Scoping study launch Isabelle de Muyser-Boucher OCHA Yasemin Aysan independent consultant to OCHA Antonella Vitale consultant to OCHA followed by: morning coffee
Scoping study launch • this session is structured as follows: • introduction and launch and of scoping study • Isabelle de Muyser-Boucher,OCHA • content and conclusions of the scoping study • Yasemin Aysan, independent OCHA consultant • c. feedback and Shelter after Disaster • Antonella Vitale, consultants to OCHA
09:00 – 9:30 09:30 – 09:45 09:45 – 10:15 10:15 – 11:15 11:15 – 11:30 11:30 –12:15 12:15 –13:00 13:00 – 14:00 14:00 – 14:45 14:45 – 15:30 15:30 – 15:45 15:45 – 16:30 16:30 – 17:15 17:15 – 17:45 17:45 – 18:30 18:30 a. introduction and launch of scoping study Isabelle de Muyser-Boucher OCHA followed by: content of the scoping study
Launch ofScoping study Shelter Meeting, 04.05.2006 Exploring key changes and developments in post-disaster settlement, shelter and housing, 1982 - 2006
1975: a major review of emergency shelter provision is launched by UNDRO 1982: "Shelter after Disaster – Guidelines for Assistance" goes to print 2003: Shelterproject.org discussions Bibliographic reference (out of print) Case studies are outdated + update is required 2005: Revision process starts Phase I (Nov. 2005 – March 2006): Desk study of major changes and developments Why a scoping study?
Compares present context to that prevailing 24 years ago: Aim: to inform the forthcoming revision of "Shelter after Disaster – Guidelines for Assistance" Objective: an understanding of major changes occurred Scope: from pre to post-disaster all aspects of livelihoods all countries concerned a continuous process What is the Scoping Study about?
Structure: • Introduction • The risk environment • Institutions and operations • New knowledge • Principles Conclusions Internet resources + Bibliography
Our team of consultants: Yasemin Aysan, Ian Davis, Tom Corsellis and Antonella Vitale All those who volunteered information and comments DFID for having accepted to support the revision Methodology: Acknowledgements • This Report is mostly based upon: • a Desk study carried out between Nov.2005 and Feb. 2006 • by a group of four consultants to OCHA • responses to a semi-structured questionnaires received • from 15 experts from various origins and horizons
By November 2006: Identification of framework of assessment for case studies Start of case studies Draft principles & strategy Presentation of intermediate results to ShelterMeeting By May 2007: Case studies completed – Implementation section drafted Review of results by ShelterMeeting By November 2007: Final draft submitted to ShelterMeeting By May 2008: Printing of revised Guidelines by OCHA DRAFT ! The way forward(phase II of the revision):
Thank you and Good reading!
b. content of the scoping study Yasemin Aysan independent consultant to OCHA followed by: conclusions of the scoping study and feedback
b. Scoping studycontent • Hazard patterns have changed • There has been an increase in climatic variability; climatic hazards, such as floods, sea level rise and droughts are increasing the vulnerability of populations; • There have been a series of disasters with high-profile regional and cross-border impacts: (Hurricane Mitch,1998, Mozambique/ Southern Africa floods, 2000-1, Indian Ocean Tsunami, 2004) Risk environment
b. Scoping studycontent • 2. Exposure to hazards is growing • Due to macro-level vulnerabilities such as: • population growth • urbanisation • concentration of population and assets eg. In coastal areas, flood plains, mega cities • uneven economic development and poverty Risk environment
b. Scoping studycontent • 2. Exposure to hazards is growing • Due to local-level vulnerabilities such as: • lack of safe land resulting in unsafe housing on dangerous sites • limited dissemination/understanding of risks • few options available to the poor to protect themselves Risk environment
b. Scoping studycontent • 3. More emphasis on Disaster Risk Management but limited implementation • Improved Risk Assessment methodologies • International frameworks for Risk Reduction • Institutional and legal Systems for DRM • International Cooperation and Partnerships on Early Warning Systems (EWS) • Risk Reduction through byelaws and land-use planning controls and their enforcement • Risk Reduction through knowledge of safer construction available since the 80s. Risk environment
