Media - 46992 - Home | UNDRR

Monitoring the Implementation of Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030: A Snapshot of Reporting for 2018

UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction

2

DisclaimerThe designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country or territory or of its authorities or concerning the delimitations of its frontiers or boundaries. The designations of country groups in the text and the tables are intended solely for statistical or analytical convenience and do not necessarily express a judgment about the stage reached by a particular country or area in the development process. Mention of the names of firms and commercial products does not imply the endorsement of the United Nations.

This publication may be freely quoted but acknowledgement of the source is requested.

CitationUNDRR (2020). Monitoring the Implementation of Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030: A Snapshot of Reporting for 2018.Bonn, Germany. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR).

United Nations 2020. All rights reserved.

Design, graphics and layout: James Brown, Designisreal.com

UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction

1

Without accurate evidence of where we stand, we cannot chart our path forward. If we are to ensure that development is risk-informed, we need access to robust data and statistics that are timely, accurate and accessible. The publication of this report marks a milestone in the life-time of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030: it is the first public reporting of data collected by the Sendai Framework Monitoring System (SFM). The SFM was launched in March 2018 and allows UN Member States to systematically report on their disaster losses.

There is still some distance to go before the collection of this data allows for considered analysis of global trends in disaster impacts, but it is already clear that the data will help us understand the current level of disaster risk reduction progress in the 104 countries that have reported for the year 2018.

Even though resource poor countries are challenged when it comes to implementing the Sendai Framework, it is encouraging that 24 of the 104 reporting countries for 2018 are LDCs, 19 are land-locked and eight are small island developing states.

Achieving the Sendai Framework’s seven global targets is important not only for the progress of disaster risk reduction but also for achieving the SDGs, particularly the eradication of poverty, and ensuring access to health and education. These and other areas of social expenditure usually bear the brunt of government cutbacks that often follow disaster losses in low and middle-income countries where disasters can wipe out years of development gains overnight.

FOREWORD

2

The Sendai Monitor should help us to more properly account for the impact of the climate emergency on countries’ sustainable development efforts. The information collected should enable them to advocate for not just for enhanced international cooperation as outlined under Sendai Target (f) but also enough international financing support to avert, minimize and adapt to climate-related loss and damage.

I can only endorse the conclusions of this report as regards the need for more comprehensive and complete reporting from Member States. For this to happen, support to the developing and most-at-risk countries has to be stepped up. I would also strongly encourage users of the SFM to report disaggregated data as this can greatly enhance understanding of risk required to develop robust national and local strategies for disaster risk reduction (Sendai Framework Target (e)).

Given the 2020 deadline for having these strategies in place, I am pleased that 80 countries are reporting that they have a national DRR strategy that is aligned to the Sendai Framework to some extent. One of the key criteria for assessing these strategies is coherence with global frameworks, including the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Paris Agreement, and I hope that during the coming year, more countries will join those who are already reporting that their DRR strategies take account of these other policy initiatives. I encourage Member States to double their efforts to monitor and report; effective risk reduction is impossible without this.

Mami MizutoriUnited Nations Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Disaster Risk Reduction

3

4 - List of Abbreviations

5 - I. Introduction

8 - II. Summary of Countries Reporting

12 - III. Summary of Data

13 - Target A: Substantially reduce global disaster mortality by 2030, aiming to lower average per 100,000 global mortality in the decade 2020-2030 compared to the period 2005-2015

15 - Target B: Substantially reduce the number of affected people globally by 2030, aiming to lower the average global figure per 100,000 in the decade 2020-2030 compared to period 2005-2015

17 - Target C: Reduce direct disaster economic loss in relation to global gross domestic product (GDP) by 2030

19 - Target D: Substantially reduce disaster damage to critical infrastructure and disruption of basic services, among them health and educational facilities, including through developing their resilience by 2030

21 - Target E: Substantially increase the number of countries with national and local disaster risk reduction strategies by 2020

24 - Target F: Substantially enhance international cooperation to developing countries through adequate and sustainable support to complement their national actions for implementation of this framework by 2030

