| 008 |
|
130425n^^^^^^^^xx^||||^o^^^^^|||^0^eng^d |
| 245 |
00 |
|a Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015 |h [electronic resource] |b building the resilience of nations and communities for disasters: mid-term review 2010-2011 |y English. |
| 260 |
|
|a Geneva, Switzerland : |b United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR), |c 2011-03. |
| 506 |
|
|a Refer to main document/publisher for use rights. |
| 510 |
|
|a (2011). Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015: building the resilience of nations and communities to disasters—mid-term review 2010-2011. United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR). |
| 520 |
3 |
|a This document is a 2010-2011 mid-term review of progress on the four Hyogo Framework for Action (HFA) priorities at national and regional levels. The review relies on reports for the 2005-2007, 2007-2009, and 2009-2011 periods submitted by participating national governments (27 in 2007, more than 100 in 2011). The first priority for action is to ensure that disaster risk reduction (DRR) is a national and local priority with a strong institutional basis for implementation. While in the past five years several countries have enacted national legislation on disaster risk management (DRM), the decentralization of responsibilities and financial resources required for effective DRR has not yet been realized. The second priority is to identify, assess, and monitor disaster risk and enhance early warning. The review has found significant deficiencies in terms of both comprehensive risk assessments and early warning systems, particularly in developing countries. The third priority is to use knowledge, innovation, and education to build a culture of safety and resilience at all levels. Though there has been an important degree of progress at the level of public awareness, there is no clear evidence that this enhanced consciousness has resulted in changes in behavior and practices that reduce disaster risks. Nevertheless, increasingly DRR concepts and principles are being incorporated in school curricula. The fourth priority is to reduce underlying risk factors. This represents the priority for action where the least progress has been made. This is partly due to scale and intractability of many of the underlying risk factors, such as poverty, urbanization, and climate change. While some of these factors require complex multifaceted solutions, the document believes that more can be done right now to integrate DRR into infrastructure projects as a first step towards reducing risk (pp.21-29). After assessing progress on the four priority areas, the mid-term review calls for: (i) implementing the HFA strategically and holistically; (ii) implementing the HFA at the local level, and (iii) integrating climate change adaptation (CCA) into DRR (pp.43-52). In addition, the review discusses means to accelerate HFA implementation, which include making DRR an integral part of development; improving governance mechanisms for DRR at the international, national, and local levels; and establishing efficient accountability frameworks with stronger support from the international community (55-66). |
| 520 |
0 |
|a Disaster Risk Management |
| 520 |
2 |
|a Foreword by the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for the Implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action p. 9; Executive Summary p. 10; 1. Background p. 13; 2. The Mid-Term Review methodology and process p. 17; 2.1 Challenges p. 18; 3. Five years into implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action p. 21; 3.1 National level progress p. 21;
3.2 Regional level progress p. 30; 3.3 International level progress p. 33; 3.3.1 Progress in HFA implementation by the United Nations p. 35; 3.3.2 Case studies on efforts to implement the HFA by other international organizations p. 38; 4. Strategic areas requiring further attention p. 43; 4.1 Implementing the HFA strategically and holistically p. 43; 4.2 Local level implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action p. 46; 4.3 Integrating climate change p. 50; 5. Suggestions for accelerating implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action p. 55; 5.1 Enabling and safeguarding development gains: disaster risk reduction is primarily a development issue p. 55;
5.2 Governance for disaster risk reduction p. 57; 5.3 Accountability for HFA implementation p. 59; 5.4 Agreeing on targets and for whom? p. 61; 5.5 Defining the “how” p. 62; 5.6 How the international community can further support HFA implementation p. 63; 5.7 Thinking now about a post-2015 framework p. 65; 6. Conclusions and recommendations for the way forward p.69; List of Annexes: Terms of Reference for the Mid-Term Review p. 80; Conceptual Framework for the Mid-Term Review including Key Questions p. 84; List of Advisory Group members p. 95; Bibliography p. 99 |
| 533 |
|
|a Electronic reproduction. |c Florida International University, |d 2013. |f (dpSobek) |n Mode of access: World Wide Web. |n System requirements: Internet connectivity; Web browser software. |
| 650 |
1 |
|a Natural disaster warning systems. |
| 710 |
2 |
|a United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR). |
| 710 |
2 |
|a Disaster Risk Reduction Program, Florida International University (DRR/FIU), |e summary contributor. |
| 856 |
40 |
|u http://dpanther.fiu.edu/dpService/dpPurlService/purl/FI13022738/00001 |y Click here for full text |
| 992 |
04 |
|a http://dpanther.fiu.edu/sobek/content/FI/13/02/27/38/00001/FI13022738thm.jpg |
