79621 Building Resilience to Disaster and Climate Change through Social Protection SYNTHESIS NOTE May 2013 Purpose of This Toolkit N atural disasters and climate change are among All of the case examples cited in the Synthesis Note the greatest threats to development.1 Although come from these case studies. The Guidance Notes and natural disasters have always presented risks, case studies are available at www.worldbank.org/sp. climate change increases those risks and compounds The toolkit offers guidance on both ex ante and ex them by adding a greater level of uncertainty. As a result post social protection measures to mitigate and reduce of their increased frequency, the economic and social costs the impact of disasters and climate change and to accel- of disasters are mounting (World Bank 2010). erate recovery (figure 1).2 It is not intended to guide relief Natural disasters and climate change can push people efforts immediately after a disaster. Instead, it seeks to into chronic and transient poverty and force them to adopt help prepare programs to respond before a disaster occurs negative coping strategies. Social protection programs and to contribute to a more agile transition from relief to play an important role in protecting poor and vulnerable recovery after a disaster. Especially in the relief phase, some people from these impacts and helping them reduce their functions are covered by the humanitarian sector as well exposure and vulnerability to them. as by the national civil protection systems. This toolkit provides guidance on how to prepare social The focus of this toolkit is aligned with the role and protection programs to respond to disasters and climate expertise of the World Bank, which has traditionally sup- change. The snapshots of good practice experiences and ported early and long-term recovery and helped rebuild practical tips for implementation are intended to guide livelihoods and infrastructure.3 This toolkit provides exam- decision makers in countries facing these risks in adapting ples of good practice experiences and practical guidance their social protection programs to reduce negative impacts for the practitioner in that direction. and accelerate recovery. The toolkit consists of a synthesis document and a set of online materials, comprising five Guidance Notes, five case studies, two technical notes, FIGURE 1: RELIEF TO DEVELOPMENT CONTINUUM and a video. The Guidance Notes cover the following topics: Humanitarian action ■■ Building Flexible and Scalable Social Protection Pro- grams to Respond to Larger-Scale Disasters; SOCIAL PROTECTION ■■ Adapting Beneficiary Targeting Mechanisms to Disaster Response and Climate Change; Risk mitigation Risk coping Risk reduction ■■ Communicating in a Post-disaster Context; ■■ Integrating Disaster- and Climate-Sensitive Monitoring measures Ex ante preventive Disaster for recovery Protective measures long-term adaptation Promotive measures for and Evaluation into Social Protection Programming; and, ■■ Adapting Benefit Transfer Mechanisms to Strengthen Disaster and Climate Resilience. The case studies include the following: ■■ Bangladesh’s Char Livelihoods Programme ■■ Ethiopia’s HARITA (Horn of Africa Risk Transfer for Source: Authors illustration Adaptation) Risk Insurance Program ■■ Ethiopia’s Productive Safety Nets Program 2  The toolkit draws primarily on successful examples of preparing social safety ■■ Mexico’s Temporary Employment Program nets to reduce risk and respond to disasters and climate change–related events. It does not examine other types of social protection programming, ■■ Pakistan’s Citizen Damage Compensation Program. such as social insurance and employment programs. The toolkit focuses on cash-based safety nets as opposed to in-kind programs. 3  The use of some of these mechanisms for humanitarian action has been 1  Although this toolkit is focused on natural disasters, many of the principles covered in other literature (see the Other Tools and Resources section at and guidance provided could be useful in other extreme events. the end of this document). Acknowledgments This toolkit was prepared by a multisectoral team con- Kelly Johnson, Stuart Kenward, Philippe Leite, Iftikhar Malik, sisting of Mirey Ovadiya, Cecilia Costella, Rachel Cipryk, Malcolm Marks, Moderis Abdulahi Mohammed, Victoria Inez Rasmus Heltberg, and John Elder. Cynthia Burton and Salinas, David Satterthwaite, Wolter Soer, Jorge Vargas, Marco Alcaraz supported the team in developing the case and Giuseppe Zampaglione for their comments, feedback, studies and the Guidance Notes. Nadège Nouviale provided and support; and to the UK Department for International administrative support. Development (DFID), Mexico’s Ministry of Social Welfare The team is grateful to Arup Banerji, Anush Bezhanyan, (SEDESOL), AusAID, and OXFAM for their collaboration and Ruslan Yemtsov for their guidance and managerial sup- throughout the development of the case studies. port; to Mansi Anand, Colin Andrews, Margaret Arnold, Jehan The toolkit was produced with financial support from Arulpragasam, Aline Couduel, Alejandro de la Fuente, Raiden the Rapid Social Response Fund and the Global Facility Dillard, Severino Garcia, Ugo Gentillini, Camilla Holmemo, for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR). iv P R E PA R I N G S O C I A L P R OT E C T I O N F O R D I S A S T E R S A N D C L I M AT E C H A N G E O P E R AT I O N A L T O O L K I T Contents List of Figures and Boxes.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi Abbreviations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii Why Should Social Protection Address Disaster Preparedness and Long-Term Climate Resilience?.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 How Can Social Protection Programs Address the Challenges of Natural Disasters and Climate Change?.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 A Framework for Climate- and Disaster-Responsive Social Protection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Design Feature 1: Coordinating Institutional Capacity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Design Feature 2: Ensuring Scalability and Flexibility. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Design Feature 3: Targeting Households That Are Most Vulnerable to Natural Disasters and Climate Change-Related Risks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Design Feature 4: Ensuring Good Governance and Accountability. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Design Feature 5: Increasing Adaptive Capacity at the Household and Community Level. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Enhancing communities’ physical assets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Supporting viable livelihoods at the household level.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Appendix A: Country Case Study Briefs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Bangladesh’s Char Livelihoods Programme. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Ethiopia’s Horn of Africa Risk Transfer for Adaptation Program.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Ethiopia’s Productive Safety Nets Programme. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Mexico’s Programa de Empleo Temporal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Pakistan’s Citizen Damage Compensation Programme.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Additional Resources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 C ontents v List of Figures and Boxes Figures Figure 1: Relief to Development Continuum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii Figure 2: Prevention, Protection, and Promotion: Disaster- and Climate Change- Responsive Social Protection Model. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Figure 3: Decision-Making Tree for Reducing Risk Ex Ante and Responding to Disasters Ex Post. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Figure 4: Linking Social Protection, Climate Change Adaptation, and Disaster Risk Management.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Figure 5: Roles of Federal Institutions in Ethiopia’s Productive Safety Net Programme (PNSP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Figure 6: Scalability of Ethiopia’s Productive Safety Net Programme (PSNP). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Figure 7: Disbursement of Funds in Pakistan’s Citizen Damage Compensation Programme. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Boxes Box 1: Rapidly responding to disasters in Brazil, Colombia, and Mexico. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Box 2: Coordinating disaster response in Mexico. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Box 3: Working with partners to deliver relief in Mexico and Pakistan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Box 4: Rapidly disbursing funds following emergencies in Ethiopia.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Box 5: Ensuring funding for victims of disasters in Mexico. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Box 6: Tips for the practitioner: Establishing a reliable benefit transfer mechanism. . . . . . . . 11 Box 7: Tips for the practitioner: Setting benefit levels. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Box 8: Benefit levels under Mexico’s emergency window. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Box 9: Examples of disaster- and climate-sensitive criteria for targeting beneficiaries. . . . . 15 Box 10: Monitoring beneficiary selection in Bangladesh’s Chars Livelihoods Program. . . . . . 16 Box 11: Recognizing gender differences in access to communications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Box 12: Tips for the practitioner: Building an M&E system.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Box 13: Increasing adaptive capacity in Ethiopia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Box 14: Drawing on communities to increase resilience in Malawi.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Box 15: Building climate resilience in Ethiopia through insurance-for-work. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 vi P R E PA R I N G S O C I A L P R OT E C T I O N F O R D I S A S T E R S A N D C L I M AT E C H A N G E O P E R AT I O N A L T O O L K I T Abbreviations CDCP Citizen Damage Compensation Programme CLP Chars Livelihoods Programme HARITA Horn of Africa Risk Transfer for Adaptation IFRC International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies IMO implementing organization M&E monitoring and evaluation NADRA National Database and Registration Authority PET Programa de Empleo Temporal (Temporary Employment Program) PETi Programa de Empleo Temporal Inmediato (Immediate Temporary Employment Program) PSNP Productive Safety Net Programme SEDESOL Secretaria de Desarrollo Social (Ministry of Social Welfare) WCFC Watan Card Facilitation Centre A bbreviations vii viii P R E PA R I N G S O C I A L P R OT E C T I O N F O R D I S A S T E R S A N D C L I M AT E C H A N G E O P E R AT I O N A L T O O L K I T 1 Why Should Social Protection Address Disaster Preparedness and Long-Term Climate Resilience? T he negative impacts of disasters and climate build their long-term resilience (Kanbur 2009; Kuriakose change have the potential to reverse recent gains and others 2012; Stern 2009; UNDP 2007; World Bank in reducing poverty and vulnerability, pushing peo- 2010). Countries that have social protection systems in ple into transitory and chronic poverty. Because the poor place before a shock hits are better able to respond, as and near-poor usually have less capacity to respond and Ethiopia’s experience shows. Independent evaluations of adapt, they are at increased risk of losing life, assets, and the Productive Safety Nets Program (PSNP) show that its livelihoods in natural disasters. Weather shocks increase sustained interventions have helped reverse the trend of transitory poverty and make it hard for both poor and near- deteriorating livelihoods and that its timely and predictable poor households to recover between assistance has enabled households to increasingly frequent disasters. In the manage risk more effectively; avoid Philippines, for example, the cost of adopting negative coping strategies, direct damages of natural disasters such as selling livelihood assets; and averaged $459 million a year between protect against food insecurity (Gil- 1970 and 2006, an annual loss equiva- ligan, Haddinot, and Taffesse 2008; lent to 0.5–1.0 percent of GDP. Cyclones Berhane, Sabates-Wheeler, and Tefera Ketsana and Parma increased the inci- 2011) dence of poverty in the worst-affected Most efforts to reduce and mitigate regions by as much as 3 percentage the risks to vulnerable groups affected points; nationwide the incidence of by economic and idiosyncratic shocks poverty rose 0.5 percentage points caused by natural disasters and climate (ESCAP and UNISDR 2010). change have been ad hoc. Establish- Poor households often have to rely ing automatic mechanisms to trigger on harmful coping strategies—with programs with the onset of a crisis potentially ominous long-term implications for human and stop them at the end of it, so that response measures development. When hit by a disaster, poor households often are timely, targeted, and temporary, has proven difficult cope by reducing essential food consumption, health care, (Marzo and Mori 2012). Creating such programs is critical, and education investments and by selling and depleting however, because well-designed and scalable social pro- productive assets. Although evidence of long-term effects tection programs whose activities are well coordinated with of disasters on human capital is scant, some studies have those of other sectors can respond more effectively. Setting found that school attendance drops, reenrolment is low, up and maintaining such programs requires practitioners and visits to health clinics decline after a disaster (World who understand the linkages between disaster response, Bank 2010). climate change, and social protection and have the skills Social protection systems can contribute significantly needed to integrate disaster and climate risk management to helping reduce the risk exposure of poor households and into safety net programs. W hy S hould S ocial P rotection A ddress D isaster P reparedness 1 2 P R E PA R I N G S O C I A L P R OT E C T I O N F O R D I S A S T E R S A N D C L I M AT E C H A N G E O P E R AT I O N A L T O O L K I T 2 How Can Social Protection Programs Address the Challenges of Natural Disasters and Climate Change? S ocial protection and labor systems, policies, and help reduce vulnerability by increasing the availability of programs help individuals and societies manage risk coping strategies in the face of disasters (Kuriakose and and volatility and protect them from poverty and others, 2012). Traditional social protection interventions can destitution through instruments that improve resilience, reduce risk exposure by focusing on disaster risk reduction equity, and opportunity (Kuriakose and others 2012). Social and climate change adaptation. Examples include public “ Safety net programs not only have the ability to efficiently and effectively buffer regular social assistance beneficiary households and communities from the impacts of disasters. They also temporarily expand coverage to a wider group of vulnerable people, helping to prevent significant increases in the number of people needing such assistance over the medium to longterm (ISDR 2011). � protection programs can help increase the resilience of the works programs that conserve soil and water and develop vulnerable by preventing or reducing the impacts of shocks hazard-resistant roads and other infrastructure. (prevention role). Social protection interventions such as Social protection programs can also contribute to social insurance, weather-based insurance, cash and in-kind equity by protecting against destitution in the face of transfers, asset diversification, and other instruments may shocks (protection role). Protection measures such as cash FIGURE 2: PREVENTION, PROTECTION, AND PROMOTION: DISASTER- AND CLIMATE CHANGE-RESPONSIVE SOCIAL PROTECTION MODEL • Education, skills and training • Entrepreneurship • Public works support • Cash for work • Extension services Climate and disaster Prevent Protect Promote responsive social protection • Seasonal employment • Cash transfers • Risk insurance • Community investment in • In-kind transfers • Long-term cash/asset disaster and climate responsive • Public works transfer infrastructure and assets • Savings Source: Adapted from Conroy, Goodman, and Kenward 2010. H ow C an S ocial P rotection P rograms A ddress the C hallenges of N atural D isasters 3 transfers, social pensions, and public works programs for to be disaster and climate responsive. Before choosing a post-disaster recovery and reconstruction can help prevent social protection intervention, the practitioner needs to poor and vulnerable households from sinking deeper into consider a number of factors: poverty after disasters while protecting the near-poor from ■■ whether the intervention aims to address post-disaster falling into poverty. These measures also guard against the recovery, ex ante risk reduction, or both erosion of regular social assistance benefits. ■■ whether the intervention seeks to achieve complemen- Social protection programs can increase opportunity by tary objectives, such as rehabilitating infrastructure, promoting human capital development, access to sustain- developing human capital, creating temporary employ- able livelihoods, and employment (promotion role). They ment, and addressing the needs of specific groups can increase long-term resilience and promote opportunities in the face of shocks by diversifying household income ■■ particular circumstances in the country, such as security, and assets, encouraging risk diversification, and building delivery capacity, the existence of credit and insurance skills, helping to address underlying vulnerabilities and markets, and functioning markets. build capacity for response (Kuriakose and others 2012). Figure 3 provides a decision-making map to help Although this toolkit draws primarily from the expe- practitioners choose a social protection program based riences of successful safety net programs, in principle, a on particular country circumstances. range of social protection interventions can be adapted 4 P R E PA R I N G S O C I A L P R OT E C T I O N F O R D I S A S T E R S A N D C L I M AT E C H A N G E O P E R AT I O N A L T O O L K I T FIGURE 3: DECISION-MAKING TREE FOR REDUCING RISK EX ANTE AND RESPONDING TO DISASTERS EX POST Country/disaster CONTEXT Are there security concerns? Y DECISION STAGE I: CONTEXT N Are there malnutrition or gender issues? Y N Are markets disrupted or non-functional? Y N Y Are credit/insurance markets non-functional? Cash-based N In-kind Intervention objective Disaster risk reduction and mitigation Disaster response Complementary Y N objectives? DECISION STAGE II: OBJECTIVES Y Human capital? Y N Rehabilitation or reconstruction? Y Livelihood diversification? N Infrastructure/community assets? Y N Employment? Y Y PROGRAM TYPE Livelihood AND DELIVERY Conditional Active labor Cash/ support: cash trans- Weather/ cash transfers, market programs, food for work, fers, social pensions, index insurance, fee waivers, school employment community driven take-home rations, asset transfer feeding, take-home supplementary guarantees development rations feeding SPECIFIC DELIVERY/CAPACITY REQUIREMENTS H ow C an S ocial P rotection P rograms A ddress the C hallenges of N atural D isasters 5 6 P R E PA R I N G S O C I A L P R OT E C T I O N F O R D I S A S T E R S A N D C L I M AT E C H A N G E O P E R AT I O N A L T O O L K I T 3 A Framework for Climate- and Disaster-Responsive Social Protection T hree principles can help policy makers and prac- Five key design features can help practitioners devise titioners identify entry points and design features and adapt social protection programs to respond to climate that increase the climate responsiveness of social shocks and natural disasters:2 protection:1 ■■ Design feature 1: Coordinating institutional capacity. ■■ Principle 1: Engage in disaster- and climate-aware plan- The policy platform needs to facilitate coordination ning. Social protection professionals must acknowledge by relevant disaster risk management, climate change and hedge against uncertainty and plan for more adaptation, and social protection agencies and actors, frequent and more severe disasters. Direct impacts of tapping the expertise and institutional capacity of disasters include human and economic losses. Indirect each (figure 4). effects include food price volatility, food insecurity, ■■ Design feature 2: Ensuring scalability and flexibility. migration, and potential conflict over land and natural Programs must be flexible enough to be rapidly scaled resources. Disaster- and climate-aware planning requires up during a disaster and scaled back once the crisis is taking these impacts into account in designing new over. They need to be capable of increasing support social protection interventions and building contingency to existing beneficiaries in the event of major shocks. mechanisms for existing programs, creating feedback Achieving scalability requires targeting, registry, and loops with early warning systems, and coordinating with payment systems that can identify, enroll, and make meteorology and climate change agencies. Planning transfers to additional eligible participants. It also may also involve risk mapping to determine how climate requires funding arrangements that can mobilize change is likely to affect a country or a geographic adequate resources on short notice. area; which physical, natural, and institutional assets ■■ Design feature 3: Targeting households that are most vul- need to be strengthened; and how consultations and nerable to natural disasters and climate change-related other processes can help empower the most vulnerable. risks. Disaster- and climate-aware targeting uses ■■ Principle 2: Focus interventions on livelihoods and assets. area- and household-level data on climate exposure to Policy makers need to understand how different risks inform targeting and distinguish the temporarily from affect livelihood resources and adopt a user-oriented the chronically poor. Such targeting requires incorpo- approach. Understanding the economic decisions rating disaster- and climate-related vulnerabilities into households and communities make to sustain their beneficiary selection criteria. livelihoods in the face of external pressures can help ■■ Design feature 4: Ensuring good governance and policy makers plan appropriate interventions. accountability. The increase in disaster risk and the ■■ Principle 3: Build the capacity to adapt and respond at likelihood and severity of climate change–related events the system level. Traditional informal safety nets are puts pressures on social protection systems, widening inadequate to handle the massive increases in covariate the potential for leakage, fraud, and malpractice. More risk brought about by natural disasters and climate attention must be paid to governance and accountability change. This type of risk requires social protection mechanisms, including through extensive communi- systems that are responsive and adaptive, systems that cation with, outreach to, and training of beneficiaries can provide adequate financing, human resources, and and implementers. administrative systems following a catastrophic event. 