25 - Target G: Substantially increase the availability of and access to multi-hazard early warning systems and disaster risk information and assessments to people by 2030

27 - IV. Conclusion

28 - Annex I

COntEnts

3

4

List OF AbbREviAtiOns

DRR Disaster Risk Reduction

LDC Least Developed Country

LLDC Land-locked Developing Country

OIEWG Open-ended Intergovernmental Expert Working Group on Indicators and Terminology Relating to Disaster Risk Reduction

SFM Sendai Framework Monitor/Monitoring

SIDS Small Island Developing States

UNDRR United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction

4

5

The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduc-tion 2015-2030 was adopted in March 2015 at the third United Nations World Conference on Disas-ter Risk Reduction in Sendai, Japan. While the new framework was developed to ensure conti-nuity with the work carried out by countries and other stakeholders under the aegis of the Hyogo Framework for Action (2005-2015) and previous instruments, its vision and expected outcome represent an important shift from managing dis-asters to managing disaster risk.

Another important innovation of the Sendai Framework is that it introduces seven global targets to assess global progress toward the expected outcomes – four of them focused on reducing loss and damages from disasters, and three focused on ensuring effective processes for doing so.

In order to measure global progress in the im-plementation of the Sendai Framework, a set of indicators was developed by an open-ended intergovernmental expert working group (OIEWG) on indicators and terminology relating to dis-aster risk reduction, established by the United Nations General Assembly resolution 69/284 in June 2015. On 1 December 2016, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the report of the OIEWG containing a set of 38 indicators rec-ommended for the seven targets of the Sendai Framework.

In order to facilitate the reporting, and in compli-ance with the recommendations of the OIEWG, the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduc-tion (UNDRR) made available to Member States the online Sendai Framework Monitoring (SFM) System on 1 March 2018, and a set of Techni-cal Guidance Notes for reporting on the Sendai Framework.

i. intRODuCtiOn

5

6

BY 2030Global disaster

mortality *aiming to lower average per

100,000

Direct disaster economic loss *in relation to global gross domestic product (GDP)

Disaster damage to critical

infrastructure & disruption of

basic services

Affected people globally *aiming to lower the average global figure per

100,000

International cooperation to

developing countries

Multi-hazard early warning systems &

disaster risk information

REDUCE

INCREASE

FTARGET

GTARGET

ATARGET

BTARGET

CTARGET

DTARGET

BY 2020Countries with

national and local DRR strategies

ETARGET

6

To enable systematic data entry into the SFM and ensure data quality, Member States have defined four key roles within the SFM system, namely, coordinators, contributors, validators and observ-ers. Coordinators are the main SFM focal points in the countries who assign the other roles to the respective entities.

Contributors enter data into the system, while validators are usually senior officials who essen-tially sign off on the entered data. Observers can see and advise on the data but cannot edit the same. Once data on an indicator is validated, it is considered official data and becomes publicly visible on the SFM.

Seven Targets of the Sendai Framework

77

Depending on the size of the country and its dis-aster data architecture, a country could have one or more persons in each of the four roles with most users normally reflected as contributors, representing the various country-level sectoral agencies as relevant for each indicator.

This report presents the first look at the ag-gregated data reported by Member States on the SFM, 18 months after the Monitor became operational. Discussions with national SFM focal points in countries and the analysis of the data highlight key challenges that Member States are facing. In contrast to the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015, monitoring of the Sendai Framework requires reporting of actual data on loss and damages in addition to quantified report-ing on disaster risk reduction (DRR) strategies, international cooperation on DRR and availability of multi-hazard early warning systems. Reporting on indicators of human losses (numbers dead, missing, ill or injured, affected by losses to liveli-hoods and dwellings) requires the existence of an adequate data architecture that includes clearly articulated methods, well-defined processes for data management and quality control, a designated custodian for each indicator or sub-indicator, well-established channels of commu-nication across different government ministries and institutions and an agreed-on timeline for data collection, reporting and aggregation. Not all Member States have the entirety of the neces-sary architecture in place for collecting disaster-related data. As a result, many have struggled to produce the necessary data for the complete monitoring of the Sendai Framework.