b. Scoping studycontent • 4. There has not been a coherent post disaster shelter and housing policy, or until now a regular sector review • Influenced by general housing policies: • Late 80s-early 90s enabling framework approach -participation, decentralisation, housing finance and capacity building (IYSH, 1987; Global Shelter Strategy for 2000, 1888; Habitat II, 1996) • Since mid-90s sustainable development app.-housing as an economic and social asset, emphasis on environment (Rio Conference, 1992; Millenium Development Goals, 2000) Policy environment
b. Scoping studycontent • Influenced by human rights and housing rights agenda: • Right to adequate housing –security of tenure, elimination of discrimination in housing sector, eradication of forced eviction (Habitat II, 1996; Human Settlements and Human Rights Commissions, 2001) • leading to rights-based approach in post disaster housing. Policy environment
b. Scoping studycontent • 5. Policy shifts in post-disaster housing and settlement have occured, influenced by the DRM, sustainable development, human rights and housing policies. • Local capacity and vulnerability are better understood; urban disasters pose a greater challenge –needs and coping, renters and marginalised, land value and availability • Reconstruction is identified as an opportunity for future risk reduction yet not systematically used Policy shifts in post disaster housing
b. Scoping studycontent • There is a much broader and more holistic view of what contitutes the sector –economic and social benefits and livelihood linkages • Linkages between safety and availability of land, land tenure and success in reconstruction and recovery are recognised • Settlement approach -social, physical and economic infrastructure and not just family shelter is widely accepted Policy shifts in post- disaster housing
b. Scoping studycontent • Emphasis on beneficiaries having more responsibility in decisions and process but implementation remains weak • The need to shift from product delivery to enabling organisations is recognised • Housing as a process and the relationship between relief, recovery, reconstruction (and development) is recognised but rarely integrated into programming and coordinated • Decentralisation to local level is desirable but not always possible Policy shifts in post- disaster housing
b. Scoping studycontent • 6. In contrast to other sectors, shelter and housing remain weak in assessment, planning and coordination, both internally and in linking with other sectors • Few international tools and mechanism are: • for coordination • UN emergency appeals and CAPs • Humanitarian Response Review, 2005 • IASC and the Cluster Working Groups on Shelter, Camp Management, Early Recovery Strategic planning and coordination
b. Scoping studycontent • For assessment, monitoring and evaluation • SPHERE standards, 1997 • ALNAP (Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in Humanitarian Action), 1997 • DEC (Disaster Emergency Committee), 1998 • SAME (Shelter Assessment, Monitoring and Evaluation for transitional shelter),2005 • PROVENTION Consortium and the World Bank (learning papers on reconstruction and recovery), 2000 • (long-term impact ass. and longitudinal studies still limited) Assessment, monitoring and evaluation
b. Scoping studycontent For international exchange of knowledge: Settlements and Disasters Delft, The Netherlands 1988 Reconstruction after Urban Earthquakes: An International Agenda to Achieve Safer Settlements in 1990’s Buffalo, USA 1989 Disasters and the Small Dwelling Oxford, UK 1991 First International Workshop on Improved Shelter Response and Environment for Refugees Geneva, Switzerland, 1993 World Conferences on Disaster Reduction Yokohama, Japan 1994 and Kobe, Japan 2005 First Emergency Settlement Conference Madison, USA 1996 United Nations Conference on Human Settlements - Habitat IIIstanbul, Turkey 1996 International Conferences – Post-disaster reconstruction (I-Rec) Coventry, UK 2002 & 2004 Peer reviews various locationsbetween 2002 – 2004 Shelter Meeting held biannually in Geneva, Switzerland 2004 – ongoing Exchange of knowledge
b. Scoping studycontent • 7. Good governance and enabling shelter strategies of the 90s called for participation of communities, civil society, local authorities, private sector leading to the proliferation of actors • The 1982 Guidelines tended to emphasize community and individual self-reliance and did not sufficiently address role of other actors • Number and range of actors involved in post disaster shelter and housing has proliferated in the last two decades • Strong national (Iran, Turkey) and local Governments (India) continue to play a key role in policy and delivery Roles and capacities
