REVIEW OF LAC pre-PDNA
Processes
Lessons Learned and Key
Reflections
United Nations Development Programme
Materials Course or Module Title – Presentation NN – Block NN – Slide1/NN (number of slides) – 8 April 2015
OVERVIEW
• During the last decade more than 30 post-disaster recovery
processes have been supported by BCPR in LAC.
• Regarding the post-disaster assessments ant the relation
with WB and ECLAC, we can group it in four stages:
• First Stage (1998-2004): Indiference
• Second Stage (2004-2006):Approaching: Do you want to
dance with me?
• Third Stage: (2006-2008): Distance: do we listen the
same music?
• Forth Stage: (2008-2010): Forced marriage: is this love?
Materials Course or Module Title – Presentation NN – Block NN – Slide2/NN (number of slides) – 8 April 2015
First Stage (1998-2004): Indiference (1)
•
Major events: Hurricane Mitch (Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras,
Nicaragua), Hurricane George (Haiti, Dominican Republic), Hurricane
Isidore and Lili (Cuba), Venezuela floods and landslides, Peru
earthquake, El Salvador earthquake, Bolivia floods, Bolivia landslide, etc.
•
UNDP assessment and programming strategies: Use of existing
capacities in country offices to have presence in the affected areas and to
orient key stakeholders in order to influence the agenda. Externals play a
catalytic role.
•
Key examples: Deployment of UNV´s and project personnel to the
affected areas, ad-hoc surveys, interviews with key stakeholders, national
stakeholders consultation and reflection journeys: to facilitate consensual
analysis, prioritization and commitment (Managua declaration)
•
Funding: First steps on the regular provision and use of TRAC 1.1.3. cat
II ; management of OCHA cash grants and in-kind contribution.
Materials Course or Module Title – Presentation NN – Block NN – Slide3/NN (number of slides) – 8 April 2015
First Stage (1998-2004): Indiference (2)
•
Results: Territorial assessments and UNDP projects (livelihoods,
housing, local governance and DRR), national strategies and UNDP
programs (DRR: ILS, capacity building), implementing partnerships with
donors and NGO´s, reorientation of existing programs and development
the new projects; institutional transformation and capacity development
processes supported by UNDP. Incidence in policies.
•
Other stakeholders: Weak presence of OCHA and UNDAC teams,
ECLAC assessments with the presence of other UN agencies (ELS),
covered by UNDP (TRAC 113 cat II); WB deploys experts for vulnerability
assessment and programming (based on infraestructure). Use of ECLAC
assessments for reprogramation of credit tails, New WB loan window on
DRR (collapse incipient institutions). IDB initiates plan Puebla-Panama.
•
Relations between stakeholders: make your own bussiness
Materials Course or Module Title – Presentation NN – Block NN – Slide4/NN (number of slides) – 8 April 2015
Second Stage (2004-2006): Do you want
to dance with me? (1)
•
Major events: Caribbean Hurricanes (Haiti, Dominican Republic,
Granada, Jamaica, Cuba), Guyana floods, Bolivia floods, Vulcanic
eruption Ecuador, etc. At global level: Pakistan earthquake, Tsunami,
Kobe world summit.
•
UNDP assessment and programming strategies: Use of existing
capacities in CO´s, inter-agency assessments and recovery frameworks,
increased presence of externals that guide the intervention. CO´s playing
a lead/coordination role for recovery. Regional roster and mechanisms for
deployment
•
Key examples: Bolivia recovery framework, Granada recovery support,
Ecuador recovery framework, DR programme, Cuba capacity building
programme
•
Funding: TRAC 1.1.3. cat II totally established ; management of OCHA
cash grants and in-kind contribution, increased funding from donors.
Materials Course or Module Title – Presentation NN – Block NN – Slide5/NN (number of slides) – 8 April 2015
Second Stage (2004-2006): Do you want
to dance with me? (2)
•
Results: Joint assessments Gov/Agencies SNU, recovery frameworks,
UNDP projects (livelihoods, minor infraestructure, housing, local
governance and DRR), Incidence in policies.
•
Other stakeholders: Increased presence of OCHA and UNDAC teams,
participation in ECLAC assessments that continues covered by UNDP
(TRAC 113 cat II); WB deploys experts for vulnerability assessment and
programming (based on infraestructure). Use of ECLAC assessments for
reprogramation of credit tails, UNDP and EC initiate partnership on DRR
(DR project, Guyana, Cuba…)..
•
Relations between stakeholders: ECLAC is highly supported by UNDP in
the Caribbean, training workshops for governments are covered,
assessments and lessons learned exercises are funded. ECLAC utilizes
UNDP materials and take all the credit (Ej: Guyana), UNDP capitalize on
ECLAC (DR).UNDP incorporate HDR people to the ECLAC assessments
to make it more relevant for the country, not credit is given (Guatemala),
Materials Course or Module Title – Presentation NN – Block NN – Slide6/NN (number of slides) – 8 April 2015
Third Stage: (2006-2008) Distance:
do we listen the same music? (1)
•
Major events: Bolivia floods, Guatemala and Mexico Floods, Uruguay
Floods, Peru earhquake, Hurrican Felix Nicaragua, Surinam Floods, Haiti
Floods, Dominican Republic Floods, Ecuador Floods. At global level:
Humanitarian Reform, First steps of cluster system, CERF, PDNA rumor,
BCPR change management process.