The data in this report is in general a snapshot of the information reported in the SFM by early October 2019. Since the SFM is an open-ended reporting mechanism (i.e. there is no date until 2030 after which data is not accepted), the fig-ures given here, especially of loss and damages, are only a snapshot at the given point in time. For the same reason, the reporting for 2017 is better in coverage and completeness com-pared to that for 2018, which is evidenced in the relatively larger numbers for 2017 in most of the comparative analyses in the data and graphs in the following sections. This is because Member States could enter data in the system throughout the year for both the current year and past years. This is because Member States could enter data in the system throughout the year for both the current year and past years. This report is based on both validated and unvalidated data that is being used for a general consolidated analysis. Furthermore, since Member States can retroac-tively change even validated data, this snapshot of data may not be entirely comparable with data for the same period extracted from the system at a subsequent date.

The rest of the report is organized as follows. Sec-tion II below summarizes the status of reporting by countries for 2017 and 2018. Section III sum-marizes the data for 2018, referencing numbers for 2017 as appropriate. Section IV provides the conclusion.

8

ii. suMMARy OF COuntRiEs REpORting

Reporting up to October

Sendai Framework Monitoring system

201964% reporting on at

least one target125

Countries

Users

152 1116 usersregistered

Reporting up to October 2019

Started reporting (overall) 2018Started reporting (overall) 2018

Started reporting (LLDC, LDC, SIDS)Started reporting (LLDC LDC SIDS)

53% reporting on at least one target104

46% validating at least one of the

targets48

13% reporting on all targets25

56% validating all of the targets14

59%24

51%8

21%19

LDC - Least Developed Country

LLDC - Land-locked Developing Country

SIDS - Small Island Developing

104Countries that

started reporting on at least one target

for 2018

53%25Countries that

started reporting on all targets for

2018

13%

14Countries validating all of the targets for

2018

7%

48Countries validating at least one of the targets for 2018

25%

2424 out of 47 Least

Developed Countries (LDCs) reported for

2018

51% 88 out of 38 Small island Developing

States (SIDS) reported for 2018

21%

1919 out of 32 Land-locked

Developing Countries (LLDCs) reported for

2018.

59%

80Countries reported having a National DRR strategy

that is aligned to the Sendai Framework over

2015-2019

41% 6Countries reported having a National DRR strategy fully

aligned with the Sendai Framework: 2015-2019

3%

42Countries reporting on

international cooperation on DRR for 2018

22%

152Countries registered with

the Sendai Framework Monoitoring System

1116 registered users on the system

56Countries engaging National Statistical

Organizations in Sendai Framework

Monitoring

29%

8




least one target125

Countries

Users







targets48



59%24

51%8

21%19




104Countries that


for 2018

53%25Countries that


2018

13%


2018

7%


25%



2018



21%



2018.

59%



2015-2019



3%



22%






Monitoring

29%




least one target125

Countries

Users







targets48



59%24

51%8

21%19




104Countries that


for 2018

53%25Countries that


2018

13%


2018

7%


25%



2018



21%



2018.

59%



2015-2019



3%



22%






Monitoring

29%




least one target125

Countries

Users







targets48



59%24

51%8

21%19




104Countries that


for 2018

53%25Countries that


2018

13%


2018

7%


25%



2018



21%



2018.

59%



2015-2019



3%



22%






Monitoring

29%




least one target125

Countries

Users







targets48



59%24

51%8

21%19




104Countries that


for 2018

53%25Countries that


2018

13%


2018

7%


25%



2018



21%



2018.

59%



2015-2019



3%



22%






Monitoring

29%




least one target125

Countries

Users







targets48



59%24

51%8

21%19




104Countries that


for 2018

53%25Countries that


2018

13%


2018

7%


25%



2018



21%



2018.

59%



2015-2019



3%



22%






Monitoring

29%




least one target125

Countries

Users







targets48



59%24

51%8

21%19




104Countries that


for 2018

53%25Countries that


2018

13%


2018

7%


25%



2018



21%



2018.

