case that some unintended negative effects occur to undermining local capacity or differentially support some
groups over other (DFID 2010). Projects should be designed according to the “do not harm” principle, by assessing
the possible consequences of the planned interventions (OECD 2010). Conict and fragility drivers should be
analyzed to achieve conict-sensitive development. Projects should be developed so as to create stability and growth
by providing protection from disasters and enhance basic services and both institutional as well as human resource
capacity. The existing approaches in development programing currently either do not cover CFRs or cover them
supercially, where the linkages between different areas are neither well recognized nor taken into consideration.
The approaches proposed here will cover:
ADDITIONALITY
Inclusion of CFR considerations into conventional approaches related to climate
change. A number of approaches have been developed to address dierent problematic
areas, such as integrated water resource management, urban water management, watershed
management, and urban planning. e current document suggests incorporating CFR-
planning into these already existing approaches and projects.
CONNECTIVITY
Multiple sectors should be linked. Adaptation measures and peace-building eorts
involve a wide range of stakeholders and sectors. e Ministry of Foreign Aairs of
Japan (2017a) points out that climate change policies should include urbanization and
socioeconomic issues, as well as ecosystem conservation in the region to mitigate human
security risks caused by climate change.
By taking this approach, synergistic effects can be expected, where multi-sectoral interventions will benet
a wide range of areas. Moreover, trade-offs can be managed strategically.
SECTOR MAJOR
ISSUES
PRINCIPLES
Inter-
disciplinary
Vulnerability
& inequality
Preventive &
adaptive
Participatory
governance Financing Quality
infrastructure
ENVIRONMENT Resource
competition o o o o
WATER Drought o o o o o o
DISASTER
Flood/
Landslides/
Storm o o o o o o
AGRICULTURE
& FOOD
Food price/
Famine/ Hunger o o o o o
LIVELIHOOD Income loss o o o o
HEALTH Malnutrition/
Diseases o o o o o
MIGRATION Migration ooo
Implement interdisciplinary approach
Address the disproportional impacts on
vulnerable groups and reduce inequality
Promote preventive and adaptive measures
Enhance inclusive and participatory governance
Allocate and manage finances for CFR
effectively and efficiently
Build resilient and green infrastructure
SIX PRINCIPLES FOR CONSIDERING
CLIMATEFRAGILITY RISKS IN THE
DEVELOPMENT SECTOR
This document recommends six principles to reduce CFRs:
6
The rst three principles cover overarching issues, and the last three focus on sector specic: governance,
nance, and infrastructure. These principles contribute to resolve major issues mentioned in this report of
sectors concerned as shown in the table 1. Major issues are covered by the six principles in the report.
Table 1. Relationship between sectors and principles
3
`
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
7
3.1 PRINCIPLE 1
Implement interdisciplinary approach
Climate change related higher
temperatures, changing rainfall
patterns, sea level rise, and extreme
weather events in various sectors would
exacerbate already fragile settings. To reduce
CFRs, an interdisciplinary approach is needed
to cover these interlinked areas.
3.1.1 Consider issues and solutions
beyond boundaries
The conventional approaches of development
projects that limit project areas are inappropriate
to manage CFRs. Issues often originate outside the
targeted areas, and solutions could be found outside
as well. The conventional approaches from a river
basin or city perspective are effective in resolving
water and urban issues, but not enough to manage
CFRs. Planning of river basin areas and cities needs to
expand to include issues that originate outside those
river basins and cities. For example, migrants could ow
from risk areas. Water usage and damage mitigation
had been traditionally managed by taking a river basin
approach. This approach, which considers a river basin
as the unit of planning and project implementation, is
commonly used in water resource management and
ood management (UNESCO 2009).
The challenges require new innovative
approaches outside of the traditional practice. Non-
traditional stakeholders could support response
activities by providing relief goods and equipment,
search and rescue teams, and other expert teams.
Private sector should prepare business continuity plans
to cope with disasters, taking into mind even disasters
occurring outside of their immediate locality. Disasters,
in particular large-scale ones, affect production activities
and services through impacting whole supply-chains
on a global scale (Ranghieri and Ishiwatari 2014).
Relocation programs which move affected people from
high-risk to lower-risk areas could be a counter-measure
(Riguard et al., 2018).
3.1.2 Resolve multiple-risks and
produce multiple-benefits
Multi-sectoral interventions will benet a wide range
of areas. Synergies between sectors can be realized
by managing multiple risks in an integrated manner.
For example, multi-purpose facilities of water resource
development can provide water to cities and agricultural
lands, mitigate ood damage, and produce electricity
more efciently than constructing specic purpose
facilities separately. Capacity building programs for
government organizations, civil society organizations,
or other stakeholders in fragile and conict-affected
states can contribute to improve institutional capacity in
a wide range of sectors including disaster risk reduction
(DRR). Single sector approaches would adversely affect
other sectors and areas by overusing natural resources
or unbalancing development.
3.1.3 Combine knowledge of (i)
Science and technology + (ii) Socio-
economy for risk assessment and
management
Different risk assessment methodologies used
in climate change and conicts should be integrated to
formulate and implement projects for managing CFRs.
The risks of climate change, such as the unavailability
of water resources or ood damage, can be projected
by using scientic and engineering approaches.
Backgrounds and root causes of conicts are analyzed
from political, governance, security, economic and
social perspectives. The current situation of these
areas should be examined, and future status should be
projected to understand CFRs.
Peace-building and climate change adaptation
activities should be integrated as well to resolve
interrelated issues of CFRs. A more integrated approach
can cover various needs in the conict-affected situations
as well as adaptation of climate change. Synergy effects
between engineering and socio-economic activities
or between hardware and software solutions can be
expected. The activities of climate change adaptation
cover mainly engineering solutions, such as structural
measures, ood simulation, and early warning,
based on climate prediction models. Peace-building
8
The 2030 agenda for Sustainable
Development along with its 17 goals
calls for an inclusive approach toward
development through leaving no-one behind.
Some of the most vulnerable groups are those
living in Africa, hotter region, urban areas,
small islands and in developing countries,
and due to climate change, it is expected that
more people in these places will be aected by
droughts, oods, typhoon and sea-level rise
(IPCC, 2018). UN DESA (2016) concluded
that multidimensional inequality leads to:
• Increased exposure to climate hazards;
• Increased susceptibility to damages caused by
climate hazards;
• Decreased ability to cope with and recover
from damages caused by climate hazards; and
leads to a disproportionate loss of assets and
income and consequently to greater inequality.
3.2.1 Identify vulnerable groups
Vulnerable groups experience disproportionately
the negative effects of climate-fragility impacts, and
therefore, require specic attention through a tailored
approach in humanitarian and development assistance
programing. ODA and other national and regional
development programs should identify and take into
account the different ways that complex climate-fragility
factors are affecting different groups in the targeted
communities. This means assessing risks based on
programing covers socio-economic activities, such as
livelihood rehabilitation, community-based structures,
and security enhancement. An integrated approach
could incorporate capacity-building activities related to
natural resource management at the community level
into peace-building programs, in order to contribute to
climate change adaptation alongside conict resolution.
