| 008 |
|
130718n^^^^^^^^xx^^^^^^o^^^^^|||^0^eng^d |
| 245 |
00 |
|a Disaster risk management: taking lessons from evaluation |h [electronic resource] |y English. |
| 260 |
|
|a Washington, DC : |b The World Bank, |c 2007-02. |
| 300 |
|
|a Conference proceedings |
| 490 |
|
|a IEG Working Paper 2008/5 |y English. |
| 500 |
|
|a Proceeding from the Conference on November 20, 2006 and the Evaluator’s Round Table on November 21, 2006. Sponsored by the Council of Europe Development Bank and the World Bank’s Independent Evaluation Group with the Collaboration of the Office of Evaluation and
Oversight of the Inter-American Development Bank |
| 506 |
|
|a This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization. |
| 510 |
|
|a (2008). Disaster risk management: taking lessons from evaluation. The World Bank (WB). |
| 520 |
3 |
|a This document is a report on the 2006 conference held in Paris by the World Bank, the Council of Europe Development Bank (CEB), and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) to discuss the use of the evaluative process to improve disaster risk management (DRM) as supported by multilateral and bilateral aid and development agencies. The report is divided into two main sections. The first section highlights lessons learned during the main conference proceedings. The second presents discussions during the Evaluators’ Roundtable. The main conference proceedings were divided into four panel presentations. The first panel discussion highlighted the growing shift in approach to disaster within the DRM community, from reacting to disasters after they have occurred towards a more proactive approach that focuses on reducing the risk factors that create the conditions for disaster. The second panel expanded on this topic by discussing the emergent interest in disaster risk reduction (DRR) within multilateral institutions. Panel participants specifically looked at various strategies for increasing the capacity of these institutions to promote DRR in borrower countries; linking economic and financial ministries to those responsible for DRR; integrating DRR into the institutional memory of government ministries; and connecting DRR frameworks at the national level to development concerns at the local level. The third panel addressed the role of community participation in DRR, and the importance of consulting with beneficiaries prior to, during, and after a disaster has occurred to ensure that interventions are meeting community needs and that the community develops a sense of ownership over the DRR process. The fourth panel discussed accountability within the relationship between humanitarian agencies and beneficiaries. Panel participants found that these agencies were more beholden to their donors than the communities which they professed to be assisting. The Evaluators’ Roundtable discussed vulnerability reduction as part of the DRM process, the challenges of multi-donor evaluation, and maximizing the impact of evaluation within the donor community. Support for DRR amongst these multilateral and bilateral aid and development agencies is primarily the result of: (1) the rising cost of disaster reconstruction as the frequency and intensity of disasters has increased; (2) the extent to which development financed by these agencies is being destroyed by disaster; and (3) the growing sense that the likelihood of a disaster can be ascertained through careful risk and vulnerability assessments, and thus either prevented or impacts mitigated. |
| 520 |
0 |
|a General Risk Management |
| 520 |
2 |
|a PREFACE p. V; EXECUTIVE SUMMARY p. VI; Taking Lessons from Evaluation p. VI; Evaluators’
Roundtable p. VIII; Strong Consensus Regarding Evaluation Findings p. X; Action Plan for Natural
Disaster Evaluators p. X; III DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT: TAKING LESSONS FROM EVALUATION p. 1; 1. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS p. 1; Apolonio Ruiz Ligero, Vice-Governor, Council of Europe Development Bank p. 1; Vinod Thomas, Director-General, Independent Evaluation Group, the World Bank p. 2; Stephen A. Quick, Director, Office of Evaluation
and Oversight, Inter-American Development Bank (ACTUAL Caroline Clark) p. 4; 2. NATURAL DISASTER PROJECT EVALUATIONS BY MULTILATERAL ORGANIZATIONS p. 5; The World Bank (WB): Applying IEG Findings: Improved World Bank Assistance for Disaster Risk Management. Margaret Arnold p. 5; Inter-American Development Bank (IDB): From Evaluation to a Renewed Business Model: The IDB Experience. Caroline Clarke p. 7; European Investment Bank (EIB): Questions for an Evaluator. Alain Sève p. 10; Asian Development Bank (ADB): Lessons Learned during the Preparation of the Disaster Evaluation. Neil R. Britton p. 11; Andean Development Corporation / La Corporación Andina de Fomento (CAF): Results of the Natural Disaster Evaluation. Roberto Lopez p. 14; Caribbean Development Bank (CDB): How Lessons of Experience Are Incorporated in Operations and New Strategies. Anne Bramble p. 16; Council of Europe Development Bank (CEB): Challenges and Results of the First Evaluation Experience in CEB—Lessons from Natural Disaster Projects. Claudine Voyadzis p. 18; 3. NATURAL DISASTER PROJECT EVALUATIONS BY BILATERAL ORGANIZATIONS p. 23; Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ): Lessons Learned from GTZ Evaluations and Reviews.