59%



2015-2019



3%



22%






Monitoring

29%

9

2017 2018Countries in the Region

21 14 13 23 4219 15 14 21 3544 35 22 39 550

10

20

30

40

60

50

Africa Americas andthe Caribbean

Arab States Asia andthe Pacific

Europe andCentral Asia

Figure 1: Number of Countries Reporting by Region: 2017-2018

2520

7

2419

8

47

3238

05

101520253035404550

LDCs LLDCs SIDS

20172018

Number of Countries in the Group

Figure 2: Number of LDCs, LLDCs and SIDS Reporting: 2017-2018

9

As of early October 2019, 104 countries had started re-porting 1 on the Sendai Framework targets for the year 2018. This was slightly lower than the 113 countries that had started reporting for the year 2017.

Regional disaggregation of reporting countries shows that some 35 (64 per cent) of the countries in Europe and Central Asia and 14 (64 per cent) of the Arab States have reported on the Sendai Framework in 2018 (Figure 1).

1 If a country reports on even one indicator of a target, it is counted as having started reporting on that target.

Among the group of 104 reporting countries for 2018, are 24 (51 per cent) of the total least developed countries (LDCs), 19 (59 per cent) of the land-locked developing countries (LLDCs), and eight (21 per cent) of all the small island developing states (SIDS) that are UN Member States (Figure 2).

10

Some 25 countries had started reporting on all seven targets for 2018 compared to 47 countries which have started reporting on all seven targets for 2017 (Figure 3).

As of early October 2019, 48 countries had started the vali-dation process for 2018 data, as compared with 55 coun-tries which had started the process for 2017. For 2017 and 2018, some 19 and 14 countries, respectively had started the validation process for all seven targets (figure 4).

5551

4340

3126

19

4845

3530 28

23

14

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

20172018

1(At least)Targets 2 3 4 5 6 All 7

Figure 4: Number of Countries Validating Data Reported on the Sendai Framework Targets: 2017-2018

20172018

113113106

100 98

83

66

47

104

8171

585252

43

25

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1(At least)Targets 2 3 4 5 6 All 7

Figure 3: Number of Countries that Started Reporting on the Sendai Framework Targets: 2017-2018

11

0

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

20172018

A

1 2 3

B C D E F G

1 21 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 61 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

20172018

40

50

0

10

20

30

A

2 3

B C D E F G

1 22 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 6 2 3 4 5 62 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

20172018

40

50

0

10

20

30

A

2 3

B C D E F G

1 22 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 6 2 3 4 5 62 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

20172018

40

50

0

10

20

30

A

2 3

B C D E F G

1 22 3 4 5 2 3 4 5 6 2 3 4 5 62 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Figure 6: Number of Countries Validating Each Indicator of the Sendai Framework: 2017-2018(The figure does not include compound indicators which are not validated separately).

As mentioned in the introduction, progress in implementa-tion of the Sendai Framework is measured by 38 indica-tors. Of these, seven indicators (A1, B1, C1, D1, D5, G1) are compound indicators derived from subsets of the remain-ing 31 simple indicators. Compound indicators A1 and B1 are the most reported on. Among the simple indicators, A2 (number of deaths attributed to disasters) and E1 (number of countries that adopt and implement national

disaster risk reduction strategies in line with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030) are the most reported on in both years. Indicators for Target F were the least reported ones in both years, though sig-nificantly more countries reported data for 2017 than for 2018 (Figure 5). Indicators of targets A and B were the most frequently validated (Figure 6).

Figure 5: Number of Countries Reporting on Each Indicator of the Sendai Framework: 2017-2018

12

iii. suMMARy OF DAtAThis section summarizes the data reported by target for 2018 with reference to data for 2017 where appropriate.

12




least one target125

Countries

Users







targets48



59%24

51%8

21%19




104Countries that


for 2018

53%25Countries that


2018

13%


2018

7%


25%



2018



21%



2018.