3.1.4 Consider cross-sectoral
coordination, and respond to both
immediate and long-term needs
Cross-sectoral coordination could provide
for the implementation of more coherent policies and
programing. Business as usual, as well as template
solutions, do not necessarily address complex climate-
fragility challenges. Long-term activities should
be designed at an early stage while responding to
immediate needs. Peace-building projects tend to
emphasize short-term response, such as restoring lost
assets, improving access to basic public services, and
rehabilitating livelihoods; and only then shifting to long-
term activities. The transfer of programmatic effort from
the relief to the rehabilitation phase and towards further
development has often proved difcult to achieve
(Hanatani et al. 2018).
Activities related to strengthening prevention
and preparedness should start from the beginning
of the projects. Projects should ensure that climate
management activities would not undermine
humanitarian issues in the long-term. Climate change
adaptation is a dynamic process to be regarded as
a long-term solution, since the impacts of climate
change become apparent and more prominent over
a long period. For this purpose, enhancing capacities
and adaptive capabilities of affected communities can
secure stability and sustainability of the projects by
strengthening capacity from a long-term perspective.
Adaptation measures to climate change can contribute
to resolving existing fragility issues in addition to
preparing for future changes. For example, improving
efforts of managing natural resources can relieve
tension among competing groups.
3.1.5 Prioritize areas
Prioritizing areas is crucial, since all issues
cannot be addressed equally at the same time.
Governance arrangements engaging relevant
stakeholders need to be in place to efciently design
and implement risk management plans by prioritizing
areas. Stakeholders share responsibilities for decisions
and for implementing risk management measures.
Trade-offs between different sectors or interest groups
can be managed.
3.2 PRINCIPLE 2
Focus on vulnerable groups
9
age, gender, disability, economic development level,
social status, ethnic group belonging, and urban and
rural population distribution.
On average, both the young and the old are
more susceptible to damage caused by climate hazards
than the adults. IPCC reports, for instance, that ood
related mortality in Nepal among girls was twice as
high as for women (13.3 per 1000 girls), as well as for
boys compared to men (Olsson et. Al, 2014). UN DESA
similarly reported that lower caste families, women
and other marginal groups in the Himalayan villages
in northwest India and Nepal are more susceptible to
climate related effects (UN DESA, 2016).
Another type of inequality relates to public
decision making (political power) and access to
public resources, such as publicly nanced health,
education, housing, ¬nancing, and other services. A
combination of inequality factors could exist as well. For
example, women in rural areas often have lower asset
positions, and experience more restrictions in tenure
arrangements, as well as social restrictions, which limit
the land available to them. This leads women farmers to
work on more marginal land that is exposed to greater
climate related hazards (UN DESA, 2016).
Ethnic minorities, racial difference and
indigenous groups are also more susceptible to the
adverse effects of climate change. IPCC found that
in many places in Latin America, Afro-Latinos and
indigenous groups suffer from disproportionate climate
effects (Olsson et. al, 2014). This nding, which also
links to low income status, has been observed in both
developing and developed countries.
In Japan, and in the ageing European nations,
one of the key issues is and will be the demographic
context, where elderly or handicapped persons are the
ones who suffer the most from climatic changes, such
as increased number of extreme weather events. During
severe oods older people also nd it more difcult
to relocate and to adapt to changes in their living
conditions.
3.2.2 Identify risk hot spots
To formulate development programs and
master plans, hot spots or vulnerable areas of CFRs
should be identied, and the risks should be assessed.
Very often it is disadvantaged groups who live in the
zones of higher risk, as they cannot afford to live in
safer areas. Rural regions are usually more exposed to
poverty. At the same time, it is estimated that 84 % of
people in Africa, 71 % in Latin America and the Caribbean
and 93 % in the least developed countries live in rural
low elevation coastal zones (UN DESA, 2016). Hence it
is important to identify the areas with higher exposure
to climate change and fragility, and where communities
have less capacity to respond and adapt.
Disadvantaged groups of people suffer
disproportionately not only in rural, but also in urban
areas. Temporary homes, refugee shelters and slums
are very often located in areas more prone to hazards,
such as low points in a city prone to ooding (India,
Bangladesh), or on steep slopes (Latin America) at risk
of landslides (UN DESA, 2016). Also, they have limited
access to water supply and other public services. UN
HABITAT estimated that there is approximately one in
eight people, or close to one billion people, currently
living in slums. This number is expected to signicantly
increase in the future (UN HABITAT, 2015-2016).
Hazard maps could be developed as an
analytical tool for CFRs. The maps integrate both climate
change predictions and the factors of conicts over
local resources as well as ethnic, economic, and social
conicts (Ministry of Foreign Affairs 2017b). Science
and technology tools and knowledge can contribute
greatly to providing better assessment of the underlying
risks and the actual needs of communities.
3.2.3 Ensure that development
programs do not create more
inequality situations in climate-
fragility settings.
The impact of development programs should
be estimated by the targeted groups. A sustained
effort to assess the long-term impacts post conclusion
of development projects should be instituted as a
standard practice in all development actions. Improper
distribution of program benets may increase already
existing, or create new, inequality and cause tension
among groups. A sustained effort to assess the longer
term impacts post conclusion of development projects
should be instituted as a standard practice in all ODA
actions.
The A New Climate for Peace report paid special
attention to the importance of designing development
programs that consider broader impacts and possible
risks. Well-intended projects can cause unexpected
harms if the climate change-fragility linkages are not
addressed. Such considerations include developing
certain areas at the expense of others, marginalization
of minority groups, exacerbating existing grievances
10
CLIMATE CHANGE AFFECTING
WOMEN IN THE HIMALAYAS
Assam, in the Indian Eastern Himalayas,
is an area highly affected by climate change.
The mean temperature in the region has been
assessed to have risen by close to 0.6 degrees
between 1951 and 2010 and is expected to
increase by 1.7-2.2 degrees by the mid-century.
At the same time, annual rainfall has decreased
by 2.96 mm per year, affecting local agriculture
and fishery, which traditionally provide livelihood
mainly to women. As a result, women in rural areas
are disproportionally impacted by the adverse
changes in the climate and the environment. As
a consequence, food insecurity has risen, and
income has declined for thousands of farmers in
Assam, leading more specifically to:
Women being forced to seek new
types of employment, often taking the lowest-
paying labor, and continue working throughout
pregnancies and after childbirth, which has also
resulted in poorer health.
Women losing jobs in the traditional tea
gardens due to decreased production as a result
of changing temperatures.
Women losing jobs in textile production,
due to decreased quantities of silk material used
for weaving, as a result of temperature rise and
changed humidity.
Young women and girls becoming more
vulnerable to human trafficking, due to lower
and insufficient income.
Women and girls being cut from
education, as they move to paid jobs outside of
the family.
Increasing numbers of child marriages,
as parents opt for marrying their children younger
in the hope of securing better life (Borah, 2017).
This case comes to show how climate
change can have negative effects on groups with
less social power, which is the case with women
in Assam, or groups employed in particular type
of activity, such as farming or weaving. It is,
therefore, essential that development programs
take into consideration the specific context of
the area they target, as well as identify the hot
spots and the specific ways that climate change
affects different groups within a community.
and ethnic conicts, degradation of biodiversity and,
ironically, increasing the potential for negative impacts of
climate changes. These unfortunate developments are
often the cause of lack of coordination between actors
and sectors, lack of understanding of the underlying
risks, lack of understanding of the specic context,
lack of consultation with the affected populations and
communities, or adaptation efforts prioritizing certain
areas over others (such as prioritizing important city
centers over rural areas) (Rüttinger et. al, 2015).