1  These principles are adapted from Kuriakose and others (2012). 2  These features are adapted from Kuriakose and others (2012). A F ramework for C limate - and D isaster - R esponsive S ocial P rotection 7 FIGURE 4: LINKING SOCIAL PROTECTION, losses. Programs can be scaled up using an existing benefi- CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION, AND ciary registry or poverty database and payment mechanism DISASTER RISK MANAGEMENT or by complementing existing mechanisms with mobile facilities and staff (box 1). Cli al, sic tar mate p hy sets Design Feature 1: Coordinating g - l, s Ad ettin and cia y a so unit ap tiv ep g dis ast er- nts om i n m Institutional Capacity ay aw Climate me l c me are vest atura rks port nt Change In d n wo sup In many countries, disaster risk management and social sys an ublic ood tem Adaptation P i h s • ive l protection agencies work in isolation and have objectives •L Disaster that do not always intersect in an optimal manner. Social Social Protection Risk protection agencies often lack the skills, knowledge, and Management experience to integrate concerns about disaster risk man- agement/climate change adaptation into programs and Transfers to protect systems. International experience suggests that where household assets there is a well-defined coordination mechanism among a Risk financing network of ministries and agencies, disaster response can be mounted rapidly and efficiently. The key is to lay the groundwork so that existing institutional capacity can be fully exploited in response to a disaster. Three features are critical to building a sound institu- ■■ Design feature 5: Increasing adaptive capacity at the tional platform: household and community level. Communities’ social, physical, and natural assets need to be strengthened ■■ effective formal communication channels and linkages in ways that increase resilience to shocks and support among social protection, disaster management, and viable livelihoods to ensure long-term sustainability. relevant sectoral ministries/agencies, including those responsible for early warning systems A key feature of successful response mechanisms is the ■■ clearly defined roles and responsibilities of all ministries/ ability to scale up to provide assistance beyond the core agencies and other implementing partners, including target group (usually the chronically poor) to include the international, nongovernmental, civil society, and private transitional poor and other groups vulnerable to disaster sector organizations BOX 1: RAPIDLY RESPONDING TO DISASTERS IN BRAZIL, COLOMBIA, AND MEXICO Bolsa Familia, a conditional cash transfer program, introduced temporary measures to meet the needs of provided in-kind and cash benefits to 162,000 fami- affected populations. It temporarily suspended program lies in 279 municipalities within 10 days of the floods conditionalities in certain areas to accommodate the that ravaged Brazil in January 2011. It used its registry shortfalls in service provision as a result of damaged (cadastro unico) and identification cards to identify infrastructure, adjusted benefit levels, and allowed people affected families, disbursing payments through the affected by flooding to claim their benefits at different program’s banking arrangements with branches of the locations. Evaluations of both Familias en Acción and Caixa Economica Federal. Utilization of a program that Oportunidades highlight the importance of ensuring was already in place sped the delivery of assistance. that emergency-related program adjustments are clearly Conditional cash transfer programs in Colombia articulated in operational manuals, clearly defining the (Familias en Acción) and Mexico (Oportunidades) used roles of such programs in disasters within the framework their registries and extensive networks of social workers of a disaster response plan or legislation, and linking to identify and verify people in need and deliver in-kind them to the network of institutions involved in disaster and cash assistance to people affected by floods in response and contingency financing. Colombia in 2010 and droughts in Mexico in 2011. Both Sources: Yaschine and Hernandez 2012; Villalobos, Cheston, and Castano programs maintained their regular operations in the Mesa 2012. affected areas. In Colombia, Familias en Acción also 8 P R E PA R I N G S O C I A L P R OT E C T I O N F O R D I S A S T E R S A N D C L I M AT E C H A N G E O P E R AT I O N A L T O O L K I T BOX 2: COORDINATING DISASTER RESPONSE IN MEXICO Mexico’s Programa de Empleo Temporal (PET) is an it requires the ministries involved to share a common interagency safety net program overseen by the Min- beneficiary database (registry) and information sys- istry of Social Welfare (SEDESOL) and implemented by tem. All implementing ministries receive data from the several sectoral ministries (transportation, environment, early warning system, which allow them to prepare an labor). The Ministry of the Interior (SEGOB) is tasked emergency response or scale up in affected localities with overseeing a coordinated institutional response to through PET or other response channels. Each col- natural disasters and managing a major national disas- laborating ministry is responsible for carrying out its ter response contingency fund (the Fund for Natural portion of the public works program—from targeting Disasters [FONDEN]). to payments to supervision and monitoring—within its A parliamentary act stipulates the responsibilities of own resource envelope. each party and mandates the coordination mechanism; ■■ linkages and information-sharing arrangements with Partnership agreements must be created between the the broader humanitarian response system, such as agencies and service providers best positioned to perform the United Nations–led emergency cluster system. outreach and delivery of benefits and services, including services required in case of a scale-up. Successful program Experience from post-disaster recovery efforts high- scale-ups involve partnerships and coordination among lights the importance of two features. The first is oversight a variety of parties—including public and private service and coordination of the disaster response effort by a providers, agencies and ministries, and development single parent institution, as the case studies of Mexico’s partners—and effective use of their relative competencies Temporary Employment Program (box 2) and Ethiopia’s and capacities. Governments that have proactively tapped Productive Safety Net Program (figure 5) and the examples private sector service providers (such as banks and cell of Turkey Emergency Earthquake Reconstruction Program phone companies) or found innovative ways to deliver and Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Fund illustrate. benefits that reflect local conditions have had success in The second feature is the establishment of partnerships responding to disasters. between public, private, and civil society sectors (box 3). FIGURE 5: ROLES OF FEDERAL INSTITUTIONS IN ETHIOPIA’S PRODUCTIVE SAFETY NET PROGRAMME (PSNP) Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Argriculture Economic Development PSNP Management • Disbursement of cash resources to ministries and regions • PSNP financial management Disaster risk Natural management resource and food security management sector directorate Program coordination Public works coordination • Day-to-day PSNP management • Early warning • Beneficiary transfers • Linkages PSNP-humanitarian • Allocation of resources to regions response • Technical support to regions • Emergency relief • Overall program monitoring A F ramework for C limate - and D isaster - R esponsive S ocial P rotection 9 BOX 3: WORKING WITH PARTNERS TO DELIVER RELIEF IN MEXICO AND PAKISTAN Mexico’s Programa de Empleo Temporal (PET) program Pakistan’s Citizen Damage Compensation Pro- uses public, private, or community-based modalities gramme relies heavily on partnerships with the pri- to make payments to beneficiaries, depending on vate sector (administered through Memorandums of the volume of transactions and the connectivity of Understanding that are put in place as part of disaster the locality to intermediary institutions. In some rural preparedness plans). It delivers cash payments through and isolated localities, payments are made through commercial banks, using biometric identification and community committees, which receive cash from the automatic teller machine (ATM) cards. An international central agency. In other localities, cash is distributed to organization runs the program’s communications beneficiaries through the telecommunications agency’s campaign. network of cash distribution facilities. Design Feature 2: Ensuring FIGURE 6: SCALABILITY OF ETHIOPIA’S Scalability and Flexibility PRODUCTIVE SAFETY NET PROGRAMME (PSNP) Experience has shown that the faster support reaches people affected by a disaster, the less likely they are to Links with national emergency assistance system to support PSNP and non-PSNP areas resort to negative coping strategies (World Bank 2009). Governments therefore need to be able to step in swiftly Risk financing supports transitorily food�insecure following natural disasters. Administrative mechanisms used populations in PSNP areas affected by significant to mobilize and deploy contingency financing and human climate event resources, transfer benefits, manage fiduciary risks, and identify and register affected people should be scalable 20% contingency budget supports transitorily food�insecure populations in PSNP areas and flexible, as demonstrated by the Ethiopia’s Productive Safety Net Programme (box 4). A policy framework is Core chronically food-insecure needed that identifies the sources of contingency financing PSNP beneficiaries and assigns financing to programs. A contingency budget and procedures for administering financing must be in place Source: Kuriakose and others 2012. that allow institutions and implementing agencies to gain BOX 4: RAPIDLY DISBURSING FUNDS FOLLOWING EMERGENCIES IN ETHIOPIA The annual budget of Ethiopia’s Productive Safety Nets emergency grant financing from an external partner; Program (PSNP) includes a contingency equivalent to 20 use of the government’s early warning system, which percent of the base program and a risk financing facility triggers a response; contingency planning in woredas; designed to respond to transitory needs in chronically and adequate institutional capacity at all levels. food-insecure districts (woredas) when large shocks In 2011, in response to the drought, the PSNP occur. Fifteen percent of the contingency budget is held extended the duration of its regular support for 6.5 at the regional level and 5 percent at the woreda level. million beneficiaries, providing an extra three months Both mechanisms are used to address the unexpected of assistance to an additional 3.1 million people living needs of chronically food-insecure households and in PSNP areas. The time between the triggering of the transitory food insecurity among PSNP and non–PSNP risk financing facility and the disbursement of payments households in PSNP–supported woredas. Funds that are averaged less than two months. In contrast, it took several not used during the fiscal year are rolled over. months for the authorities in charge of humanitarian If a shock is too large to be handled by the con- assistance to assess the crisis, mobilize funding, and tingency fund, the risk financing facility responds. respond to needs. The average humanitarian response This facility is based on four principles: contingent to slow-onset droughts in Ethiopia takes eight months. 