•
UNDP assessment and programming strategies: CO´s devoted to
coordination and logistics for the externals, increased presence of
specialists to coordinate, assess and programme, inclusion of projects in
flash appeal and CERF to mobilize $ from humanitarian windows. Not
clarity on UNDP role on response and recovery
•
Key examples: Peru Flash appeal and recovery process (no ECLAC),
Tabasco and Chiapas (ECLAC, local presence), Nicaragua inter-agency
assessment (no ECLAC), DR assessments and programme (divorced
from ECLAC), Ecuador recovery assessment and programme (no
ECLAC).
Materials Course or Module Title – Presentation NN – Block NN – Slide7/NN (number of slides) – 8 April 2015
Third Stage: (2006-2008) Distance:
do we listen the same music? (2)
•
Funding: TRAC 1.1.3. cat II and cat III increased, access to humanitarian
windows. No bilateral resource mobilization channeled through UNDP.
•
Results: joint assessments with the SNU (Mexico, DR, Nicaragua) UNDP
projectss (livelihoods, minor infraestructure, housing), Minor incidence in
policies.
•
Other stakeholders: Increased presence of OCHA and UNDAC teams,
ECLAC assessments cost-shared with IDB or WB or not covered by
UNDP (except Mexico).
•
Relations between stakeholders: ECLAC is more agressively promoting
themselves as lead agency for PDNA (name, letter to gov.), many RC are
pissed off (Peru, Mexico). No relation with WB
Materials Course or Module Title – Presentation NN – Block NN – Slide8/NN (number of slides) – 8 April 2015
Forth Stage: (2008-2010): Forced marriage:
is this love? (1)
•
Major events: Costa Rica earthquake, Haiti floods, Cuba hurricanes, Haiti
earthquake, El Salvador Floods, Chile earthquake. At global level: Cluster
system, Reform, early recovery more established, EC/WB/UNDP
agreement for PDNA, Surge teams, Ex Rep roster, PDNA first
methodology. PDNA in Haiti (08-10), PDNA in El Salvador, PDNA
transformed in DALA+ in Chile
•
UNDP assessment and programming strategies: CO´s continue focused
on coordination and logistics for the externals, increased presence of
specialists to coordinate, assess and programme, inclusion of projects in
flash appeal and CERF to mobilize $ from humanitarian windows. UNDP
role oriented to Early Recovery. Development of tools for ER: guidelines,
UNDP ER policy, UNDP recovery assessment methodology (LAC
region). No clear UNDP post-disaster identity at CO level
Materials Course or Module Title – Presentation NN – Block NN – Slide9/NN (number of slides) – 8 April 2015
Forth Stage: (2008-2010): Forced marriage:
is this love? (2)
•
Key examples: Cuba response and recovery plan led by OCHA, Haiti
cash for work programme (local) and PDNAs (external) , Costa Rica
Recovery framework led by government (no ECLAC), El Salvador PDNA,
DR programme,
•
Funding: TRAC 1.1.3. cat II and cat III increased, access to humanitarian
windows. No major bilateral resource mobilization.
•
Results: UN joint programme in Cuba and CR, CERF resources in Cuba,
ELS, lack of overall strategy for UNDP, Minor incidence in policies.
•
Other stakeholders: OCHA and UNDAC teams completely established,
strengthened partnership between ECLAC and the World Bank.
•
Relations between stakeholders: Forced marriage.
Materials Course or Module Title – Presentation NN – Block NN – Slide10/NN (number of slides) – 8 April 2015
Conclusions
•
UNDP CO´s have been accumulating post-disaster experiences in the
last decade but there is room for an strengthened CO´s position for
recovery. The strategic approach has been decreasing for more
fragmented intervention given the more centralized agenda and top-down
approach..
•
The Humanitarian Reform has increased the confusion about roles and
responsabilities of the externals vis a vis the CO : do they come to
support of to take over? (OCHA´s/ECLAC´s example)
•
How to ensure that PDNA´s will constitute a basis for the posterior CO´s
work. Need to revise the corporate agreement and design strategies for
a better capitalization at CO level.
•
Wider mandate, coordination functions, firewall with UN agencies: major
disadvantage with strongly focused stakeholders as the WB.
•
Are we giving the rigth steps to build capacities to face recovery
processes on a way that transform while repairs? (UNDP tools)
Materials Course or Module Title – Presentation NN – Block NN – Slide11/NN (number of slides) – 8 April 2015
Lessons Learned
1. What worked? Effect of joint effort.
2. What didn’t work? Main constraints of joint approach.
3. What needs to be improved? What capacities are needed in govt? RCs?HCs, WB
and EC counterparts? UN system? Others?
4. Was guidance provided by headquarters? Was it useful? Why/why not?
5. How much did your institution invest in the PDNA (financial, technical, logistical,
resources)?
6. How much did counterparts invest in the PDNA (financial, technical, logistical,
resources)?
Materials Course or Module Title – Presentation NN – Block NN – Slide12/NN (number of slides) – 8 April 2015
Lessons Learned Cont.
7. Reflections on improving relationship between partner agencies, communications,
logistics, decision making, etc.
8. Utility of the recovery framework?
9. What is the ability to monitor the recovery framework?
10. Sector specific lessons.
11. Have best practices been identified, institutionalized and shared?
12. Other major issues raised by PDNA process
Materials Course or Module Title – Presentation NN – Block NN – Slide13/NN (number of slides) – 8 April 2015
Relationship of PDNA and the recovery process
1. What recovery strategies have been undertaken since the crisis?
2. How much has been invested in recovery?
3. Nature of relationship between assessments undertaken/PDNA recovery
framework developed and actual strategies and investments?
4. Documentation of recovery activities: existence/effectiveness of
monitoring system?
5. Do recovery needs persist that require further assessment and
investment?
Materials Course or Module Title – Presentation NN – Block NN – Slide14/NN (number of slides) – 8 April 2015