To better understand the links between
inequality and risks to human development UNDP has
adjusted its Human Development Index (HDI) to include
indicators on inequality (IHDI). The IHDI could be used as
an assessment tool in development programs to inform
policies about inequality gaps and their contribution to
the overall human development cost, where inequalities
in public health, education and standard of living lead
to more fragility and decreased coping mechanisms
(UNDP.2018).
11
3.3 PRINCIPLE 3
Promote preventive and adaptive measures
Climate fragility programing must
combine both preventive and adaptive
approaches, countering known threats,
while preparing societies to be able to recover
after emerging threats strike. Eorts to avoid
harm from known problems should go in
tandem with anticipating new, and at times
unknown, climate change challenges. is
means that more work is necessary to coordinate
the inclusion of such issues as part of climate
action. Particularly problematic is the sporadic
attention triggered by major disasters, while
excluding smaller threats, enjoying fewer mass
media coverage, from the climate and disaster
management cycle. e prevention and
adaptation approach principle warrant a focus
on needs that goes beyond shocks and pursues
comprehensive protection.
3.3.1 Harmonize preventive initiatives
Promoting actions to ameliorate climate
fragility must be harmonized with all other prevention
efforts related to disasters, public health and public
order, establishing two-way communication between
relevant institutions. Addressing climate fragility should
connect efforts to relevant climate change action
initiatives to generate synergies and avoid duplication.
There might be tensions between conict-sensitive,
climate sensitive, do no harm approaches, etc., that
could be pulling in different directions while promoting
prevention; nevertheless, differences should be worked
out on the ground, and in line with the context.
The 2014 Ebola fever outbreak in West Africa
made evident important weaknesses of international
and national capabilities to respond to infectious
diseases emergencies, triggering major reforms (Dubois
and Wake 2015, Moon et al. 2015). The World Health
Organization has merged its outbreak and humanitarian
response divisions to offer a more comprehensive
response, while the International Federation of the
Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies has moved in a
similar direction. The World Bank has also created the
Pandemic Emergency Financing Facility to make more
resources available when necessary.
The UN Secretary-General António Guterres
has put great emphasis on the need to bolster the
conict prevention capabilities of the organization. It
has been highlighted that to achieve sustainable peace,
humanitarian, development, political and security
initiatives are not to be implemented in isolation. The
recent joint report by the UN and World Bank “Pathways
for Peace” puts forward several recommendations to
realize the Secretary-General’s vision in relation to the
joint work of peace, development and humanitarian
sectors, and addressing exclusion, inequality and
injustice. It should be added that in relation to food
security monitoring, both FAO and WFP maintain
systems for constant reporting to avert crises such as
the 2011 famine in Somalia.
3.3.2 Promote knowledge co-creation
Strengthened institutions must promote
knowledge co-creation with different stakeholders
and utilize this knowledge to constantly transform
themselves. Despite the efforts of the international
community, climate will continue to change, and society
should be ready to adapt to its consequences. In order
to do this, coping capacities should be strengthened at
all levels, from the global to the local and the community
levels, with special emphasis on institutions. Knowledge
societies will be in the best position to confront
uncertainty as new data about climate stressors will
become available in line with science development.
Nonetheless, information co-creation and sharing is
crucial to ensure that different perspectives about
the new threats are taken into consideration and that
there is a common understanding of the risks and
the possibilities; otherwise, the needs of the most
vulnerable or marginal communities would be at risk of
being sidelined, leaving harm unaddressed.
3.3.3 Ensure a connected, full crisis
management process
Adaptation to new threats is only possible if
the cycle of crisis management is covered as a whole.
Disconnected efforts to respond, recover and build
12
preparedness against future threats risk losing precious
learning opportunities (Hanatani et al. 2018). These
processes are not linear and represent a continuous
process through which the many faces of fragility
are confronted. It should be noted that the crisis
management cycle is not a one-size-ts-all approach,
but it serves to encompass different process triggered
by crises at the local level to promote bouncing back
better as much as possible. Thus, its success highly
depends on the ownership and empowerment of the
local actors through the full management process. In
other words, a territorial approach to adaptation should
be at the forefront of all efforts.
3.3.4 Addressing migration as a form of
climate adaptation
Getting out of harm’s way has been historically
the most common approach of humans to deal with
overwhelming threats. Since the 2008 COP in Cancún,
México, the option of contemplating migration as an
adaptation strategy has been agreed but its actual
applicability is under scrutiny. Voluntary movements
are preferred, yet people only consider moving as
a last resort. The experience of the development
sector in relocation may come in handy when large-
scale movements are required, but much research
is required to elucidate factors that can make such
efforts successful. Since this is a major challenge,
a number and a variety of preparations are required
in advance. In that sense, efforts such as the Global
Compact for Migration, adopted in December 2018 in
Marrakech, Morocco, need also to be supported from
the climate change community. How individual states
react to proposals, and their willingness to cooperate
on migration issues, will also determine the success of
such initiatives.
3.4 PRINCIPLE 4
Enhance inclusive and participatory governance
Good and eective governance for
climate change is an important tool
to reduce CFRs. ere are challenges
in climate change adaptation governance
related to institutional fragmentation due
to the interdisciplinary nature of climate
change impacts, or due to the uncertainties
of the level of risks, or the time mismatch in
developing short-term policies for long-term
climate projection. Adaptation is an emerging
policy eld. is section proposes approaches
for improving climate change adaptation
governance toward reducing future climate
risks fragility.
3.4.1 Aim toward inclusive climate
governance
Disaster risk governance needs to strongly
address reduction of poverty, inequality, access to
power and information, and informality as some of the
most common forms of people vulnerability to address
vulnerability (Adger, 2006). In dealing with climate
change impacts, literature has long suggested the
importance of examining the underlying vulnerability as
the root causes of disasters. To ensure and understand
the dynamics of the impacts of climate change on
different nations, groups and individuals calls for
understanding their vulnerability to climate change.
Inclusive disaster risk governance needs to
recognize those who are vulnerable and do more to
respond to the needs of the world’s most vulnerable
people. The recent World Disaster Report from the
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent
Societies (2018) stated that we need leave no one
behind and proposed ve different reasons that affected
people may not receive the assistance they need: they
are Out of sight, Out of reach, Out of the loop, Out of
money, and Out of scope. Specically, migration and
displacement need to be taken very seriously.
3.4.2 Strengthen urban climate
governance
The world is now heavily urbanized with
over 55% of world population living in urban areas
(UNHABITAT, 2016) and it is expected to increase to 68%
by 2050 (UNDESA, 2018). The concentration of people,
infrastructure, assets and waste coupled with improper
land use planning has also led to an increased disaster
risk. Sustainable urban development is suggested
13
as the key to ensure benets from urbanization. This
include managing rapid population growth, managing
urban and rural linkages, managing pollution, provision
of infrastructure and services that focusses on the poor
and vulnerable groups and provision of decent jobs,
housing, health care, education and safe environment.
3.4.3 Govern for resilience: toward
adaptive and transformative climate
governance
Literature on climate change governance
is rapidly expanding, especially focusing on the
role of network, fragmentalism, experimentation,
transnationalism, multi-level governance, collaboration,
partnerships and those on urban climate change
governance. Bai et al (2018) recently call for long-term,
cross-disciplinary studies to reduce carbon emissions
and urban risks from global warming. In practice, trans-
national network for cities such as ICLEI , C40, RC100,
Resilient Cities campaign by the UNISDR, are taking
over international stage on diplomacy and negotiations,
and learning and knowledge exchange.