b. Scoping studycontent • Capacities largely remained unsupported in weak administrations (Mitch countries) resulting in more prominent role for local NGOs and the international community • In the 90s NGO attention shifted to refugees and conflict. Recent large scale disasters ( Mitch, Gujarat, Turkey, Tsunami, Pakistan)changed the trend • Increased overlap of conflict and natural disasters resulted in mixed mandate responses (flow of funds determined) Roles and capacities
b. Scoping studycontent • UN agencies have been responding to shelter and housing based on flow of funds, and not always on mandates, capacities or proven expertise • IFIs are increasingly becoming the key actors in reconstruction where housing is a major part • Private sector, small builders play a sinificant role • Quantitative and qualitative gaps in human resources and expertise remain. Roles and capacities
b. Scoping studycontent • 8. Choices for post- disaster shelter and housing have been recognised and more diverse approaches have been supported since the 1982 Guidelines • Prefabricated solution dominated 80s discussion; however pressures remain • Host families • Cash for owner built • Cash and vouchers for materials • Insurance for risk transfer
b. Scoping studycontent It should be recognised that shelter and housing ( as well as recovery) is not a linear process and that the various choices have to be supported in parallel. A practical coordination mechanism to develop and implement a single sector strategy for coherence is required. please fell free to use the side bar
c. feedback and Shelter after Disaster Antonella Vitale consultant to OCHA followed by: morning coffee
c. feedbackconclusions how should these conclusions inform the revision of ‘Shelter after Disaster: Guidelines for Assistance’? 1. hazard patterns have changed 2. exposure to hazards is growing 3. there is more emphasis on Disaster Risk Management, but limited implementation 4. there has not been a coherent post-disaster shelter and housing policy or, until now, a regular sector review 5. post disaster housing and settlement approaches influenced by DRM, sustainable development, rights and housing policies 6. compared to other sectors, shelter and housing remain weak in assessment, planning and coordination, both internally and in linking with the other sectors 7. good governance and enabling shelter strategies of the ’90s called for the participation of communities, civil society, local authorities, private sector, and the proliferation of actors 8. choices for post disaster shelter and housing have been recognised and more diverse approaches have been supported than recognised by the 1982 guidelines the scoping study was intended to inform the guidelines revision: what have we learnt?
new for 2006! c. feedbackconclusions online blog the scoping study should inform the guidelines revision feedback through: quick and easy access from sheltercentre.org immediate posting 1. working group blog, password protected 2. public access blog, no password
c. Shelter after Disaster phase 2 the study will inform the revision by Shelter Centre with OCHA of ‘Shelter after Disaster: Guidelines for Assistance’ over Summer 2006, Shelter Centre will identify partners to undertake case studies for the revision, referring to specific: 1. major responses, including different phases of response and approaches to response 2. types of hazard and disaster 3. regions and country income levels 4. topics of focus, such as land rights preliminary results of case studies will be presented at SM06b, with a collated draft report presented at SM07a please propose partner organisations and case studies the scoping study should inform the guidelines revision
in your folders c. Shelter after Disaster phase 2 feedback sheets also feedback at: name and contact details express your level of interest comments or suggestions? please leave the sheets for us to collect!
c. Shelter after Disaster phase 2 the study will inform the revision with OCHA of ‘Shelter after Disaster: Guidelines for Assistance’ over Summer 2006, Shelter Centre will identify partners to undertake case studies for the revision, referring to specific: 1. major responses, including different phases of response and approaches to response 2. types of hazard and disaster 3. regions and country income levels 4. topics of focus, such as land rights preliminary results of case studies will be presented at SM06b, with a collated draft report presented at SM07a please propose partner organisations and case studies the scoping study should inform the guidelines revision