Thomas Schaef p. 23; Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA): Norwegian Lessons and Reflections. Bjørn Johannessen p. 25; 4. OTHER RECENT EVALUATION INITIATIVES p. 27; European Commission (EC): Embedding Evaluation Results in Policy Making. Nicoletta Pergolizzi
p. 27; International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC): Summary Analysis of Recent International Federation Learning Events. Margaret Stansberry p. 28; Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in Humanitarian Action (ALNAP): Disaster Risk Management: Lessons from ALNAP. John Mitchell p. 30; Tsunami Evaluation Coalition (TEC): The Tsunami Evaluation Coalition. John Cosgrave p. 31; ProVention Consortium: Evaluating Impact in Risk Reduction: Mainstreaming, Indicators, and Learning. Ian O’Donnell p. 34; EVALUATORS’ ROUNDTABLE p. 37; 5. OPENING REMARKS p. 37; 6. COMPARING AND CONTRASTING THE WORLD BANK AND THE INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK EVALUATIONS p. 39; Evaluation of Policies and Operational Practice Related to Disaster Risks: The Experience of the IDB. Marco Ferroni p. 39; Hazards of Nature, Risks to Development: An Evaluation of World Bank Assistance for Natural Disasters ─ Methods and Findings. Ronald Parker
p. 42; 7. VULNERABILITY REDUCTION AND DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT p. 46; Disaster Risk Management: Disaster Risk Management: Taking Lessons from Earthquakes. Kyriazis Pitilakis p. 46; Vulnerability Reduction and Disaster Risk Management. Richard Platt p. 47; 8. THE CHALLENGES OF MULTI-DONOR EVALUATION p. 49; TEC Lessons Learned. John Cosgrave
p. 49; The challenges of multi-donor evaluation. Bastiaan de Laat p. 50; 9. MAXIMIZING THE IMPACT OF EVALUATION IN THE DONOR COMMUNITY p. 52; Disaster Recovery and Reconstruction Evaluation Lessons and Policy Implications. Robert Picciotto p. 52; Action Plan for Natural Disaster Evaluators p. 52; ANNEX A. CONFERENCE PROGRAM p. 55; ANNEX B. ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS p. 63; ANNEX C. REFERENCES p. 76; Boxes: Box 1. Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR) p. 6; Box 2. Lessons from 1987 and 1989 Emergency Assistance Policies p. 13; Box 3. Thessaloniki: Distribution of Peak Horizontal Accelaration Scenario T=500 Years p. 46; Box 4. Fragility Curves p. 46; Box 5. Effect of Retrofitting and Structural Upgrade p. 47; Tables: Table 1. Lessons and Recommendations from Natural Disaster Evaluations p. X; Table 2. Apparent Functional Distribution of 49 Natural Disaster-Related Loans, 1995-2002 p. 8; Table 3. EIB’s Assistance for Disaster Management Inside the EU p. 10; Table 4. Emergency interventions are largely unevaluable p. 42; Table 5. Concentration of Lending in the Disaster Portfolio Compared with Overall World Bank Lending p. 43; Figures: Figure 1. Economic Losses from Great Natural Disasters p. 2; Figure 2. Share of World Bank Portfolio in Natural Disaster Lending (in 5 year increments) p. 6; Figure 3. The ADB’s Funding of Rehabilitation versus Mitigation p. 12; Figure 4. PREANDINO, Logic Framework and Action Areas p. 15; Figure 5. CDB’s Disaster Management Portfolio Compared to its Overall Portfolio p. 16; Figure 6. CEB’s Lending Over the Last Five Years (2001 - 2005) p. 18;
Figure 7. Embedding Evaluation Results in DG ECHO’s Policy Making p. 27; Figure 8. Relief Funding as a Percentage of all ODA from 1970 to 2005 p. 32; Figure 9. High vulnerability and losses in LAC p. 40; Figure 10. Risk management and financing framework p. 40; Figure 11. Disaster projects more rapidly delivered than the overall portfolio p. 41 |
| 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 Conference proceedings. |
| 650 |
1 |
|a Disaster response and recovery. |
| 710 |
2 |
|a Independent Evaluation Group (World Bank). |
| 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/FI13042595/00001 |y Click here for full text |
| 992 |
04 |
|a http://dpanther.fiu.edu/sobek/content/FI/13/04/25/95/00001/FI13042595thm.jpg |