Building resilience to disasters is recognized
as one of the ultimate goals for disaster risk reduction
and management. Disaster resilience is dened by
the UNISDR (2009) as the “The ability of a system,
community or society exposed to hazards to resist,
absorb, accommodate, adapt to, transform and recover
from the effects of a hazard in a timely and efcient
manner, including through the preservation and
restoration of its essential basic structures and functions
through risk management”. This hence calls for an
integrated approach for disaster resilience. Djalante et
al (2013) proposed that adaptive governing resilience is
characterized by governance system that is polycentric,
multi-layer, anticipative and adaptive (Djalante et al
2013). As knowledge evolve on the governance for
resilience, new concept on transformation emerge.
Alexander (2013) state that in the case of DRR,
transformation rather than the preservation of the state
of the system will be more relevant for future DRR.
When resistance, and incremental adjustment to build
resilience is no longer enough, then transformation in
disaster risk governance policy is necessary (Matyas
and Pelling, 2015). This can be done through for
example transforming development and disaster risks
to address the underlying roots of vulnerability, which
can be done through intense interaction between
actors; the intervention of external actors; system level
change extending beyond efciency to governance and
goals; behavior beyond established coping strategies;
and behavior extending beyond established institutions.
3.5 PRINCIPLE 5
Allocate and manage finances for CFR effectively and efficiently
Understanding the rapidly evolving
landscape of development nancing is
important in the context of addressing
CFRs. e landscape of nancial sources
contributing to development include public
nances (national and local governments, and
overseas development assistance), individual
remittances, philanthropy, private sector
nances, international nances, including
those of the bi- and multi-lateral development
institutions, including banks (e.g. MDBs).
In general, nancing by governments is
the predominant source of development
nancing in most countries and its share
in the overall development nancing will
continue to increase in the years to come due
to economic growth, improved scal situation
and improvements in governance. Over the
years, private development nancing through
public-private partnership (PPP) and other
related variants has also been on the rise.
Establishing fund pools (e.g. adaptation fund,
disaster emergency fund), which can address
the cross-sectoral needs, have been the major
approach taken by governments specially to
address nancing in cross-sectoral areas such
as climate change and disaster risk reduction.
ough such approaches have helped to reduce
the increasingly fragmented developmental
nancial landscape, giving a single-window
14
option for local governments to access nances,
the development sector nance is still largely
fragmented. e principles described here
focus on achieving additional nancing for
addressing CFRs and for reducing the nancial
costs of CFRs with increased nancing
eciency and eectiveness of interventions.
3.5.1 Promote win-win approaches for
improving the risk/return portfolio of
interventions, and convert additional
costs into incentives to ensure rapid
mainstreaming of CFRs
Addressing CFRs is riddled with both risks
and returns and, hence, efforts should be focused on
improving the risk/return ratio of interventions. A wide
range of practices can be employed including emphasis
on quantifying risks, prioritizing those projects and
programs that focus on the most vulnerable populations,
participatory approaches by involving wide variety of
stakeholders, scenario making, and by incentivizing the
players. Risk identication should be part of the integral
part of interventions and only those projects and
programs that identify robust risk mitigation strategies
should be promoted. The nancial allocation for projects
should be in congruence with the CFRs to be addressed
by the intervention. While aiming at the lowest cost
approaches, the emphasis should be given to the lowest
risk approaches (i.e. win-win approaches) or those
approaches that can work under wide variety of future
scenarios, under which interventions are expected to
perform in the future.
Depending on the nature of the fragility
issue to be addressed, addressing CFRs could result
in higher overall costs, compared to business as
usual approaches, largely due to additional data and
analytical needs, need for cross-sectoral collaboration,
additional stakeholder involvement, additional technical
capacities, and new interventions that may be difcult to
access and may have limited ‘shelf-life’, requiring to be
constantly reviewed and revised. In addition to nancial
costs, the integrated approaches may bring additional
complexity to project and program implementation and
related coordination that could mean employment of
additional staff to address the complexity. These costs
would remain additional even if CFRs are mainstreamed
into sectoral approaches.
National governments could promote credit-
enhancements or soft credit for interventions initiated
by local governments, private sector entities, and
institutions that seek to address CFRs and this could
act as an incentive mechanism for integrating CFR
issues into programs and projects. Mainstreaming
could bring overall higher benets with even higher
net returns on investment. Cost-sharing mechanisms,
including sharing costs among different departments
and ministries, with private sector entities and other
stakeholders could reduce the overall burden on the
government, increase the ownership and sustainability
of interventions. Initiatives such as public-private-
partnerships (PPP) could address many issues that may
arise with the mainstreaming of climate fragility issues
into development and can ensure the sustainability with
wider ownership.
3.5.2 Promoting result-based financing
architecture to strengthen institutional
deliverance
Result-based nancing (RBF) refers to linking
nance to prior identied outcomes that the intended
nancing operations aim to achieve. RBF can ensure
that the payments are made only after the intended
results are achieved. RBF can ensure institutional
service delivery and can ensure accountability and
transparency. However, due to its very nature of ‘upon
result’ payment, the RBF may not be suitable for all the
situations where CFRs may have to be mainstreamed.
However, it can be effectively employed at the service
delivery end in sectors such as education, health,
water and sanitation, rural livelihood generation etc.
Since payments can only be made upon ‘veriable’
measurement of results, intangible results, which may
constitute a signicant proportion of CFR outcomes,
may not be well recognized and rewarded. Hence,
special efforts are necessary in order not to miss on
the intangible results. RBF could result in additional
costs due to its rigorous nature of data collection for
monitoring and evaluation purposes.
3.5.3 Design insurance measures to
promote risk awareness and buffers
from catastrophic risks
The increasing number of innovation
mechanisms in insurance sector enables development
practitioners to design insurance programs for
addressing CFRs. Depending on the CFR in question,
unemployment insurance, disaster insurance,
social insurance, health insurance, and other social
protection programs can provide enough buffer to
societies, governments and private sector entities. For
example, the Government of the Philippines has been
implementing a mandatory overseas workers insurance
program (Overseas Filipino Worker Insurance) that
15
Physical (or Hard) infrastructure is one
of the key pillars to facilitate socio-
economic growth through providing
people with basic services to maintain a decent
quality of life and social stability. Providing
basic services, such as water, transport, and
health is crucial in rehabilitating people’s lives
under fragile situations.
e current environment still identies
a serious decit of infrastructure needs globally
and this needs to be solved, particularly
through long-term investment strategies at
global, country, regional, and local levels.
Forecasts of global infrastructure investment
needs will reach US$94 trillion by 2040
with the assumption of a population increase
of 2 billion people and migration of about
46% of rural communities to cities (Global
Infrastructure Outlook, 2017). To optimize
such impact, infrastructure investment is also
important in contributing to climate change
by resilient and green infrastructure.
In addition, to tackle vulnerability and
inequality, it is important to invest soft infrastructure
such as policy, legislation, institutional capacity,
appropriate advanced technology that contribute to
providing long-term benets to people suffering from
CFRs and opportunities for empowering people. This
is because: i) CFRs contribute to social upheaval and
violent conicts as well as making fragile states weaker;
and ii) Climate-Fragility impacts can be mitigated by high
quality infrastructure that ensures economic efciency,
job creation, improved quality of life, and boosted
economic growth. There are various approaches to
make infrastructure a viable asset to achieve the
protects Filipino workers from economic and social
risks while overseas. Such insurance programs can
protect workers from unforeseen incidences that
predispose them to certain risks, including ill health and
unemployment. Similarly, well designed crop insurance
programs and asset insurance programs can protect
individuals from extreme economic losses and reduce
the economic burden on governments, while enabling
communities to understand and evaluate risks well and
become risk aware.