59%



2015-2019



3%



22%



1116 registered users on the system56

Countries engaging National Statistical


Monitoring

29%


their early warning systems and risk

information for 2018

30% 82Countries reporting on disaster mortality for

2018

42%

64Countries reporting on their economic losses

from disasters for 2018

33% 50Countries reporting on their losses to critical

infrastructure and basic services from disasters

for 2018

26%

72Countries reporting on affected people from

disasters for 2018

37%59Countries reporting on




2018

42%





for 2018

26%


disasters for 2018

37%





2018

42%





for 2018

26%


disasters for 2018

37%





2018

42%





for 2018

26%


disasters for 2018

37%




least one target125

Countries

Users







targets48



59%24

51%8

21%19




104Countries that


for 2018

53%25Countries that


2018

13%


2018

7%


25%



2018



21%



2018.

59%



2015-2019



3%



22%






Monitoring

29%





2018

42%





for 2018

26%


disasters for 2018

37%

13

0

500010

00015

00020000

2500030000

35000

Africa

Americas and the Caribbean

Arab States

Asia and the Pacific

Europe and Central Asia

Total

20172018

Figure 7: Number of Persons Dead or Missing in Disasters by Region: 2017-2018

III.A.

Target A: Substantially reduce global disaster mortality by 2030, aiming to lower average per 100,000 global mortality in the decade 2020-2030 compared to the period 2005-2015

14

Target A was the most reported on with 82 countries with a total population of 4.0 billion reporting data for 2018, as compared with 90 countries for 2017. In 2018, 81 countries2 reported 22,076 people dead and 1,914 people missing as a result of disasters. In comparison, for 2017, 90 countries with a total population of 4.7 billion, reported 34,426 deaths and 1,418 missing as a result of disasters.

2 Excluding data for one outlier pending verification.

Regionally, the Asia and the Pacific accounted for about 30 per cent of the number of dead and missing (Figure 7). A total of 16 LDCs, 17 LLDCs and five SIDS reported on Tar-get A for 2018. The 16 reporting LDCs accounting for 12 per cent of the total population of all reporting countries, recorded over 28 per cent of the total reported deaths and missing persons attributed to disasters (Table 1).

NUMBER OF COUNTRIES REPORTING

POPULATION PERSONS DEAD

PERSONS MISSING

LDCs 16 500,415,968 6,639 40

LLDCs 17 251,038,966 3,684 34

SIDS 5 2,214,659 31 1

Table 1: Number of Persons Dead or Missing in Reporting LDCs, LLDCs and SIDS: 2018

14

15

610,522 1,655

26,185

25,989 76,554

Africa

Arab States

Asia and the Pacific Europe and Central Asia

495,428

1,671,635

228,299 5,357,949

42,858 Africa

Arab StatesAsia and

the Pacific

4,366,642

72,145

1,864,468 18,344,410

122,310 Africa

Americas andthe Caribbean

Arab StatesAsia andthe Pacific





Figure 8: Number of Injured or Ill People Attributed to Disasters: 2018

III.B.

Target B: Substantially reduce the number of affected people globally by 2030, aiming to lower the average global figure per 100,000 in the decade 2020-2030 compared to period 2005-2015

Figure 10: Number of People whose Disrupted or Destroyed Livelihoods were Attributed to Disasters: 2018

Figure 9: Number of People whose Damaged or Destroyed Dwellings were Attributed to Disasters: 2018

16

Table 2: Number of People Affected in Reporting LDCs, LLDs and SIDS: 2018

NUMBER OF COUNTRIES REPORTING

TOTAL POPULATION

PERSONS INJURED OR ILL

PERSONS WITH DWELLINGS DAMAGED OR DESTROYED

PERSONS WITH LIVELIHOODS DISRUPTED OR DESTROYED

LDCs 15 449,847,738 619,378 751,203 6,256,043

LLDCs 14 169,480,713 618,459 453,142 4,254,067

SIDS 4 2,117,565 172 6,164 230,000

For the year 2018, some 72 countries with a combined population of 3.7 billion people, reported on Target B of the Sendai Framework as compared with 83 countries with a combined population of 4.5 billion in 2017. In 2018, close to 741,000 people were rendered ill or injured on account of disasters, over 80 per cent of them in Africa (Figure 8).

