Скачать презентацию Emergency Capacity Building ECB Project A collaborative effort Скачать презентацию Emergency Capacity Building ECB Project A collaborative effort

053a9e83bae6112edc0495644747602a.ppt

  • Количество слайдов: 16

Emergency Capacity Building (ECB) Project A collaborative effort of the Interagency Working Group on Emergency Capacity Building (ECB) Project A collaborative effort of the Interagency Working Group on Emergency Capacity (IWG)

Interagency Working Group (IWG) -7 Member Organizations CARE International Catholic Relief Services (CRS) International Interagency Working Group (IWG) -7 Member Organizations CARE International Catholic Relief Services (CRS) International Rescue Committee (IRC) Mercy Corps (MC) Oxfam–GB (OGB) Save the Children–US World Vision International (WVI) - Emergency/Humanitarian Directors & CEOs

The Emergency Capacity Building Project An activity of the Interagency Working Group on Emergency The Emergency Capacity Building Project An activity of the Interagency Working Group on Emergency Capacity (IWG) Funded by: The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation ($5. 12 m) and Microsoft Corporation ($1 m) Two-year time frame: ending 31 -Mar-07 Four initiatives: 1) Staff capacity, 2) Accountability and Impact Measurement, 3) Risk Reduction, 4) Information and Technology Requirements

Overarching Principles of the ECB Project l l l Benefits intended for the entire Overarching Principles of the ECB Project l l l Benefits intended for the entire humanitarian community. Committed to transparency and sharing of research with as wide an audience as possible. Efforts not duplicative – will work through or with existing bodies or networks to build synergy and reinforce those efforts.

Initiative 3: Risk Reduction “the key to putting us all out of business” Initiative 3: Risk Reduction “the key to putting us all out of business”

Initiative 3: Risk Reduction - Context “only 4% of the estimated $10 billion in Initiative 3: Risk Reduction - Context “only 4% of the estimated $10 billion in annual humanitarian assistance is devoted to prevention” and yet “every dollar spent on risk reduction saves between $5 and $10 in economic losses from disasters” - Eric Schwartz, The Boston Globe, 23 rd March 2006

Initiative 3: Risk Reduction - Goal ECB Overall Project Goal: To improve the speed, Initiative 3: Risk Reduction - Goal ECB Overall Project Goal: To improve the speed, quality, and ultimate effectiveness of the humanitarian community in saving lives, improving the welfare, and protecting the rights of people in the emergencies ECB 3 Initiative Goal: To improve capacity for risk reduction among IWG agency staff, affected communities, and local and national authorities

Initiative 3: Risk Reduction - Outcomes & Results Outcomes l IWG agencies will have Initiative 3: Risk Reduction - Outcomes & Results Outcomes l IWG agencies will have implemented a variety of promising community-based DRR projects in at least 3 pilot countries, and disseminated the results widely l Targeted local communities in the 3 pilot countries are better prepared to respond effectively to disasters l Local and/or national authorities in the 3 pilot countries, and/or at least 1 academic institution are more aware of DRR principles Results l Models and promising practices for disaster risk reduction designed and tested in three pilot countries l Hands-on training package for program staff and community members in disaster risk reduction l Advocacy initiatives piloted in three countries to promote the acceptance of and commitment to disaster risk reduction principles by local and/or national authorities and other key stakeholders

Initiative 3: Risk Reduction - Strategic Approach l “Don’t reinvent the wheel” l A Initiative 3: Risk Reduction - Strategic Approach l “Don’t reinvent the wheel” l A listening and learning approach that embraces innovation l Focusing on collaborative and value-added work l Building effective local-level partnerships, and engaging extant risk reduction initiatives, networks, and resources l Make a better case for investment in preparedness to donors

Initiative 3: Risk Reduction - Action Areas Research/ Review Pilot Projects Training Advocacy Initiative 3: Risk Reduction - Action Areas Research/ Review Pilot Projects Training Advocacy

Initiative 3: Risk Reduction - Field Focus …. . 3 pilot countries l Ethiopia Initiative 3: Risk Reduction - Field Focus …. . 3 pilot countries l Ethiopia (led by SC-US) - 20+ years of emergency program experience l Guatemala (led by Mercy Corps) - Post-Hurricane Mitch & CAMI work l Indonesia (led by CRS) - Post-tsunami recovery N. B. All 3 pilot countries have been subject to emergencies during 2005/6.

Initiative 3: Risk Reduction - 9 field pilot projects ($630, 000 total) Ethiopia (led Initiative 3: Risk Reduction - 9 field pilot projects ($630, 000 total) Ethiopia (led by SC-US) 1) CRS: Flood risk mitigation (Dire Dawa Admin. Council & Shinile Zone, Somali Region) 2) Mercy Corps: DRR strategies in CARE's, CRS' and MC's operational areas (W & E Harrarghe) 3) SC-US: "Writeshop" project for a Handbook on Disaster Risk Reduction (with IIRR) 4) SC-Canada: Sensitization workshop Guatemala (led by Mercy Corps) 1) CARE & Mercy Corps: Strengthening preparedness and risk reduction capacities (Senahú, Alta Verapaz and surrounding communities) 2) CRS: Community & municipal strengthening of risk management & disaster preparedness 3) Mercy Corps & SC-US: Integrated Risk Management as a Tool for Reduction and Mitigation of Disasters (Santa Catarina Ixtahuacán, Nahualá, San Lucas Tolimán y Santiago Atitlán) 4) Oxfam-GB: Strengthening emergency preparedness capacities (Nuevo Amanecer, zona 21, Guatemala City) Indonesia (led by CRS) 1) Mercy Corps: Community-based disaster risk reduction capacity building, with KOGAMI (Padang, W. Sumatra)

Initiative 3: Risk Reduction - Learning Greatest Benefits of Collaboration: l Advocacy - focus Initiative 3: Risk Reduction - Learning Greatest Benefits of Collaboration: l Advocacy - focus on raising the bar l Support - communities of practice l Innovation Most Significant Learning: l Build on existing knowledge & experience l Integrated community-based approach l Advocacy for increased DRR resource investment l Connect 1) HQ with field; and 2) intra-agency coordination and learning

What Have We Learnt? l l l TIME: Time spent in setting up collaborative What Have We Learnt? l l l TIME: Time spent in setting up collaborative processes should not be underestimated. TRUST: Trust is essential – nothing moves forward without it. FIELD UP: Buy in from the field is key for sustainability. LARGE INVESTMENT: Organizational learning requires a large investment of staff time. INTRA-AGENCY BUY-IN: Engagement by senior management and across departments is critical.

What Next? ECB Phase II! What Next? ECB Phase II!

For further details, please check out http: //www. ecbproject. org Thank you! For further details, please check out http: //www. ecbproject. org Thank you!