3.5.4 Tap into private capital flows to
bring programmatic efficiency and skill
development
The advantage of engaging private sector
is that they bring efciency and effectiveness to the
social programs due to the capacities and nature of the
private sector operations. Private sector engagement
also brings new skills and technologies to social
development programs including skill development for
community members. Tapping into nancial resources
from the enormous private sector capital for addressing
CFRs is possible by emphasizing the benets such
investments can bring to the private sector. As private
sector investments are constantly seeking investments
in the risky regions, collaborative investments in risk
reduction and other social causes can provide them
a risk free political and social environment, help build
trust with the consumers, and improve the overall
outlook of the rms among investors and governments.
While encouraging the private sector capital
ows, it is important to transparently share risk
information, including that of the social and political
risks that may pose challenges to private sector. While
public-private partnerships have evolved as a proven
means of attracting private sector investments, new
and innovative approaches such as social-impact bonds
(SIBs) have open up new avenues for the private sector
to invest in those social programs that may otherwise be
difcult to expand. As scaling up of pilot social initiatives
are the best candidates for such SIBs, it is important that
the messages from pilot outcomes are well designed
to address questions that private investors may raise.
In addition, private sector can provide matching funds
with successful application in health and food sectors.
All these vehicles can take private sector engagement
beyond the boundary of corporate social responsibility.
3.6 PRINCIPLE 6
Build Resilient and Green Infrastructure
16
SDG goals. Among others, Principle 6 will examine
some of the possible actions around resilient and
green infrastructure and the importance of balanced
investment in soft and hard infrastructure.
3.6.1. Understand the various roles of
infrastructure
One of the reasons for increased vulnerability
caused by climate and fragility-induced impact is the
cascading damage of critical infrastructure. Cities are
becoming denser as people and infrastructure become
more connected and interdependent than before.
Technological developments had created smarter
infrastructure and support systems. On the other hand,
it becomes more important for comprehensive CFR-
focused planning before considering new and expanded
engineering aspects to mitigate such impacts and keep
critical infrastructures operating in climate-fragility
complex risk environment. In particular, integrating
alternative options for providing basic services such as
water and sanitation, energy, food distribution-related
infrastructures, health, and education into building
infrastructure planning are also critical to control
resource allocations in times of emergency. For resilient
city development strategies, land use planning and
zoning are critical to prevent and reduce risks. This also
provides more opportunities to access basic services,
create more jobs, attract new business investment, and
protect the environment, etc.
3.6.2 Enhance infrastructure quality
Infrastructure needs to respond to many
complex challenges from a wide range of development
agendas and apply them to project design, constructions,
operations and maintenance, and other stages of the
operational cycle. In addition, diverse funding sources
for development projects change the landscape of ODA
that urgently calls for global standard of infrastructure
quality to achieve the SDGs. Given this environment,
the initiative for Quality Infrastructure has emerged
to ensure economic efciency from multi-dimensional
viewpoints such as life-cycle cost, safety, resilience
against natural disaster, job creation, while addressing
social and environmental impacts and aligning with
economic and development strategies (from Leaders’
Communique at G20 Hangzhou Summit, 2016).
In the climate and fragility risk context, it is vital
to resume basic service provisions by reconstruction or
rebuilding basic infrastructure swiftly but technically
appropriately to secure livelihoods and keep social
stability. International strategic engagement in short
(emergency period) and long term (recovery to growth
period) is also crucial to improve quality infrastructure
initiatives. As such, infrastructure quality needs to
mitigate CFRs in transparent development planning
and investment and operationalization with cross-
sectoral, as well as inclusive, approaches, to bring new
technical and nancial sources to enhance innovative
infrastructure solutions.
In the context of sustainable development
needs, green infrastructure should play a critical
role to both quality infrastructure and sustainable
economic growth. The denition of green infrastructure
varies but it widely covers infrastructure considering
mitigating environmental impact on natural habitats,
contributing to GHG emission, also investment in clean
energy efforts through energy efciency, transport,
solid waste management, and others (G-24, GGGI). In
the EU, green infrastructure strategies are focused on
delivering economic, social and ecological benets and
contributing to sustainable growth by implementing at
regional, national, and local levels in EU countries (EC).
3.6.3 Install soft components to vitalize
grey hard concrete infrastructure
Hard infrastructure comprises physical assets
with returns on investment that are measurable, but
they are unable to deliver optimal services without
human/institutional and other non-physical assets.
Strengthening such governance and institutional
capacity includes: planning CFR issues in integrated,
sound, mid to long-term policy and strategies;
assessing probability of risks with possible scenarios;
using engineering technical and operational expert
knowledge and experiences; establishing sound
communications channels between local authorities
and communities to identify risks and needs in the
communities; and others.
3.6.4 Secure inclusiveness to
create a stronger and more viable
infrastructure system
As cities need to become more resilient
towards external shocks and extreme risks, as well as
create an environment where no one is left behind,
infrastructure system development also needs to
consider ‘inclusiveness’ of different stakeholders not
only at the service consumers level (downstream) but
also at the development planning level (upper stream).
Infrastructure system is expected to contribute to
poverty reduction and protection of vulnerable groups.
Infrastructure does not always need to be
combined with high-end technologies; there are
17
PROVIDING HIGH EFFICIENCY
AND CLIMATESMART
IRRIGATION IN PAKISTAN
Jalalpur Irrigation Project (approved
2017) will install surface irrigation systems
for improved food security and enhanced
agricultural production for a project area
of 68,263 hectares (ha) of less-productive,
rain-fed agricultural land on the right bank
of the River Jhelum in Punjab, Pakistan.
The project will help improve crop yield and
reduces land degradation due to saline
conditions. Farmers will be organized into
485 water user associations responsible
for the operation and maintenance of
watercourses and structures. The project
includes the provision of high efficiency
irrigation systems for more than 800 ha,
and 20 water storage ponds with solar
pumping stations. Training on climate-smart
irrigation practices and more profitable farm
management, including irrigation schedules
based on crop water requirements and other
techniques to maximize water productivity
will be provided to water user association
and 6,000 farm households.
Source; Asian Development Bank (2018) Sustainability
report 2018, Investing for an Asian and the Pacific
Free of Poverty, Mandaluyong, ADB.
BOX 3
also viable solutions by using local resources and
knowledge, which could provide for more sustainable
solutions. Private sector involvement would also bring
substantial benet and advantage not only for exploring
new funding sources but also for introducing new
innovative technologies. By doing so, a community-
private interface can be encouraged and integrated.
Local government authorities can optimize it to nd
customized infrastructure solutions. To facilitate the
level of understanding on the negative impacts of CFRs
and engage all stakeholders to mitigate such impacts
at local level, local authority could invest resources to
make necessary data available to local communities
and the private sector, so that adequate inputs and
decisions in infrastructure planning and investment
could be made.