10 P R E PA R I N G S O C I A L P R OT E C T I O N F O R D I S A S T E R S A N D C L I M AT E C H A N G E O P E R AT I O N A L T O O L K I T BOX 5: ENSURING FUNDING FOR VICTIMS OF DISASTERS IN MEXICO Mexico’s Programa de Empleo Temporal Inmediato (SEMARNAT) and at least 20 percent for the Ministry (PETi) is an emergency response mechanism that of Social Welfare (SEDESOL)). This share is deemed was added to PET in 2003 to ensure the timely and sufficient to respond to higher-frequency events (such efficient response to populations affected by systemic as hurricanes of flooding) of low to medium impact. If crises. The mechanism operates within the broader PET necessary and justified by the magnitude of the disaster, framework but has modified systems and procedures all remaining funds in SEDESOL’s annual budget for PET for a post-disaster context. All PET implementing can be channelled through PETi to address the needs ministries are required to allocate a percentage of PET of people affected. If this funding is not adequate to funding to a contingency fund (up to 20 percent for support participation in the cash-for-work scheme for the Ministry of Communication and Transport (SCT) all people in need, Mexico’s Fund for Natural Disasters and the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (FONDEN) can provide supplementary resources to PET. access to funding immedi- Creating early warning “ ately when an emergency systems, establishing con- is declared. Creating early warning systems, tingency financing and con- Part of managing con- establishing contingency financing tingency plans, and building tingency financing is having institutional capacity ahead and contingency plans, and building in place a programmatic of crises can significantly disaster preparedness plan. institutional capacity ahead of crises reduce the time it takes to Such a plan not only pro- can significantly reduce the time it respond to a crisis. Despite � vides operational guide- takes to respond to a crisis. weaknesses, the National lines on the role, objectives, Disaster Management Strat- adaptation of design param- egy in Bangladesh made it eters, and triggering on and possible to respond quickly off specific social protection interventions, in particular to Cyclone Sidr in 2007, evacuating and reaccommodating for post-disaster recovery, but also defines the roles and 4.5 million people within five days (Pelham, Clay, and Braun- responsibilities of different agencies; and allocates funding holz 2011). The governments of Ethiopia, Mexico (box 5), for the execution of post-disaster activities. and Pakistan have also developed disaster response plans and created response mechanisms. BOX 6: TIPS FOR THE PRACTITIONER: ESTABLISHING A RELIABLE BENEFIT TRANSFER MECHANISM The following tips can help ensure the transparency, largest numbers of affected people and effect predictability, and timeliness of transfers following a benefit transfers rapidly. natural disaster or climate change–related incident: • Optimize the use of modern technology in view • Understand the political, institutional, and legal of the size, location, and needs of the affected context and available service provision options. populations. • Use existing payment mechanisms, temporarily • As part of preparedness plans, establish guidelines expanding staff and equipment where outreach for the payment cycle, and orient/train staff and already exists in affected areas. partners in their use. • Establish temporary registration and payment or • Manage information flows to keep track of payments. point-of-sale offices in affected areas. • Provide the affected population with basic informa- • For the disbursement of payments, contract insti- tion about benefit amounts, payment locations, pay- tutional partners that have the ability to reach the ment dates, and requirements to collect payments. • Ensure access by people with mobility constraints. A F ramework for C limate - and D isaster - R esponsive S ocial P rotection 11 participating in its public works window, Bangladesh’s BOX 7: TIPS FOR THE PRACTITIONER: Chars Livelihood Programme put in place a temporary cash SETTING BENEFIT LEVELS advance against future wages in flood-affected areas in • Use criteria that reflect how households earn which the start of works projects was delayed. The initiative their livings. proved to be very effective in smoothing consumption and • Weigh transaction costs and access to markets became an intervention option of the program’s disaster and essential goods in choosing between in-kind response mechanism. and cash benefits. Good design practice points to setting benefits at a level that ensures subsistence but does not discourage • Develop options based on the availability of work or contribute to post-disaster inflation (box 8). Large funding and the number of potential beneficiaries sums—such as payments triggered by the loss of a house to be served. or property—should be made as lump-sum payments, • Establish benefits that complement or supple- keeping in mind security considerations, particularly for ment existing social assistance benefits. households headed by women, elderly people, or people • Set triggers for phasing benefits in and out. with disabilities. Successful examples also highlight the • As part of disaster preparedness plans, develop importance of flexibility: benefits under existing social guidelines that drive the allocation of resources. assistance schemes should be adjustable as part of disaster response. Source: Del Ninno, Subbarao, and Quintana forthcoming. High- and low-technol- ogy options for providing benefits have been used with success. The key is to “ The ability to scale up social protection program- use the most cost-effective High- and low-technology for pro- ming depends on the capac- option given a country’s viding benefits have been used ity on the ground to deliver institutional capacity and with success. The key is to use the the target populations’ assistance rapidly. Response teams and related mech- most cost-effective option given a access to technology. anisms must be in place country’s institutional capacity and In Pakistan’s Citizen’s to conduct rapid damage the target populations’ access to Damage Compensation Program, three commer- � assessments and to estab- technology. lish temporary registration/ cial banks were selected information centers to enroll based on their experience beneficiaries for benefits or with disasters and internally temporary employment opportunities. Mexico’s PETi and displaced people, the coverage of their branch networks, Pakistan’s Citizen Damage Compensation Programme rely on mobile local information centers to enroll beneficiaries, make payments, and hear grievances (see case studies). BOX 8: BENEFIT LEVELS UNDER Adapting benefits and benefit transfer mechanisms MEXICO’S EMERGENCY WINDOW to disaster response is key to meeting needs. As with regular social protection programming, benefit transfer Mexico’s Programa de Empleo Temporal (PET) systems for disaster response need to distribute benefits sets benefit levels slightly below market wages for to the targeted population in a predictable and transparent unskilled labor (at 99 percent of the wage level), at manner, using a reliable payment mechanism (box 6). The a rate of 60 pesos ($4.50) a day. It also limits the types and levels of benefits provided need to be sufficient number of days an individual can work per year. When to meet basic needs and prevent households from resorting responding to a disaster, however, implementing to negative coping strategies while they reestablish their ministries have the flexibility to adjust the number livelihoods (Harvey and Bailey 2011) (box 7). of days each beneficiary is entitled to work, the The initial phase of a disaster response program often length of the work day, and hence the total benefit requires some experimentation, monitoring, and adjust- per household. Beneficiaries can work as long as the ment, even where parameters for benefits already exist. state of emergency is in place (up to three or four For example, to avoid disrupting the incomes of household months in some instances . 12 P R E PA R I N G S O C I A L P R OT E C T I O N F O R D I S A S T E R S A N D C L I M AT E C H A N G E O P E R AT I O N A L T O O L K I T FIGURE 7: DISBURSEMENT OF FUNDS IN PAKISTAN’S CITIZEN DAMAGE COMPENSATION PROGRAMME and their ability to facilitate payments through points of all community members at the same time. Beneficiaries sale in various provinces (figure 7). Where branches were are paid against confirmed attendance by checking the not conveniently located, banks set up 101 payment desks— master attendance sheet and payroll sheets. Payment pre- called Watan Card Facilitation Centres (WCFCs)—within dictability still seems to be a challenge, however, although program registration and payment centers. More than 2 improvements have occurred (Berhane, Sabates-Wheeler, million households received payments through payment and Tefera 2011). Food transfers follow established food centers, points of sale, and the commercial branch network. management system and emergency response processes Very low levels of fraud have been associated with the of the government, the World Food Programme, and NGO program. These payment mechanisms evolved over time systems. and were adjusted based on beneficiary satisfaction, ease Mexico’s PET program uses an array of payment mech- of access, and fraud-prevention considerations. anisms to respond to the needs and circumstances of its In its initial phase, Bangladesh’s Chars Livelihood clients. On average, emergency payments are disbursed to Programme made payments to its beneficiaries through beneficiaries within five working days after a disaster has a network of NGO partners called implementing organi- been declared in an area. The disbursements are made in zations (IMOs). Payments were made through points of cash through Telecomm, the telecommunications agency, sale at particular locations on specific days. under the Ministry of Communications and Transporat- A lower-technology option that has worked well is the tion, which has a network of cash disbursement facilities use of direct payments (in-kind or cash) to beneficiaries around the country. Where fixed facilities do not exist or through local government structures or implementing conditions make it difficult for beneficiaries to reach a cash agency structures based on a computerized payroll and disbursement center, it sometimes uses mobile facilities. attendance sheet system. This system is relevant for cash- Small amounts of cash are generally disbursed directly from for-work and noncash transfer programs. In Ethiopia, for central offices to communities, with payments made through example, the Productive Safety Net Program makes monthly community committees. In areas with better connectivity cash payments to beneficiaries. Funds are transferred from and where a larger number of beneficiaries