1. Group 02

2. Group Members Chair: Manu Gupta Time keeper: Ryo Hamaguchi Reporters: Chamindha Sunita Reddy; Ananda Mallawatantri; Patra Rina Dewi; Suman Nag, Serena Fortuna, Chamindha, J. P. Misra, Yuichi Nishimura, Kushani De Silva

3. Results What results do we believe have had the most impact in building resilience? Policy Development, Project Implementation, and Capacity Development Policy Development – Cost Benefit Analysis ( M) – Curriculum Development (M) – Strategy paper on Tsunami (I) – SNAP Strategic National Action Plan (M) – Manifesto Sector Plan (M) – Consortium for Disaster Education/National Platform (I)

4. Results (Cont’d) Programme Implementation – Opportunities to work together (S) – National Environment Technical Institutes/National Disaster Management Organizations (Ind) – Indigenous knowledge recognized & built upon (I,S,Ind andM)

5. Results (Cont’d) Capacity development – Safe construction technology promotion through guidelines & trainings (I) – Incident Command System (M) – Coastal Zone Management & DRR – High quality IEC materials developed (I,S,M,Ind) – Community lead infrastructure development (S)

6. Factors for the success What factors contributed most in the success of the activities? 1)The Impact of Tsunami 2)Multi Stakeholder ownership & credibility 3)Flexibility in implementation & design 4)Well time built on the needs identified in the first two years after the Tsunami 5)Integrated approach for development 6)Opportunities for engagement among implementing partners (Intra & Inter)

7. Constraints What have been the projects shortcomings, limitations and constraints 1)Time period was too short to build resilience 2) Lack of Gender sensitivity & focus on vulnerability 3) Lack of opportunity for engagement between the implementing partners

8. Sustainability/Suggestions What would we differently do? 1) Amending & formulating Policies on project outputs 2) Create mechanisms at local level for self sustainability 3) Building links with research studies 4) Conflict sensitive programming 5) Private sector 6) Media

9. Capturing lessons learnt Approaches, mechanisms and processes by which the lessons learned captured? 1)Peer level capturing 2)In depth interviews ( With implementers, beneficiaries, key informants, etc) 3)Wider consultations ( With implementers, beneficiaries, focus groups, etc) 4)Case studies 5)Field visits 6)Exit workshops 7) Monitoring, learning & evaluation missions

10. Main gaps identify the main gaps that remain between what has been achieved and what would have been ideal Objective 01-04:Absence of a log frame with good indicators Objective 04:Lack of research studies on vulnerability & risks Objective 02:Highly Tsunami focus

11. Potential Interventions that can fill these gaps Preparation of a log frame with clear indicators prior to the project implementation Research on vulnerability & risk assessments at local levels Tsunami focus to multi hazards

12. Process forward Suitable process to move this process forward Preparation of a log frame with clear indicators Creating a data base for research studies (Identification of thematic areas, expertise, etc) Integrated approach to built community resilience Focus on Powerty- Disaster inter phase

13. Thank you