3.6.5 Take cross-sectoral approach and
introduce safety-nets
Establishing a good governance system is
urgently required and should be established during
times of non-emergency/crisis, as resuming basic
government’s administrative function is critical to
cope with emergencies. Climate-fragility risk/impact
reduction systems are also required alongside with
humanitarian response mechanisms. This could only
be possible with a good governance system and a silo-
broker approach. A silo-braking (or cross-ministerial)
approach is indispensable for viable planning and
investment decision-making. CFRs related incidences
have no sectoral and geographic administrative
boundaries. A silo-type of approach is needed to
maintain expertise in each concerned agency` as its
strength. But trade-off issues are often never resolved.
As a modality, a single coordinating unit could be used
as one of the approaches to mitigate the silo-culture.
Under the single coordinating unit or leading agencies,
the other concerned agencies would form a consortium.
If the private sector is involved, a business model of the
consortium would be key to bind them and maximize
their contributions. How it should be constituted
depends on the local situation. Legislation setting up
the appropriate unit is critical. Unit staff also needs
to be given clear decision-making authority from their
line ministries. The unit needs to have capability to
assess strategic (infrastructure) needs and prioritize
allocation of limited resources. This would help external
donors avoid overlapping efforts. Sustainability of the
unit could be achieved through forming trust across
unit members, accumulation of knowledge and experts
within the unit, and assessment of action plans also
need to be implemented.
Finally, to cope with CFRs investing money in
building new infrastructure and retrotting existing
infrastructure is not enough to sustain individual
and social activities. Shocks from extreme events
bring devastating impacts on people and society.
Without safety nets, such as solid insurance schemes,
incorporating CFR mitigation strategies, disaster
incidents can easily fuel grievances that lead to a great
social upheaval and deprivation of resiliency towards
reconstruction of society and economic activities.
18
Photo by Orendain
19
Climate change impacts on natural and human systems are increasing
and affecting fragile economic, social and political systems. However,
the existing approaches in development programing currently cover
CFRs insufficiently.
The six approaches proposed in this document address the
disproportionality that climate change impacts and contribute to
sustainable development that no one is left behind. Since CFRs are
deeply interrelated with various development agenda, development
assistance organizations, line ministries, and civil society organizations
need to take cross-sectoral and silo-breaking approaches.
REFERENCES
Adger, W. N. (2006) ‘Vulnerability’, Global Environmental
Change, 16(3).
Crawford, A., Dazé, A., Hammill, A., Parry, J., and Zamudio, A.
N. (2015). Promoting climate-resilient peacebuilding in fragile
states, Manitoba: International Institute for Sustainable
Development.
Alexander, D. E. (2013) Resilience and disaster risk reduction:
An etymological journey, Natural Hazards and Earth System
Sciences, 13.
Bai, X. et al. (2018) Six research priorities for cities and
climate change, Nature, 555(7694), pp. 23–25.
Borah, A. (2017) From trafcking to unemployment
Climate change hits women in the Himalayas. A new climate
for peace, https://www.newclimateforpeace.org/blog/
trafcking-unemployment-%E2%80%93-climate-change-hits-
women-himalayas.
DFID (2010) Working effectively in conict-affected and fragile
situations, Brieng paper B: Do no harm, London: DFID.
Djalante, R. et al. (2013) Pathways for adaptive and integrated
disaster resilience, Natural Hazards, pp. 2105–2135.
DuBois, M. and Wake, C. (2015) The Ebola in West Africa:
Exposing the politics and culture of international aid. HPG
Working Paper. London: ODI.
Global Infrastructure Hub by Oxford Economics (2017) Global
infrastructure outlook, Infrastructure investment needs 50
countries, 7 sectors to 2040.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs (2017a) Analysis and proposal
of foreign policies regarding the impact of climate change
on fragility in the Asia-Pacic Region: With focus on
natural disasters in the region, http://www.mofa.go.jp/
les/000287344.pdf.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs (2017b) Roundtable seminar on
climate change and fragility implications on international
security. http://www.mofa.go.jp/les/000226918.pdf
Hanatani A., Gomez O., Kawaguchi C. (2018) The Continuum
beyond the humanitarian-development nexus, Hanatani A,
Gomez O., Kawaguchi C. (Ed). Crisis management beyond the
humanitarian-development nexus. London: Routledge.
IFRC (2018) Leaving no one behind. www.ifrc.org
Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (IDMC) (2015)
Global estimates 2015: People displaced by disasters.
Geneva: IDMC.
IPCC (2018) Summary for policymakers. In: Global warming
of 1.5°C. An IPCC special report on the impacts of global
warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related
global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of
strengthening the global response to the threat of climate
change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate
poverty [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D.
Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia,
C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J.B.R. Matthews, Y. Chen,
X. Zhou, M.I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, and
T. Watereld (eds.)]. World Meteorological Organization,
Geneva, Switzerland, 32 pp.
Ishiwatari M. (2017) Climate and fragility risks in Japanese
development cooperation: Implications of adaptation and
peace: Building experiences, Climate Security In Japan
Discussion Paper, Institute for Global Environmental
Strategies.
Islam, S. N. & Winkel, J. (2017) Climate change and social
inequality. DESA Working Paper No. 152. ST/ESA/2017/
DWP/152. New York: UNDESA.
Matyas, D. and Pelling, M. (2015) Positioning resilience for
2015: the role of resistance, incremental adjustment and
transformation in disaster risk management policy, Disasters,
39.
Moon, S., Sridhar, D., Pate, M.A., Jha, A.K., Clinton, C.,
Delaunay, S., Edwin, V., Fallah, M., Fidler, D.P., Garrett, L. and
Goosby, E., (2015) Will Ebola change the game? Ten essential
reforms before the next pandemic. The report of the Harvard-
20
21
LSHTM Independent Panel on the Global Response to Ebola.
The Lancet, 386(10009), pp.2204-2221.
OECD (2010) Conict and fragility: Do no harm-international
support for state building, Paris: OECD.
Olsson, L., M. Opondo, P. Tschakert, A. Agrawal, S.H. Eriksen,
S. Ma, L.N. Perch, and S.A. Zakieldeen, (2014) Livelihoods and
poverty. In: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, adaptation, and
vulnerability. Part A: Global and sectoral aspects. Contribution
of working group II to the Fifth assessment report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Field, C.B., V.R.
Barros, D.J. Dokken, K.J. Mach, M.D. Mastrandrea, T.E. Bilir,
M. Chatterjee, K.L. Ebi, Y.O. Estrada, R.C. Genova, B. Girma,
E.S. Kissel, A.N. Levy, S. MacCracken, P.R. Mastrandrea, and
L.L.White (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 793-832.
Peters K. (2018) Accelerating Sendai Framework
implementation in Asia: Disaster risk reduction in contexts of
violence, conict and fragility, London: ODI.
Ranghieri, F., & Ishiwatari, M. (2014) Learning from
Megadisasters: Lessons from the Great East Japan
Earthquake. Washington DC: World Bank.
Rigaud, Kanta Kumari; de Sherbinin, Alex; Jones, Bryan;
Bergmann, Jonas; Clement, Viviane; Ober, Kayly; Schewe,
Jacob; Adamo, Susana; McCusker, Brent; Heuser, Silke;
Midgley, Amelia. (2018) Groundswell: Preparing for internal
climate migration. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Rüttinger, L., Smith, D., Stang, D., Tänzler, D., Vivekananda,
J. (2015) A New climate for peace: Taking action on climate
and fragility risks. Executive Summary. adelphi, International
Alert, The Wilson Center, The European Union Institute for
Security Studies. Germany.
Schleussner, C. F., Donges, J. F., Donner, R. V., & Schellnhuber,
H. J. (2016) Armed-conict risks enhanced by climate-related
disasters in ethnically fractionalized countries. Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(33), 9216-9221.
