review of indonesia pdna process n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
REVIEW OF INDONESIA PDNA PROCESS PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
REVIEW OF INDONESIA PDNA PROCESS

play fullscreen
1 / 15

REVIEW OF INDONESIA PDNA PROCESS

129 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

REVIEW OF INDONESIA PDNA PROCESS

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. REVIEW OF INDONESIA PDNA PROCESS Lessons Learned and Key Reflections United Nations Development Programme

  2. OVERVIEW OF PDNA – INDONESIA (West Sumatera) • Disaster context: date of crisis, overview of affected sectors, extent of damages • An earthquake (7.6) hit West Sumatera on 30 September 2009, followed by an aftershock(6.2). 1,117 people were killed, 1214 were severely injured, 1,688 sustained minor injured and 410 people evacuated. • 249,833 houses were damaged (114,797 with severe damage) including government buildings, health facilities, educational facilities and financial and banking buildings/offices. • The most severe damage was in the housing sector; assessed damage and loss reaching Rp. 15,41 trillion. • Total damage and loss was Rp. 20,86 trillion.

  3. OVERVIEW OF PDNA – INDONESIA (West Sumatera) • PDNA timeframe: activities from initial request to final product • 9 - 29 October 2009: began with Provincial preparatory meeting, designation of local personnel, local orientation on PDNA, Data Collection, Joint analysis and Report writing. • Description of key stakeholders: relationships between govt., World Bank, HC/RC, UN agencies and EC • The cluster approach was used, allowing international community to participate in recovery process. • Cluster groups worked closely with the National Agency for Disaster Management (BNPB) and the local authorities. • With the support from World Bank, the Government used ECLAC methodology to assess damages and losses. • Training on PDNA: content, management, timing, participation, frequency, partnerships • No training on PDNA before the process; only minimal initial introduction was provided - overall understanding of PDNA process was poor.

  4. OVERVIEW OF PDNA – INDONESIA (West Sumatera) • Recovery framework: final output, recovery projects, monitoring system • Integration between HRNA and DaLa in PDNA was not achieved. • However, collaboration between the methodologies provided significant contribution to the Action Plan of the GOI. • The recovery strategy emphasized the following extra priorities: housing, public infrastructure. social recovery, productive sectors and cross-sector recovery. • Monitoring of activities is conducted based on source of funding: activities funded by the National Budget (APBN) will be conducted by BNPB and Bappenas; those funded by the Local Budget (APBD) are responsibility of local authorities (Bappeda)

  5. OVERVIEW OF PDNA PROCESS (1) • Role of Government: level of govt. leadership, communication between govt. and UN system, World Bank, EC, civil society, etc. • Government plays the central role; BNPB coordinates emergency response and orders government agencies to provide assistance as required. • Bappenas as the planning agency plays coordination role in the formulation of the Action Plan. • Both agencies verify and validate information collected from field; although the multisectoral assessment was conducted independently, the result was reviewed with BNPB and Bappenas. • Role and nature of involvement of UN system, World Bank, EC, civil society, other actors. • International community played supporting roles to government led process. • UNDP plays coordination role in the HRNA process while the World Bank provided support for the DaLA process. • Various parties were also involved in conducting multisectoral assessment.

  6. OVERVIEW OF PDNA PROCESS (2) • Relationship between DaLa/ECLAC and UN HRNA approaches; process to develop consensus on overall approach • Overall, the relationship between DaLa and UN HRNA was at the superficial level. • Efforts were made at the initial stage to develop consensus on an integrated approach between the two, however as HRNA methodology is not yet fully recognized and understood by the WB team, the integration did not occur. • Technical difficulties in the field also contributed to the situation. • How were corporate agreements operationalized in the field; level/adequacy of support between HQ and field? • Since the understanding of the methodology is not yet clear, the corporate agreements were difficult to implement in the field. • Many groups were confused about their roles and responsibilities in the process and could not contribute to the final output.