are involved, the Ministry of Finance directly to woreda (district) bank cash disbursements are made through commercial banks accounts. Payments are made at several key locations to or Telecomm. A F ramework for C limate - and D isaster - R esponsive S ocial P rotection 13 Design Feature 3: Targeting whether the social protection program provides a short- Households That Are Most er-term response to a major disaster (in which trade-offs have to be made between the speed, accuracy, and cost Vulnerable to Natural Disasters and of using different targeting mechanisms in order to reach Climate Change-Related Risks the most vulnerable among the affected population in a In regular social protection programming, beneficiaries timely way) or longer-term activities to reduce or mitigate are often selected based on some predefined criteria. vulnerabilities. Categorical targeting may be used to reach one group In disaster response, geographic targeting is an option and income poverty to target another. When a disaster or in areas where damage is extensive and most households climate shock occurs, it is likely that a different or larger are affected. In areas where the affected population is set of people will be affected. Flexible systems must be dispersed, and in places where pockets of poverty or built that can respond to this increased and differentiated vulnerability co-exist with relatively well-off popula- demand. tions, geographic targeting needs to be combined with Simply targeting the poor does not ensure that people other methods, such as categorical or poverty targeting. who are most vulnerable to disaster and climate shocks are Self-targeting of beneficiaries, usually done in public works covered. Incorporating other specific criteria can signifi- programs, may need to be combined with categorical cantly increase the effectiveness of programs in protecting targeting measures to ensure that certain vulnerable and augmenting the income and assets of poor households. groups are not left out. As the response progresses, and A combination of targeting strategies should be used. 3 the availability and quality of information improves, ben- The key is to develop criteria that are verifiable and measur- eficiary targeting can be further refined. able and that complement In long-term risk reduc- and reinforce other criteria. tion interventions, selection “ Some options include the criteria can be identified by following: A combination of targeting strate- analyzing the vulnerability ■■ Geographic targeting gies should be used. The key is to to natural disasters and cli- mate change risks. The anal- of high-exposure areas develop criteria that are verifiable (ex ante) or areas that ysis should be carried out as and measurable. a component of poverty and have been affected by � disaster/climate impacts risk assessments, including (ex post) the community-level anal- ysis of disaster and climate ■■ Categorical targeting vulnerability. Assessments should include the underlying (for example, targeting of particular categories at risk, structural issues that contribute to inequality, poverty, such as children, elderly people, people with disabilities, and vulnerability. Risk analysis also needs to be regularly or people vulnerable to disaster/climate) updated, because disaster and climate change vulnerabil- ■■ Poverty-based targeting, whereby measures of changes ity or resilience will change over time, possibly requiring to welfare as a result of disaster- or climate-related adjustments in targeting over the life of a program. Area- shocks complement easily identifiable welfare mea- and household-level data on exposure to natural hazards sures such as housing location and quality and assets are needed to distinguish transitory from chronic poverty ■■ Self-targeting, where individuals or households decide in places where crises are likely to occur. whether to participate (for example, setting wages at The development of targeting selection criteria and indi- or below market rates in an emergency/rehabilitation cators needs to take into consideration not only longer-term public works program) measures of household poverty but also household losses ■■ Community-based targeting, where community selects or potential losses as a result of a shock. Methods such as the beneficiaries based on its own disaster and climate proxy means testing—which use a set of easily identifiable vulnerability criteria. indicators such as a household’s location, housing quality, and asset holdings to develop a score—need to be sup- Application of these methods will vary according to plemented with measures of rapid changes in welfare as the context (box 9). The method used will depend on a result of disaster or climate shocks. These measures of household vulnerability can be incorporated into a proxy means test to measure transitory need. 3  This section is adapted from Grosh and others (2008). 14 P R E PA R I N G S O C I A L P R OT E C T I O N F O R D I S A S T E R S A N D C L I M AT E C H A N G E O P E R AT I O N A L T O O L K I T BOX 9: EXAMPLES OF DISASTER- AND CLIMATE-SENSITIVE CRITERIA FOR TARGETING BENEFICIARIES • Bangladesh’s Char Livelihoods Project (CLP): Only topography are prioritized for hazard-resistant road poor communities living on fluvial islands (chars), construction; municipal drought-related climate which are highly vulnerable to flooding and climate indexes are used as targeting criteria for fire mit- change impacts, are eligible for CLP support. igation and watershed protection activities under • Ethiopia’s Productive Safety Net Program (PSNP): a specific disaster risk management component. The PSNP covers geographic regions and districts When a disaster occurs, geographical targeting is that are chronically food insecure because they the first level of beneficiary selection. Participation are highly climate vulnerable, usually as a result is limited mainly to households residing in munic- of droughts. Chronic food insecurity is defined as ipalities declared to be in a state of emergency. a food gap of three months or more and receipt Since 2009, housing damage surveys have been of food aid for three consecutive years. The PSNP used as a proxy for loss of livelihood (that is, as a also includes a household-level criterion that looks basis for determining temporary income support at severe asset loss over time. This criterion is sen- needs and indirectly contributing toward home sitive to the cumulative effect of both disaster and reconstruction costs). Houses identified as damaged economic shocks. are targeted for follow-on engineering assessments by the relevant agency. • Mexico’s Temporary Employment Program (PET): Municipalities with high average rainfall and rugged “ Community participation is an essential element of effective beneficiary targeting systems. Even in rapid-onset disasters, which are initially characterized by chaos, it should be pos- � sible to conduct qualitative consultations with a cross-section of affected stakeholders. The first (relief) phase of the Pakistan Citizen Damage people with disabilities, which represented more than 14 Compensation Programme (September 2010–June 2011) percent of household enrolled in Phase I. relied on a mix of geographical targeting and assessments Existing beneficiary registration and management of community-level housing damage and/or crop loss (used information systems for social protection programs can as proxies for livelihoods losses) to determine eligibility for facilitate vulnerability targeting for large-scale disaster a one-time cash transfer payment. The exact method used responses. In locations subject to high-frequency extreme varied by province. This approach allowed for the quick climactic events, such as recurrent floods and droughts, mobilization of the program, but it inevitably missed some the development and regular updating of computerized households and did not allow for vulnerability targeting. beneficiary lists through existing social protection programs For the second (recovery) phase (June 2011–June 2013), (including those created for previous disaster responses) housing damage was combined with refinements to the can quickly provide information to target relief support beneficiary targeting mechanism to screen out the better-off in the immediate aftermath of a disaster. Such lists may and to include the most vulnerable flood-affected families. also help in the development of targeting strategies for The vulnerability characteristics of flood-affected families low-frequency disasters, such as major earthquakes and were profiled by analyzing a random sample from the flood volcanic eruptions. Vulnerability targeting can be expedited registration database and linking it with information on or facilitated if the disaster response registration databases gender, disability, and educational levels in the national civil are linked to existing national civil registries, poverty data- registration database. This process was facilitated by the bases, or social protection databases. use of Pakistan’s National Database Registration Authority Community participation is an essential element of (NADRA) to administer both databases and NADRA’s efforts effective beneficiary targeting systems. Even in rapid-on- to include potential beneficiaries on the civil registry who set disasters, which are initially characterized by chaos, it were not already on it. The inclusion strategy resulted in should be possible to conduct qualitative consultations increased coverage of households headed by women and with a cross-section of affected stakeholders. The use of A F ramework for C limate - and D isaster - R esponsive S ocial P rotection 15 BOX 10: MONITORING BENEFICIARY SELECTION IN BANGLADESH’S CHARS LIVELIHOODS PROGRAM The beneficiary selection process for the Chars Liveli- through the program, to become future customers in hoods Programme (CLP) in Bangladesh is carried out IMO microcredit programs, or to repay existing loans. by the staff of up to 21 local nongovernmental organi- The verification process required about 450 days zations (NGOs) and implementing organizations (IMOs). of Secretariat input over four CLP-1 selection rounds. The CLP’s Management Secretariat, which is run by an However, it demonstrated to the IMOs that CLP man- international firm engaged by the program’s bilateral agement was serious. The fact that redoing the selection donors, verifies beneficiaries. Teams of staff revisit and process entailed substantial costs for IMOs discouraged reinterview 3–5 percent of households to confirm their attempts to overestimate participant numbers and eligibility. If the inclusion or exclusion error rate exceeds significantly reduced targeting errors. No IMO had to 5 percent, the IMOs repeat the selection process. repeat the selection process more than once, and the Extensive exclusion errors were identified through selection standards remained consistently high after the this process after the first round of beneficiary selection lengthy revisions that took place during the early stages during the project’s first phase (2004–10). Although the of project’s first phase. The exclusion error rate in the IMOs followed the CLP’s selection criteria, the households first intake of the second phase was only 0.4 percent, identified tended to be younger and healthier than aver- and a 2011 CLP poverty assessment found less than 1 age, with most headed by working men. The IMOs may percent of eligible households were missed as a result have believed that these households had the greatest of exclusion