USAID (2018) The intersection of global fragility and climate
risks, Washington DC: USAID.
UN (2015) Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction
2015–2030, Geneva: UNISDR.
UNDESA (2016) World economic and social survey 2016.
Climate change resilience: An opportunity for reducing
inequalities. E/2016/50/Rev.1. ST/ESA/363. New York,
USA: UNDESA.
UNDESA (2018) World urbanization prospects: The 2018
revision.
UNDP (1997) Human development report 1997, New York,
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
UNDP (2018) Inequality-adjusted human development index,
http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/inequality-adjusted-human-
development-index-ihdi
UNDP (undated) Support to the implementation of
the 2030 agenda for sustainable development goals
2030 http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/
sustainable-development-goals/goal-16-peace-justice-and-
stronginstitutions.html
UNESCO (2009) IWRM Guidelines at river basin level, Paris:
UNESCO.
UN HABITAT (2015-2016) Slum almanac 2015-2016. Tracking
improvement in the lives of slum dwellers. UNON, Publishing
Services Section, Nairobi, ISO 14001:2004-certied. D1 No:
15-02822/200 copies/jw.
UNHABITAT (2016) World cities report, Urbanization and
development: Emerging futures, Nairobi: UNHABITAT.
UNISDR (2009) UNISDR Terminology on disaster risk
reduction. Geneva: UNISDR.
UNISDR (2015) Making development sustainable: The future
of disaster risk management. Global assessment report
(GAR) on disaster risk reduction. Geneva: UNISDR.
Vivekananda, J., Fetzek, S., Mobjork, M., Sawas, A., Wolfmaier,
S. (2017). Action on climate and security risks: Review
of progress 2017. Netherlands Institute of International
Relations ‘Clingendael’, adelphi, SIPRI and the Center for
Climate and Security. The Netherlands.
Winsemius, H., Jongman, B., Veldkamp, T., Hallegatte, S.,
Bangalore, M., and Ward, P. J. (2015) Disaster risk, climate
change, and poverty: assessing the global exposure of poor
people to oods and droughts. Policy research working paper
no. WPS 7480. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.
... The IPCC has also stressed that people who are socially, culturally, politically, institutionally, economically or otherwise marginalized are most at risk and vulnerable to climate change (IPCC 2014). There is more evidence showing that these marginalized groups of people suffer disproportionately from both direct and indirect effects of climate hazards, whereas earlier alluded to, loss of crops as an example is a direct loss, but subsequent rise in food prices and degraded diets are possible indirect impacts (Ishiwatari et al. 2019). Detailed reports of estimates by country and region have indicated that the Asian region and Africa would be the two regions most harmed by changing climate (UNFCCC 2007;AMCEN 2011). ...
Chapter
Full-text available
This chapter provides an overview of Indonesian youth and young professionals’ (YYP) engagement in Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and explores how the current national framework enables the environment for the YYP to best contribute to reducing disaster risks. DRR activities involving YYP have been growing for years. However, many of them are scattered as there is no official DRR platform exists focusing on youth and young professionals. Thus, the overall potentials of YYP for DRR have not been well utilized as a part of the nation’s resilience building. The first part of the proposed chapter will update the current academic discourse on youth engagement in DRR and general characteristics of Indonesian YYP engagement in DRR. The second part of the chapter will discuss the interlinkages between Indonesian policy on disaster management and youth development as well as discussion on the potential role of youth. The third part of the chapter will exhibit insight from U-INSPIRE, a platform of youth and young professionals working on innovation, science, and technology for resiliency that supports DRR policy and action at the local, national, and international level in line with Sendai Framework. Given the ability of U-INSPIRE to mobilize Science, Engineering, Technology, and Innovation (SETI) actions from YYP at all phases within the disaster management cycle in Indonesia since its establishment, as well as diffusion and uptake from YYP of other countries to establish their own U-INSPIRE, potentially this approach can become a model on leveraging YYP engagement in DRR.
Chapter
Climate change is recognized as inevitable and one of the most complex challenges that humankind faces now and, in the future. Simulation models have predicted increased atmospheric temperatures, an increase in intense rain events as well as a reduced number of rain days, leading to increased drought risk and hampered crop production. Indeed, the effects of drought and heat stress associated with climate change are expected to be more severe in the tropics and sub-tropics where temperatures are already quite high. Poor and marginalized segments of society are especially vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change. They tend to have limited resources, the capacity to adapt, and hence their livelihoods tend to be highly dependent on natural resources which are sensitive to climatic variability. Just as different countries and groups in society have varying degrees of susceptibility to the adverse impacts of climate change, men and women also have different coping and adaptive capacities that lend themselves to different vulnerabilities and responses. Therefore, gender equality is a fundamental part of increased resilience to disasters for improved livelihoods. This review chapter is centred on cases of marginalized third world countries in Southern Africa and the Asia Pacific with the specific objective of understanding the nexus between gender, climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction with a specific focus on agriculture. With this review, we intend to provide insight into gender dimensions for recovery in developing countries that is often overlooked by national and international policymakers, as well as bridging the gap between the policymakers, researchers and farmers.
Book
Full-text available
In addressing humanitarian crises, the international community has long understood the need to extend beyond providing immediate relief, and to engage with long-term recovery activities and the prevention of similar crises in the future. However, this continuum from short-term relief to rehabilitation and development has often proved difficult to achieve. This book aims to shed light on the continuum of humanitarian crisis management, particularly from the viewpoint of major bilateral donors and agencies. Focusing on cases of armed conflicts and disasters, the authors describe the evolution of approaches and lessons learnt in practice when moving from emergency relief to recovery and prevention of future crises. Drawing on an extensive research project conducted by the Japan International Cooperation Agency Research Institute, this book compares how a range of international organizations, bilateral cooperation agencies, NGOs, and research institutes have approached the continuum in international humanitarian crisis management. The book draws on six humanitarian crises case studies, each resulting from armed conflict or natural disasters: Timor-Leste, South Sudan, the Syrian crisis, Hurricane Mitch in Honduras, the Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami in Indonesia, and Typhoon Yolanda. The book concludes by proposing a common conceptual framework designed to appeal to different stakeholders involved in crisis management. Following on from the World Humanitarian Summit, where a new way of working on the humanitarian-development nexus was highlighted as one of five major priority trends, this book is a timely contribution to the debate which should interest researchers of humanitarian studies, conflict and peace studies, and disaster risk-management.
Article
Full-text available
Xuemei Bai and colleagues call for long-term, cross-disciplinary studies to reduce carbon emissions and urban risks from global warming.
Technical Report
Full-text available
Human security will be progressively threatened by climate change, consequently development cooperation agencies such as JICA need to adopt approaches to strengthen resilience to climate-fragility risks. Currently, JICA's approaches to climate change adaptation and peacebuilding are not connected enough. There is a need for integrating assessments of climate risk and peace-building impacts as well as science, engineering and socioeconomic approaches. Furthermore, to address climate-fragility risks more broadly, Japan can build on its long history and extensive experience, for example in the water sector and disaster risk reduction.
