Internal Evaluation Evaluation of the UNISDR Secretariat Asia Pacific 2009 Contract Commencement: Monday 2 February 2009 Contract Completion: Friday 6 March 2009 EXTRACTS presented to IAP Meeting Korea 14 July 2009 ‘Regional’ Findings

Evaluation Process Diagram

Six Key Questions for Respondents Has ISDR been successful in strengthening regional coordination, cooperation…? HFA reporting Impacts of ISDR Existing knowledge tools Climate change adaptation and the link to DRR A vision for ISDR

Recommendations

Work Plans - Global and Regional

Recommendations

needs and priorities of disaster reduction Page 02 of Has the ISDR Secretariat Asia Pacific been able to implement a program for disaster risk reduction in the region that adequately reflects the needs and priorities of disaster reduction identified by partners and stakeholders at national and regional levels? 1.1 need a clearer picture of needs and priorities from stakeholders regional coherence not fully addressed need time-bound strategies in line with HFA regional platform must be strengthened

regional cooperation success Page 07 of *Has ISDR been successful in strengthening regional cooperation, coordination and harmonization of DRR efforts over the last two or three years? 2.1 Vastly improved since ISDR arrived Need to build IAP, clarify roles of other players (SAARC, ESCAP, etc.) Lack of clarity on ISDR role Need and expanded presence in the region Use HFA more, platforms, networks

impacts on disaster reduction Page 11 of *What have been the most recognizable impacts that ISDR as had on DRR over the last few years? 2.4 Motivation for DRR Change in neg. attitudes Good docs and tools Boosted profile of DRR HFA HFA HFA Advocacy and partnership building Greater awareness through HFA Establishing regional apparatus, networks Key impactsOther impacts

partnership building Page 14 of *In your view, has ISDR been able to adequately build and support partnerships for DRR? 3.1 Cornerstone of ISDR success in the region Significant achievement Opportunities are there to build; more systematic and regular IAP, more collaborative agenda setting etc.

most useful for partnerships Page 01 of xx 3.1 a *Given your response above, what means or actions have been most useful in your opinion? 3.1 a Actions drawn from real needs in the region More govt. participation Need a work plan for follow- up actions, clearer mandates IAP and Minist’l Link to climate change partners HFA and IAP should be the focus

relevant effective Ministerial conference Page 17 of *Is the Ministerial Conference a relevant regional initiative and policy forum in which a commitment to disaster risk reduction can be demonstrated and priority actions agreed? 3.3 Realistic commitment is needed Pacific not well represented Should concentrate on implementation of action plans in the region Held less often Ministers to be held accountable

IAP relevance and value Page 18 of a *Is the IAP (ISDR Asia Partnership) a relevant regional initiative and forum in which a commitment to disaster risk reduction can be demonstrated and priority actions agreed? 3.3 a More regular meetings Excellent forum Management core could be beyond ISDR Focus on regional cooperation/coordination More systematic organization generally

other organizations and partners Page 19 of *Are there organizations active in DRR in the region that you believe ISDR could or should have closer ties and working relationships? 3.4 Government should be primary entry point not NGOs Open to all practitioners, get technical ASEAN, SAARC, others… UN Country Teams Media groups, WB/ADB country offices Private sector

link to global initiatives Page 20 of *In your view, does ISDR Asia Pacific Secretariat have adequate linkages to the more global initiatives in DRR? 3.5 Good connections Regional priorities need to come from the region, passed up to global Gap in info/communications seem to be from GVA Regional driving global DRM is region-specific

priorities to 2015 Page 24 of Please rank your view of future priority areas of development or improvement or strengthening for ISDR over the next three to five years? 4.4 Advocacy, advocacy, advocacy …followed by resource mobilization, knowledge management, and monitoring HFA

needs and priorities of disaster reduction Page 25 of *If it was decided ISDR would focus on only one of the following areas of disaster risk reduction, which one would you consider the single most important role? 4.5 Another strong role for advocacy KM and M+E still seen as significant Indicates a key role for the office

climate change adaptation and DRR and ISDR Page 26 of *Climate change and adaptation and the links to disaster risk reduction is of increased interest to much of the international community, finally. Do you think there should be a lead role for ISDR, (or a responsibility that ISDR should adopt), to better inform regional governments and stakeholders of the best available information on this topic as it relates to DRR? 4.6 Clear message here ISDR needs to be in on this debate All three roles from previous question MUST be maintained Need to find the niche in CCA for ISDR Regional initiatives, local lessons

… a vision for the future … Page 27 of *Finally in one sentence, can you describe your vision for ISDR in ten years from now, in 2015? 4.7 In 10 years, ideally DRR will be common sense !!! The top most advisory organization on DRR A vibrant movement that brings regional actors together By then, advocacy with Governments will be unnecessary International conferences should be banned

Scott Cunliffe Mobile: …thank you … Evaluation of the UNISDR Secretariat Asia Pacific 2009