error. potential to make use of the productive assets provided trained community facilitation teams has been found to be the risk of fraud, malpractice, and corruption is heightened. one of the most cost-effective investments an agency can Several steps can promote accountability and good make, saving time and money that is often otherwise spent governance in disaster- and climate change-responsive resolving confusion and tension (BBC Media Action 2012). social protection programming: Independent third-party verification of beneficiaries ■■ Ensure effective participation in decision making by helps to discourage selection biases and to detect gaps in communities and vulnerable groups. Program planners coverage. Such verification need to understand the lim- “ is important to reduce inclu- itations and constraints that sion and exclusion errors. Adequate accountability and gov- prevent vulnerable groups Another good practice from participating in or ernance mechanisms are crucial to followed by a number of accessing the program and inspiring trust in and establishing programs to reduce errors devise measures to over- is the periodic monitoring the credibility of any social protec- come them, using commu- � and reassessment of bene- tion initiative. nication approaches, meth- ficiary targeting processes ods, and tools that work and outcomes, as well as the most effectively in particular settings (for example, evaluation of the performance of targeting mechanisms rural versus urban). Often, additional resources will (box 10). need to be mobilized at the community level to ensure Finally, a robust targeting grievance mechanism has adequate outreach. A beneficiary survey of the Ethiopia to be put in place or adapted to cope with the likely high Productive Safety Nets Programme (PSNP) found that volume of complaints needing to be resolved over a com- levels of satisfaction with the program were highest (90 pressed time period in a post-disaster context. percent) among households that felt they had received enough information to understand how the program Design Feature 4: Ensuring Good worked; satisfaction among people who reported not Governance and Accountability having received enough information was lower (75 per- cent). The PSNP gradually introduced communication Adequate accountability and governance mechanisms are measures at local levels, posting lists of beneficiaries, crucial to inspiring trust in and establishing the credibility appeals, and appeal resolutions, along with its social of any social protection initiative. Such mechanisms are safety net and public works plans for public review. particularly important in a post-disaster context, where 16 P R E PA R I N G S O C I A L P R OT E C T I O N F O R D I S A S T E R S A N D C L I M AT E C H A N G E O P E R AT I O N A L T O O L K I T ■■ Establish good two-way communications and feedback ■■ Manage fiduciary risks. Disaster preparedness plans mechanisms. The development of two-way communi- should include emergency guidelines that simplify or cation systems between disaster response programs modify existing financial management and procurement and beneficiaries is a proven way of reducing conflicts procedures and emphasize internal and external com- over the distribution of benefits, diminishing frustration, munication on program guidelines. Each implementing combating corruption and abuse of aid, and identify- agency should regularly report its activities and expen- ing people who may have been missed in beneficiary ditures to an administrative unit. Independent auditors selection processes (IFRC 2012). The establishment of should be used and spot checks conducted to verify feedback mechanisms, for both program beneficiaries adherence to program guidelines. It is also important and the broader affected population, is essential. Such to create mobile capacity or personnel, in the form of mechanisms can include radio talkback segments, roving teams that can be deployed quickly to verify phone hotlines, mobile information services on market accounts and facilitate disbursements. days, SMS/Twitter/online feeds, beneficiary satisfaction In Pakistan, financial management and audit proce- surveys, and many other channels. NADRA, the main dures aim to maximize the transparency of the Citizen technical agency executing Pakistan’s Citizen Damage Damage Compensation Programme. An operational Compensation Programme (CDCP), publishes eligibility manual, approved by a high-level oversight body, criteria and beneficiary lists on its Website and posts defines program and financial management and audit basic hard copy notices in villages. It also uses an guidelines, including arrangements and procedures on extensive SMS enquiry and response system (box 11). controlling the flow of funds. The program is audited Program implementing agencies have engaged com- internally by the government and externally by inde- munity-based organizations and other local institutions, pendent auditors. Help desks and telephone hotlines such as councils of elders, in the grievance redress and are used to gather beneficiary feedback on fraud and communication/outreach processes. corruption. A rapid evaluation of the first phase of the For its emergency operation in Aceh Province program found low levels of fraud. following the 2004 tsunami, Indonesia’s Kecamatan ■■ Measure outcomes and impact, and use the findings to Development Program (now the National Program for inform operations. Progress and outcomes are often Community Empowerment) recruited 28 subdistrict difficult to track, because the results of preventive information facilitators to supplement its network of actions, such as building an earthquake-proofed clinic village technical and empowerment facilitators. The or a seawall, may not be witnessed during the lifetime responsibilities of the information facilitators covered of the project if a hazard event does not occur. The time most aspects of gender-disaggregated data collec- and capacity pressures posed by a major emergency tion, information sharing, and communication with response may lead practitioners to place a low priority stakeholders and external partners (NGOs, donors, on monitoring and evaluation (M&E), missing oppor- and others). The facilitators were also responsible for tunities to document the contribution of the program. disseminating information about the program to local Early integration of disaster and climate change– stakeholders, documenting program activities, and sensitive criteria into social protection M&E plans, interacting with the media. They contributed to the programs, and budgets allows for the more effective high level of participation of villagers at all stages of capture of information, such as the use of proxy indi- the relief and recovery process, an important factor in cators to measure the reduction of risk exposure. In its success (World Bank 2009). post-disaster contexts, M&E systems have also been BOX 11: RECOGNIZING GENDER DIFFERENCES IN ACCESS TO COMMUNICATIONS A recovery needs assessment conducted by the Inter- areas, socio-cultural differences also affected who used national Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent cell phones. The IFRC decided that direct face-to-face Societies (IFRC) following the 2010 floods in Paki- methods of communication would need to be used to stan found that cell phone use was fairly widespread reach women in some locations, in addition to SMS throughout the affected communities. However, it found services for sending messages to beneficiaries about distinct gender differences. In some provinces, men its assistance. were more likely to possess a cell phone. In some rural Source: IFRC 2010. A F ramework for C limate - and D isaster - R esponsive S ocial P rotection 17 BOX 12: TIPS FOR THE PRACTITIONER: BUILDING AN M&E SYSTEM 1. Agree on performance outcomes, indicators, and that can be adjusted and expanded for post-disaster realistic interim targets to monitor resilience and contexts as required (as part of a disaster prepared- post-disaster response activities. ness or contingency plan, for example). 2. Gather baseline data on ex ante risks and ex post 5. Report and disaggregate findings by age and gender. impacts, the people most vulnerable to them, and 6. Use findings to inform decision makers of any the coping/adaptation mechanisms of both bene- necessary adjustments to the design and imple- ficiary and nonbeneficiary groups. mentation of activities. 3. Assess the capacity of the program to deliver on its 7. Use findings to inform future social protection objectives, including objectives related to disaster programming and share lessons learned. risk management/climate change adaptation (for 8. Sustain the M&E system within the organization, example, building emergency response capacity). including its capacity for post-disaster expansion. 4. Build and adequately resource a monitoring system Source: Adapted from Katich n.d. used to provide rapid real-time feedback on the appro- Several public works programs have helped communi- priateness and coverage of the response—identifying ties limit the impact of natural hazards and environmental gaps, for example (box 12). degradation. In Ethiopia, programs have carried out soil and water conservation projects (box 13). In southern Malawi, Design Feature 5: Increasing they have built local irrigation (World Bank 2009). Adaptive Capacity at the Household Physical measures must be accompanied by non- structural risk reduction measures, such as conducting and Community Level risk analysis of infrastructure plans and building projects; Social protection programs should build the capacity of identifying the need to retrofit existing critical structures communities and households to cope with and adapt to (for example, hospitals and schools) or protect key public future shocks. They can do so by strengthening communities’ assets (for example, land tenure records); and securing physical assets and supporting livelihoods in a manner that funding so that the institutions responsible are able to serves a long-term adaptive social protection function. act (Pusch 2004). As forms of support, public works programs are most ENHANCING COMMUNITIES’ PHYSICAL ASSETS useful during disasters, provided that the interventions have been planned and screened in advance for their Enhancing communities’ physical assets is key to reducing social, environmental, and engineering feasibility (Kuriakose the risk of disaster and adapting to climate change. Pro- and others 2012) as well as their capacity to withstand grams can do in the following ways: shocks and contribute to ■■ helping build or rehabil- building resilience to them. “ itate hazard-proof infra- Risk assessment and con- structure (strengthening Enhancing communities’ physical tingency planning are key, embankments, roads, assets is key to reducing the risk and local knowledge is cru- bridges, or gullies; haz- � of disaster and adapting to climate cial. People living in disas- ard-proofing health clin- change. ter-prone areas are usually ics or classrooms) aware of climate risks and ■■ putting in place other often develop their own structural mitigation disaster survival techniques measures (planting mangroves to protect coastal areas) and coping mechanisms. Indigenous knowledge and prac- ■■ encouraging environmental conservation and rehabilita- tices should be taken into account when designing these tion measures (conserving the soil through tree planting, interventions (box 14). bunds, area catchments, and fenced enclosures). 