Article
Full-text available
This paper examines the development over historical time of the meaning and uses of the term resilience. The objective is to deepen our understanding of how the term came to be adopted in disaster risk reduction and resolve some of the conflicts and controversies that have arisen when it has been used. The paper traces the development of resilience through the sciences, humanities, and legal and political spheres. It considers how mechanics passed the word to ecology and psychology, and how from there it was adopted by social research and sustainability science. As other authors have noted, as a concept, resilience involves some potentially serious conflicts or contradictions, for example between stability and dynamism, or between dynamic equilibrium (homeostasis) and evolution. Moreover, although the resilience concept works quite well within the confines of general systems theory, in situations in which a systems formulation inhibits rather than fosters explanation, a different interpretation of the term is warranted. This may be the case for disaster risk reduction, which involves transformation rather than preservation of the "state of the system". The article concludes that the modern conception of resilience derives benefit from a rich history of meanings and applications, but that it is dangerous – or at least potentially disappointing – to read to much into the term as a model and a paradigm.
Article
Full-text available
Significance Ethnic divides play a major role in many armed conflicts around the world and might serve as predetermined conflict lines following rapidly emerging societal tensions arising from disruptive events like natural disasters. We find evidence in global datasets that risk of armed-conflict outbreak is enhanced by climate-related disaster occurrence in ethnically fractionalized countries. Although we find no indications that environmental disasters directly trigger armed conflicts, our results imply that disasters might act as a threat multiplier in several of the world’s most conflict-prone regions.
Article
Full-text available
The west African Ebola epidemic that began in 2013 exposed deep inadequacies in the national and international institutions responsible for protecting the public from the far-reaching human, social, economic, and political consequences of infectious disease outbreaks. The Ebola epidemic raised a crucial question: what reforms are needed to mend the fragile global system for outbreak prevention and response, rebuild confidence, and prevent future disasters? To address this question, the Harvard Global Health Institute and the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine jointly launched the Independent Panel on the Global Response to Ebola. Panel members from academia, think tanks, and civil society have collectively reviewed the worldwide response to the Ebola outbreak. After difficult and lengthy deliberation, we concluded that major reforms are both warranted and feasible. The Panel's conclusions off er a roadmap of ten interrelated recommendations across four thematic areas: 1 Preventing major disease outbreaks All countries need a minimum level of core capacity to detect, report, and respond rapidly to outbreaks. The shortage of such capacities in Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone enabled Ebola to develop into a national, and worldwide, crisis. Recommendation 1: The global community must agree on a clear strategy to ensure that governments invest domestically in building such capacities and mobilise adequate external support to supplement eff orts in poorer countries. This plan must be supported by a transparent central system for tracking and monitoring the results of these resource flows. Additionally, all governments must agree to regular, independent, external assessment of their core capacities. Recommendation 2: WHO should promote early reporting of outbreaks by commending countries that rapidly and publicly share information, while publishing lists of countries that delay reporting. Funders should create economic incentives for early reporting by committing to disburse emergency funds rapidly to assist countries when outbreaks strike and compensating for economic losses that might result. Additionally, WHO must confront governments that implement trade and travel restrictions without scientific justification, while developing industry-wide cooperation frameworks to ensure private firms such as airlines and shipping companies continue to provide crucial services during emergencies. 2 Responding to major disease outbreaks When preventive measures do not succeed, outbreaks can cross borders and surpass national capacities. Ebola exposed WHO as unable to meet its responsibility for responding to such situations and alerting the global community. Recommendation 3: A dedicated centre for outbreak response with strong technical capacity, a protected budget, and clear lines of accountability should be created at WHO, governed by a separate Board. Recommendation 4: A transparent and politically protected WHO Standing Emergency Committee should be delegated with the responsibility for declaring public health emergencies. Recommendation 5: An independent UN Accountability Commission should be created to do systemwide assessments of worldwide responses to major disease outbreaks. 3 Research: production and sharing of data, knowledge, and technology Rapid knowledge production and dissemination are essential for outbreak prevention and response, but reliable systems for sharing epidemiological, genomic, and clinical data were not established during the Ebola outbreak. Recommendation 6: Governments, the scientific research community, industry, and non-governmental organisations must begin to develop a framework of norms and rules operating both during and between outbreaks to enable and accelerate research, govern the conduct of research, and ensure access to the benefits of research. Recommendation 7: Additionally, research funders should establish a worldwide research and development financing facility for outbreak-relevant drugs, vaccines, diagnostics, and non-pharmaceutical supplies (such as personal protective equipment) when commercial incentives are not appropriate.
Technical Report
Full-text available
People living in poverty are particularly vulnerable to shocks, including those caused by natural disasters such as floods and droughts. Previous studies in local contexts have shown that poor people are also often overrepresented in hazardprone areas. However, systematic evidence across countries demonstrating this finding is lacking. This paper analyzes at the country level whether poor people are disproportionally exposed to floods and droughts, and how this exposure may change in a future climate. To this end, household survey data with spatial identifiers from 52 countries are combined with present-day and future flood and drought hazard maps. The paper defines and calculates a “poverty exposure bias” and finds support that poor people are often overexposed to droughts and urban floods. For floods, no such signal is found for rural households, suggesting that different mechanisms—such as land scarcity—are more important drivers in urban areas. The poverty exposure bias does not change significantly under future climate scenarios, although the absolute number of people potentially exposed to floods or droughts can increase or decrease significantly, depending on the scenario and the region. The study finds some evidence of regional patterns: in particular, many countries in Africa exhibit a positive poverty exposure bias for floods and droughts. For these hot spots, implementing risk-sensitive land-use and development policies that protect poor people should be a priority.
Technical Report
Full-text available
"A New Climate for Peace" is an independent report commissioned by members of the G7 Member States. The report identifies seven compound climate-fragility risks that pose serious threats to the stability of states and societies in the decades ahead. Based on a thorough assessment of existing policies on climate change adaptation, development cooperation and humanitarian aid, and peacebuilding, the report recommends that the G7 take concrete action, both as individual members and jointly, to tackle climate-fragility risks and increase the resilience of states and societies to them. Stakeholders across five continents have engaged in discussions on risk perception, preventive policy approaches and strategies as part of a series of dialogues and consultations. The results of this process are also part of the study.
Book
Full-text available
The successes of Japan’s disaster risk management (DRM) system as well as the ways in which that system could be improved are reflected in the lessons drawn from the Great East Japan Earthquake (GEJE) and presented in the initial reports from the Learning from Megadisasters project. The GEJE was the first disaster ever recorded that included an earthquake, a tsunami, a nuclear power plant accident, a power supply failure, and a large-scale disruption of supply chains. Extreme disasters underscore the need for a holistic approach to DRM. Single-sector development planning cannot address the complexity of problems posed by natural hazards, let alone megadisasters, nor can such planning build resilience to threats. Faced with complex risks, Japan chose to build resilience by investing in preventative structural and nonstructural measures; nurturing a strong culture of knowledge and learning from past disasters; engaging in wise DRM regulation, legislation, and enforcement; and promoting cooperation among multiple stakeholders, between government agencies and ministries, between the private sector and the government, and among multiple levels of governance, from local to national to international. The book consolidates a set of 36 Knowledge Notes, research results of a joint study undertaken by the Government of Japan and the World Bank. These notes highlight key lessons learned in seven DRM thematic clusters—structural measures; nonstructural measures; emergency response; reconstruction planning; hazard and risk information and decision making; the economics of disaster risk, risk management, and risk financing; and recovery and relocation. Aimed at sharing Japanese cutting-edge knowledge with practitioners and decision makers, this book provides valuable guidance to other disaster-prone countries for mainstreaming DRM in their development policies and weathering their own natural disasters.