Three tribes

1. Should we or shouldn’t we? The proposed marriage of the three tribes, a tale of tentative romance and much domestic dispute

2. Three tribes

3. The prize Climate finance! Better lives for the ‘client” (poor and vulnerable people), whom they all shared

4. The ‘client’ faced many, many risks Climate, weather, poverty, conflict, economic shocks, disease, …. • Climate risks were the mandate of the CCA tribe • Weather risks were the mandate of the DRR tribe • The SP tribe couldn’t quite decide if their mandate was poverty or economic risks

5. Let’s try it! SP, DRR and CCA all married and the three of them went off on a honeymoon at a posh Ethiopian resort called PSNP

7. Upon return from honeymoon A fight broke out ! The house was too small to fit all the risks, and they argued bitterly which to keep: Climate Disasters Local infrastructure Poverty hunger Conflicts Whose risks mattered the most? They also all talked different languages and couldn’t agree on what should be the new family language

8. They sought counseling Counseling was time consuming. Which framework should be used for the counseling? • Hazard maps • Livelihoods frameworks • PRA/RRA • Poverty and vulnerability profile • Community vulnerability profile • No regrets • Low regrets • Early warning systems • Climate projections • Seasonal weather forecasts

9. Guess what! They couldn’t agree • The counselor patiently let them argue • No one wanted to give up their own language and frameworks which they seemed to love more dearly than they loved the new marriage

10. What should be put in the center of the house? The tribes’ own programs, or The vulnerable people (remember the ‘client’, the reason they came together in the first place!), or State and peace building

11. They talked about the things the others did they didn’t care much for Climate information (use it or don’t use it) We need to build adaptive capacity (but how do you do it?) CCTs don’t help CCA! …..the other tribes had many flaws and these flaws were hard to accept

12. The counselor asked them, why did you marry? • Deliver resources to the ‘client’ (the same target group they thought they shared, although doubts arose if they really did share ‘client’) • Help ‘client’ adapt and become resilient • This was good news, and they even forgot to argue about the meaning of ‘resilient’!

13. A solution!? Agree to an ‘open marriage’ – appreciate ‘overlaps’ but also allow separate spheres

14. It got even better! Someone proposed, if we explore our ‘overlaps’ we can find synergies and grow our circles and we are all better off

15. On the hunting trip for synergies • They set out to explore the promised land of overlaps and synergies • Alas, this led to ……

16. The Impasse of the Color Coded Cards! • The counselor thought that using blue, red, and yellow cards the overlaps could be detected and the circles could grow • Blue cards were for making Planning babies • Yellow cards were to be used for making Implementation babies • Green cards were to be used for making Monitoring babies

17. Another fight broke out! Are the color-coded off-spring really new or just old babies on new bottles? “you are not taking CC into account!”, shouted the CCA tribe angrily “It’s the same as Integrated Rural Development”, insisted one tribe Elder, who had seen many color coded cards in his long life “you are just giving handouts!”, said the development tribe. But now the SP tribe had enough and decided to get even. “Uncertainty is not new!”, they replied

18. Then they got tired and shared an intimate moment They started to share their uncertainties as a way to get closer But even that didn’t last long as they couldn’t agree on what uncertainty meant: Uncertain climates, or Uncertainty about adaptive capacity That was when the SP tripe sniped about the superiority of their own no-regrets framework

19. Tired of fighting, a truce took hold The tribes realized the fighting over fusing the circles wasn’t worth it (it had “high transaction costs” in the jargon of the SP tribe) But they agreed to collaborate whenever it makes sense- For example when the ‘client’ faces food insecurity and weather risks are important They also agreed to share data which was a dear possession to all of them

20. But what happened to the babies? With the wise counselor as midwife, many blue, red, and yellow inter-tribal babies were now delivered We present to you, the planning, implementation, and evaluation babies!

21. Process indicators of risk mgt & output indicators for development results Routes challenges to achieve surviving & thriving Justifying action on low probability but severe risks How to invest in achieving greater clarity? Driven by the political economy of donors Hegemony of IE Planning & evaluating in uncertain contexts and for uncertain outcomes Balancing learning & accountability Can SP be used as a broad, inclusive starting point for integrating DRR & CCA? Challenges involved in planning, implementing & evaluating SP, DRR & CCA under uncertainty Programming with weak risk information Maintaining the central purpose as reducing poor& excluded peoples risks Convergence around data needs Need to assess the added value of SP/ DRR/ CCA integration in terms of better addressing peoples risks Identify no regrets & co-benefits Understanding the incentive structures that the poor & excluded respond to Human centric approach Interventions being accountable to the poor & excluded How best to make these assessments? Shared objectives across SP, DRR & CCA – that aim at significant improvements in human resilience Addressing peoples basic needs and issues of sustainability

22. What can agencies do to enable people to survive, thrive and adapt? SP Widening circles through incorporation DRR CCA Messy contexts & uncertainty Steps to incorporation context specific

23. Group 3 Recommendations – planning, implementing & evaluating SP/ DRR/ CCA in uncertainty Premises for recommendations • A human-centric approach needs to be maintained and peoples perceptions of vulnerability, risk and adaptation actions should guide processes • Integration of SP, DRR & CCA may be to burdensome while incorporation is desirable • Incorporation needs to be within national systems, country driven and on-budget to be sustainable

24. Group 3 Recommendations – planning, implementing & evaluating SP/ DRR/ CCA in uncertainty Planning • Plan together – across govt departments, sectors, scales, stakeholders • Enable bottom-up driven planning • Share tools & data for planning & risk assessment and develop common analysis • Plan for flexibility and scalability • Starting point for incorporation/ integration depends on what thematic area is strongest in each country context

25. Group 3 Recommendations – planning, implementing & evaluating SP/ DRR/ CCA in uncertainty Implementation • Budgets and incentives need to be in place for incorporation/ integration • Devolved/ decentralised (local admin of resources), shock responsive, chronic poverty conscious, involve formal and informal institutions • Capacity development & awareness of the thematic areas to enable joined up working • Risk and insurance concepts & instruments incorporated

26. Group 3 Recommendations – planning, implementing & evaluating SP/ DRR/ CCA in uncertainty Evaluation [there are various M&E for CC initiatives] • CC impacts need explicitly included and estimated in terms of human development outcomes • Realistic expectations of impact achievements against duration of intervention • Design shared of common baselines, datasets & analysis methods • Develop adaptive capacity measurement procedures that encompass human development outcomes • Identify successful adaptation in the face of CC effects – use of development without CC effects as counterfactual

27. A stimulating group Many thanks