18 P R E PA R I N G S O C I A L P R OT E C T I O N F O R D I S A S T E R S A N D C L I M AT E C H A N G E O P E R AT I O N A L T O O L K I T BOX 13: INCREASING ADAPTIVE CAPACITY IN ETHIOPIA The public works component of the Productive Safety vegetation cover and a broader diversity of plant Nets Program (PSNP) in Ethiopia contributes to social species, increasing the supply of livestock feed, bee protection and builds climate resilience. It employs forage, and medicinal plants. beneficiaries on labor-intensive projects for six months • Small-scale irrigation from water sources developed of the year to fill the food gap experienced during the by the PSNP helped 4–12 percent of households lean period. This program helps farmers avoid distress expand livestock holdings and increase incomes sales and maintain a buffer against natural shocks. It also by 4–25 percent, with even very small irrigated invests in community assets that help reverse the severe plots (190 square meters) estimated to be capable degradation of watersheds and provide more reliable of generating gross margins of Br 4,200–6,000 water supply under different climatic conditions. Some ($413–$491) per year if double cropped. 60 percent of the PSNP’s public works subprojects are • The construction of water conservation structures in soil and water conservation, strengthening both liveli- reduced surface run-off, increased infiltration, and hoods and resistance to the impacts of variable rainfall. raised groundwater levels, thereby enhancing spring An independent impact assessment conducted yields and increasing stream base-flows. As a result, in 2008 (M.A Consulting Group 2009) reached the in several communities, springs now last longer into following conclusions: the dry season. • Soil and water conservation projects led to signifi- cant and visible increases in wood and herbaceous SUPPORTING VIABLE LIVELIHOODS a living during a disaster find their recovery from adverse AT THE HOUSEHOLD LEVEL effects more difficult and their vulnerability to future disasters increase. They are less likely to invest in structural Diversifying livelihoods and income sources increases disaster mitigation measures, which have a low priority in households’ ability to withstand and cope with disasters comparison to survival (Yodmani 2001). These households and climate shocks. Households with diversified sources are also less willing to take risks, thus remaining locked in of income may be better able to cope with the effects of strategies that keep them impoverished. In the Philippines, a drought if they have alternatives to agricultural incomes, for example, marginal farmers often continue cultivating for example. Households that lose their means of earning lower-yielding rice varieties, which are more hazard toler- ant, reducing the risk of total crop failure but also limiting potential earnings (ESCAP and UNISDR 2010). BOX 14: DRAWING ON COMMUNITIES TO Social protection programs can help reduce the vul- INCREASE RESILIENCE IN MALAWI nerability of the poor to disasters both by helping them cope better with shocks in the short run and by increasing The Nkhokwe Forestation subproject of the Malawi their resilience in the long run by allowing them to increase Social Action Fund (MASAF III) established a commu- their incomes, diversify their assets and livelihoods, and nity-level forest management committee and raised take more productive risks. Cash transfers and public works local people’s awareness of the need to develop the can help poor households build an asset base and enhance forest as an alternative income source and a way their human capital. to recharge the groundwater. The planted forest Several other instruments also hold potential to help becomes the community’s common asset, and the households build sustainable livelihoods. Crop and live- income from the forest is used to develop a commu- stock insurance allow farmers to take greater risks and nity credit system with the help of the community experiment with new climate resilient agricultural varieties savings and investment component of the project. that would not be possible with traditional crop insurance The forestation project also helps local communities schemes (box 15). Asset restocking—such as raising poultry produce fertilizer through compost, reducing depen- in flood-prone areas or camels in drought-prone areas— dence on commercial fertilizer (World Bank 2009). can increase incomes and climate resilience. Training and Source: World Bank 2009. business development support for off-farm activities and A F ramework for C limate - and D isaster - R esponsive S ocial P rotection 19 BOX 15: BUILDING CLIMATE RESILIENCE IN ETHIOPIA THROUGH INSURANCE-FOR-WORK Ethiopia’s Horn of Africa Risk Transfer for Adaptation The payments enable farmers to afford the seeds and (HARITA) program (recently renamed the R4 Rural inputs necessary to plant the following season and Resilience Initiative) is an innovative model that inte- protect them from having to sell off productive assets grates demand-based disaster microinsurance for the to survive. The model also facilitates farmers’ access to poor into a social safety net program, enhancing both credit for the purchase of productive assets through the its climate-related and social protection benefits. The program’s partnership with a microfinance institution, initiative began in 2007, as an agricultural risk man- using the insurance as collateral. agement program to enable poor smallholders in the In 2010 in the village of Awet Bikalsi, yields on teff drought-prone region of Tigray to strengthen their food (an annual grass) were 57 percent higher among farm- and income security through a combination of improved ers who bought insurance. In all villages, farmers who resource management, affordable disaster insurance, purchased insurance planted more seeds and seemed and microcredit. Oxfam America and the Relief Society to be switching to high-yielding variety seeds at higher of Tigray (REST) worked closely with the government rates than did farmers who did not buy insurance. They of Ethiopia to build an insurance-for-work scheme into were also using more compost. In addition, farmers who the Tigray operations of the Productive Safety Net Pro- bought insurance tended to invest less family labor in gramme (PSNP). The scheme gives poor farmers the agriculture and to diversify their sources of income more option of working to pay for insurance cover through than farmers who did not purchase insurance. They also the PSNP on small-scale community-identified projects experienced smaller losses of livestock. More farmers that build climate resilience and agricultural productivity, who bought insurance for the second time reported that such as improved irrigation or soil management they expect to plant different crops, use more fertilizer, Automatic insurance payouts to farmers are trig- and obtain loans (Oxfam America 2011). gered if rainfall drops below a predetermined threshold. diversification into rural enterprises have the potential to diversification of livelihoods. Social protection that explic- diversify livelihoods and create viable business alternatives. itly supports livelihoods needs to be carefully designed to A key challenge is identifying the right level and mix of ensure that it serves a long term, adaptive function. instruments to encourage healthy risk-taking behavior and 20 P R E PA R I N G S O C I A L P R OT E C T I O N F O R D I S A S T E R S A N D C L I M AT E C H A N G E O P E R AT I O N A L T O O L K I T Conclusions P olicy makers and practitioners in client countries scalability, coordination, and flexibility are addressed. are increasingly realizing that climate change This toolkit offers a snapshot of good practice experi- and the growing frequency and unpredictability ences and practical tips to practitioners. In-depth Guidance of disasters will translate into mounting challenges for Notes on particular aspects of adapting social protection poverty reduction. International experience suggests that programs to disasters and climate change are available at long-term sustained solutions require collaboration across www.worldbank.org/sp; each providing a list of additional the disaster risk management, climate change, and social resources. Through these tools, and through iterative protection disciplines. From a social protection standpoint, collaborative processes based on specific contexts, social effective response to disasters and climate change will be protection programs can prepare and respond to the possible if the programs that are best positioned to play a challenges raised by natural disasters and climate change. role are prepared to respond, and the challenges of design, C onclusions 21 22 P R E PA R I N G S O C I A L P R OT E C T I O N F O R D I S A S T E R S A N D C L I M AT E C H A N G E O P E R AT I O N A L T O O L K I T Appendix A: Country Case Study Briefs T he country case studies were prepared in 2012 Program (PSNP) by supporting public works that increase and 2013 in collaboration with the implementing resilience to climate-related shocks and protecting its and funding agencies. They represent successful beneficiaries’ assets and income from low-frequency but examples of adaptation of social protection programs in severe recurrent disaster impacts (mainly droughts). The preparation for or response to disasters and severe cli- insurance scheme made its first pay-outs to clients following mate events. The full cases studies are available at www. a major drought in 2011. Based on promising results, it is worldbank.org/sp. being scaled up in Ethiopia and expanded into Senegal, under the direction of Oxfam America and the World Food Bangladesh’s Char Livelihoods Programme. (For more information on the program, see Programme http://www.oxfamamerica.org/issues/insurance.) The Chars Livelihoods Programme (CLP) is a large regional Ethiopia’s Productive Safety social protection and poverty reduction program that aims to secure and promote livelihood opportunities while Nets Programme strengthening the resilience of the target population to The Productive Safety Nets Programme (PSNP) is a large natural shocks and climate variability. The programs works national social safety net program that responds to both with extremely poor households located on fluvial islands chronic food insecurity and shorter-term shocks (mainly (chars) in northwest Bangladesh, who are particularly droughts) among Ethiopia’s poor. It targets a highly cli- vulnerable to annual seasonal flooding as well as random mate-vulnerable population, offering a practical model of extreme flooding events. The program benefited more how social safety nets can be designed to meet the social than 900,000 people during its first phase (2004–10). A protection needs of the most vulnerable while simultane- second phase (2010–16) is targeting assistance to more ously reducing the risks from disaster- and climate-related than 1 million people. impacts. The CLP uses a combination of public works, asset The PSNP incorporates a number of interesting features, transfers (cash and in-kind), livelihoods-related training, including public works activities geared toward improving market development, and social development activities climate resiliency; a risk financing facility to help poor to achieve its aims. Its key disaster/climate resilience fea- households and communities, including households outside tures include public works that reduce the risk of flooding, of the core program, better cope with transitory shocks; and innovative