  7. OVERVIEW OF PDNAPROCESS (3). • Use of comparative advantages of different agencies • Use of comparative advantages was not optimal due to lack of understanding of the agencies about the methodology. • Resource Mobilization • Under the coordination of Govt., a Multi Donor Trust Fund is established, to cover the West Sumatra disaster and possible future disasters in Indonesia. • The trust fund will serve as a funding mechanism to pool contributions from multiple donors and disbursed based on the agreed decision making procedure. • Issues related to finalization of PDNA products • HRNA is very much still a UN-centered exercise (even UNDP-centered) and need to be further aligned with DaLA and government framework • Coordination framework with the government

  8. OVERVIEW OF PDNAPROCESS (4) • Data collection: what methodology was used, availability of baselines, etc? Primary data collection: • 600 questionnaires • 18 Focus Group Discussion • 72 Interviews with Key Informants • 96 enumerators • In 6 (six) districts: Kota Padang, Kota Pariaman, Kab. Padang Pariaman, Kab. Agam, Kab. Pasaman Barat, Kab. Pesisir Selatan • Started on Thursday (15 October 2009) until Saturday (17 October 2009)

  9. LESSONS LEARNED (1) • What worked? Effect of joint effort. • First time in history, HRNA was included in text, but was not allocated in monetary terms; however Govt. allocated some funds for ER • There is goodwill to fully implement PDNA • What didn’t work? Main constraints of joint approach. • Separated report due to inappropriate HRNA • Clusters could not fully participate in ER due to responding in emergency response. • What needs to be improved? What capacities are needed in govt? RCs?HCs, WB and EC counterparts? UN system? Others? • To impose strict Government Leadership; Terms of Reference produced by the Government and endorsed internationally • EC must actively involved; • There must be formal working team (consisted of Government and partners)

  10. LESSONS LEARNED (2) 4. Was guidance provided by headquarters? Was it useful? Why/why not? • Partially: Early Recovery Advisor was being deployed to facilate HRNA but not overall PDNA. 5. How much did your institution invest in the PDNA (financial, technical, logistical, resources)? • GoI : (leadership); Local Government mobilization of local development officers; University teacher and student. • WB : 20 sectoral experts and international advisors. • UN : local NGOs, clusters, Admin and logistics supports, advisors and writers. • EC : ???

  11. LESSONS LEARNED (3) • Reflections on improving relationship between partner agencies, communications, logistics, decision making, etc. • Result of last 2 years work on PDNA should have been used as the basis for this PDNA. • Now partners are intensively having conversations about moving forward with the PDNA • Utility of the recovery framework? • Finding of PDNA was the basis for the nation action plan for RR • The action plan (Recovery framework) guides the deployment and the utilization of national budget 640 mill USD over 3 fiscal years • What is the ability to monitor the recovery framework? • National Technical Support Team is formed by the national government to ensure support local governments implementation of the Recovery Action Plan. • Performance is being monitored through national account system

  12. LESSONS LEARNED (4) • Sector specific lessons. • 80% of damage is in housing sector. • Social sectors received less attention and resources compare to physical and infrastructure. • Local Government physical facilities were mostly damaged • Have best practices been identified, institutionalized and shared? • National Disaster Management Agency has developed the calculation matrix for DaLA in its technical training, but the HRNA matrix is still missing. • Standard table of content for PDNA report is already agreed • Other major issues raised by PDNA process • Imbalance between DaLA and HRNA • Link between national and global PDNA initiative is not clear.

  13. RELATIONSHIP OF PDNA ANDTHERECOVERY PROCESS (1) • What recovery strategies have been undertaken since the crisis? • WS Recovery action plan was formally adopted but local government has yet to develop local action plan. • ER has been implemented with 2009 national budget • How much has been invested in recovery? • Overall 640 mill USD, of which 35 mill USD is allocated to ER • Prov Local Gov’s alone is expected to allocate 30 mill USD • Nature of relationship between assessments undertaken/PDNA recovery framework developed and actual strategies and investments? • PDNA informs recovery action plan, which in turn, determines the national budget, that triggered local implementation plan • Documentation of recovery activities: existence/effectiveness of monitoring system? • Recovery activities are being monitored through national account system.

  14. RELATIONSHIP OF PDNA ANDTHERECOVERY PROCESS (2) 5. Do recovery needs persist that require further assessment and investment? • Yes, but as living document National Action Plan, will be adjusted every six month. • Serious delay on the budget disbursement.

  15. THANK YOU