social safety net mechanisms that cushion the targeting methods that help the most climate-vulnerable program’s beneficiaries against disaster impacts, post-di- households obtain the full benefits of consumption smooth- saster relief and recovery support to protect and restore ing and asset protection. The program works through and the assets and income built up through the program, and strengthens existing government institutional systems at direct measurement of climate resilience outcomes in all levels rather than creating separate systems. its monitoring and evaluation systems. These initiatives The PSNP entitles poor households to a secure, regular, have been closely integrated into the program’s broader predictable government transfer; protects them against the livelihoods and social protection focus, creating strong impacts of natural disasters; and significantly improves the synergies and mutually reinforcing benefits between these management of the natural environment that contributes areas. (For more information on the program, see http:// to these risks. It has enabled core beneficiaries to meet www.clp-bangladesh.org/). consumption needs, mitigate risks, and avoid selling productive assets during crises. There is evidence that Ethiopia’s Horn of Africa Risk livelihoods are stabilizing and food insecurity is being Transfer for Adaptation Program reduced among these households. (For more information on the program, see http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/ The Horn of Africa Risk Transfer for Adaptation Program ethiopia/projects.) (HARITA)/Rural Resilience Initiative (R4) contributes to the food security objectives of the Productive Safety Net A ppendix A : C ountry C ase S tudy B riefs 23 Mexico’s Programa de Empleo Temporal Pakistan’s Citizen Damage Mexico’s Temporary Employment Program (Programa de Compensation Programme Empleo Temporal [PET]) is a social safety net program Following severe floods in 2010, the government of Paki- in a middle-income country that has integrated disaster stan put in place a temporary nationwide social safety risk management and climate change adaptation into its net program that reached an estimated 8 million people operations. It provides temporary employment opportu- affected by floods. The program led to the development nities on public works projects to people in marginalized of a social safety net disaster preparedness action plan communities with high unemployment levels and people by the government. whose livelihoods have been affected by natural disasters The program’s approach allowed for its rapid estab- or other systemic crises. lishment and expansion over a wide geographic area. Its The program has developed a highly collaborative efficient beneficiary registration and payment distribution and formalized institutional relationship between social system was created in partnership with commercial banks protection, disaster management, and sectoral agencies. and linked to the national civil registry. Coordination among It has created a quick and efficient disaster response 19 partners at the national, provincial, and local levels was mechanism and contingency fund, incorporated disaster largely achieved. (For more information on the program, and climate sensitive targeting criteria into sectoral public see http://cdcp.nadra.gov.pk/.) works programs, and established a payment system that recognizes the mobility constraints of some beneficiaries. (For more information on the program, see http://www. sedesol.gob.mx/es/SEDESOL/Empleo_Temporal_PET.) 24 P R E PA R I N G S O C I A L P R OT E C T I O N F O R D I S A S T E R S A N D C L I M AT E C H A N G E O P E R AT I O N A L T O O L K I T References BBC Media Action. 2012. Policy Briefing No. 6: Still Left in the Kanbur, R. 2009. “Systemic Crises and the Social Protection Dark? How People in Emergencies Use Communication System: Three Proposals for World Bank Action.� April, to Survive—and How Humanitarian Agencies Can Help. World Bank, Washington, DC. March, London. Kuriakose, A. T., R. Heltberg, W. Wiseman, C. Costella, R. Berhane, G., R. Sabates-Wheeler, and M. Tefera. 2011. Evalu- Cipryk, and S. Cornelius. 2012. Climate-Responsive Social ation of Ethiopia’s Food Security Program: Documenting Protection. Social Protection and Labor Discussion Progress in the Implementation of the Productive Safety Paper 1210, World Bank, Washington, DC. Nets Programme and the Household Asset Building M.A Consulting Group. 2009. Ethiopia Productive Safety Programme. International Food Policy Research Insti- Nets Programme Public Works Impact Assessment. tute, Washington, DC. Addis Ababa Conroy, K., A. R. Goodman, and S. Kenward. 2010. Lessons Marzo, F., and H. Mori. 2012. Crisis Response in Social Pro- from the Chars Livelihoods Programme, Bangladesh tection. Social Protection and Labor Discussion Paper (2004–2010). London, Department for International 1205, World Bank, Washington, DC. Development. Pelham L., E. Clay, and T. Braunholz. 2011. “Natural Disasters: Del Ninno, C., K. Subbarao, and R. Quintana. Forthcoming. What Is the Role of Safety Nets?� Social Protection Improving Payment Mechanisms in Cash-Based Safety Discussion Paper 1102, World Bank, Washington, DC. Net Programs. Social Protection Discussion Paper, World Pusch, C. 2004. “Preventable Losses: Saving Lives and Bank, Washington, DC. Property through Hazard Risk Management: A Compre- ESCAP (United Nations Economic and Social Commission hensive Risk Management Framework for Europe and for Asia and the Pacific), and UNISDR (United Nations Central Asia.� World Bank Disaster Risk Management Office for Disaster Risk Reduction). 2010. Protecting Working Paper 9, Washington, DC. Development Gains: Reducing Disaster Vulnerability and Stern, N. 2009. Blueprint for a Safer Planet: How to Manage Building Resilience in Asia and the Pacific. New York. Climate Change and Create a New Era of Progress and Gilligan, D., J. Haddinot, and A. Taffesse. 2008. An Analysis Prosperity, London: Bodley Head Ltd. of Ethiopia’s Productive Safety Net Program and Its UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). 2007. Linkages. International Food Policy Research Institute, Poverty Eradication, MDGs and Climate Change. 2007. Washington, DC. New York: UNDP. Grosh, M., C. Del Ninno, E. Tesliuc, and A. Ouerghi. 2008. UNISDR (United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduc- For Protection and Promotion: The Design and Imple- tion). 2009. Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk mentation of Effective Safety Nets. World Bank, Wash- Reduction. New York: UNISDR. ington, DC. ———. 2011. Disaster Risk Reduction in the United Nations HARITA (Horn of Africa Risk Transfer for Adaptation). 2011. New York: UNISDR. 2010. Quarterly reports. October–December. Oxfam Villalobos, S., Cheston, T. and L. M. Castano Mesa. 2012 America, Boston. Análisis de la respuesta de los programas de transfe­ Harvey, P., and S. Bailey. 2011. Cash Transfer Programming rencias monetarias condicionadas a la crisis de inunda- In Emergencies. Good Practice Review No. 11, Overseas ciones, caso Colombiano. June, World Bank, Bogota. Development Institute, London. World Bank. 2009. Building Resilient Communities: Risk IFRC (International Federation of Red Cross and Red Cres- Management and Response to Natural Disasters through cent Societies). 2010. World Disasters Report: Urban Social Funds and Community-Driven Development Risk. Geneva: IFRC. Programs. Washington, DC: World Bank. ———. 2012. World Disasters Report: Focus on Forced ———. 2010. Natural Hazards, Unnatural Disasters: The Migration and Displacement. Geneva: IFRC. Economics of Effective Prevention. Washington, DC: Katich, K. n.d. “Monitoring and Evaluation in Disaster Risk World Bank. Management.� EAP DRM Knowledge Notes Working Yaschine, I., and C. Hernandez. 2012. Operacion del Programa Paper 21, World Bank, Washington, DC. Oportunidades en la Coyuntura del Desastres Naturales en Mexico. World Bank, Mexico City. R eferences 25 Yodmani, S. 2001. Disaster Risk Management and Vulner- ability Reduction: Protecting the Poor. Asian Disaster Preparedness Center, Bangkok. 26 P R E PA R I N G S O C I A L P R OT E C T I O N F O R D I S A S T E R S A N D C L I M AT E C H A N G E O P E R AT I O N A L T O O L K I T Additional Resources Adaptive Social Protection Group, Institute for Devel- Social Resilience and Climate Change Group, World Bank opment Studies http://worldbank.org/socialresilience http://www.ids.ac.uk/project/adaptive-social-protection Focuses on the equity dimensions of climate change, Explores and highlights the benefits of an interlinked including the distributional, poverty, and social conse- approach to risk reduction and resilience building in rural quences of climate variability and change and of policies areas of developing countries. Uses evidence from social and approaches to addressing the effects of climate change. protection, climate change adaptation, and disaster risk United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction reduction to help governments, practitioners, and devel- http://www.unisdr.org/ opment agencies reduce poor people’s vulnerability to the Serves as the UN system’s focal point for coordinating impacts of climate change and other shocks. disaster reduction and creating synergies among disaster Cash Learning Partnership reduction activities. http://www.cashlearning.org/ USAID Resilience Group Formed by a consortium of five international nongovern- http://www.usaid.gov/resilience mental organizations. Supports capacity building, research, Supports building resilience to recurrent crises in and information-sharing on cash transfer programming as support of country-led plans and in partnership with the a tool for delivering aid in times of crisis. international community. Global Facility for Disaster Risk Reduction World Bank Climate Change https://www.gfdrr.org/ http://climatechange.worldbank.org/ Partnership of 41 countries and 8 international organi- Brings together resources from several areas of the zations committed to helping developing countries reduce World Bank that focus on climate change mitigation and their vulnerability to natural hazards and adapt to climate adaptation. change by mainstreaming disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation in country development strategies. World Bank East Asia and Pacific Disaster Risk Management Coordinates damage, loss, and needs assessment (https:// www.worldbank.org/eapdisasters www.gfdrr.org/track-iii-ta-tools). Building on the success of the first 17 notes, prepared in 2008 in response to a request from the Chinese gov- Prevention Web ernment, the disaster risk management team continues http://www.preventionweb.net to publish new notes that consider different sectors and Serves the information needs of professionals work- topics (http://go.worldbank.org/IQ7BMLMO50). ing on disaster risk reduction by developing information exchange tools that facilitate collaboration. Provides World Bank, Making Women’s Voices Count: Integrating information on the design and development of the project, Gender Issues in Disaster Risk Management in East Asia as well as background documentation and descriptions of and Pacific some services that have been put in place http://go.worldbank.org/HA7P1NF0Q0 Series of five Guidance Notes on integrating gender issues in disaster risk management, designed to help Task Teams design and implement gender dimensions in disaster risk management work in the East Asia and Pacific Region. A dditional R esources 27 1319044