Close to 7.8 million people had their houses damaged or destroyed, some 69 per cent of them in Asia and the Pacific region (Figure 9). Close to 25 million had their liveli-hoods disrupted or destroyed on account of disasters, 74 per cent of them in Asia and the Pacific region (Figure 10).

Reporting LDCs accounted for significant proportions of people affected by disasters in 2018. The 15 reporting LDCs with 12 per cent of the total population of all report-ing countries for 2018, accounted for over 84 per cent of persons injured or ill, close to 10 per cent of persons with dwellings damaged or destroyed, and over 25 per cent of persons with livelihoods disrupted or destroyed (Table 2).

16

17

12,937.17

1,015.98

358.63

3,170.19

38.23

Agricultural Sector

Other Productive Assets

Housing Sector

Critical Infrastructure

Cultural Heritage

III.C.

Target C: Reduce direct disaster economic loss in relation to global gross domestic product (GDP) by 2030

For 2018, out of 64 countries reporting, 63 countries (excluding one outlier) with total population of 1.5 billion people and collective GDP of USD19.3 trillion at current prices reported on Target C of the Sendai Framework. In comparison, 67 countries with total population of 2.1 billion people and total GDP of USD46.1 trillion3 reported on Target C for 2017. Excluding one outlier, the reporting countries recorded a total of USD17.5 billion (USD73.0 billion) in direct economic losses in 2018 (2017). Close to 74 per cent of the direct economic losses in 2018 were recorded in the agricultural sector and some 18 per cent in damaged or destroyed critical infrastructure (Figure 11).

3 The significantly higher total GDP of the countries report-ing for 2017 is because five high income countries accounting for a total of USD 31.1 trillion in GDP had not been able to report for 2018 until the time of this snap-shot.

Close to 93 per cent of the losses were recorded in Eu-rope and Central Asia (Table 3). LDCs as a group, which accounted for over 25 per cent of persons with livelihoods disrupted or destroyed (Target B) 4, accounted for a minus-cule share of globally reported direct economic losses be-cause of their low GDPs (Table 4). The 13 reporting LDCs which accounted for one percent of total GDP of all report-ing countries, suffered three per cent of the total reported direct economic losses.

The numbers reported on losses due to damaged and de-stroyed critical infrastructure and cultural heritage reflect fewer countries reporting and the absence of well-estab-lished methods for evaluating losses in cultural heritage.

4 The LDCs that reported on Target B in 2018 are not all the same LDCs that reported on Target C.

Figure 11: Direct Economic Losses Attributed to Disasters: 2018 (Million USD at current prices)

17

18

REG

ION

*

AGRI

CULT

URE

OTH

ER P

RODU

CTIV

E A

SSET

S

HO

USIN

G

CRIT

ICA

L IN

FRA

STRU

CTU

RE

CULT

UR

AL

HER

ITAG

E

TOTA

L LO

SSES

GDP

Africa (10)

261.7

1.4

26.4

1.4

15.4

306.3 260,787.2

Americas & the Caribbean (13)

6.9

138.9

130.3

15.7

14.7

306.6

4,703,939.1

Arab States (11)

125.7

-

0.8

10.8

3.5

140.8

1,532,050.6

Asia and the Pacific (9)

375.8

44.8

83.3

20.0

0.0

523.9

3,365,714.7

Europe & Central Asia (20)

12,167.0

830.9

117.8

3,122.2

4.6

16,242.6

9,480,950.0

Total (63) 12,937.2

1,016.0

358.6

3,170.2

38.2

17,520.2

19,343,441.7

Table 4: Direct Economic Losses Attributed to Disasters in 2018 by Sector for LDCs, LLDCs and SIDS (Million USD at current prices) *Figures in brackets indicate the number of countries reporting.

Table 3: Direct Economic Losses Attributed to Disasters in 2018 by Sector and Region (Million USD at current prices) *Figures in brackets indicate the number of countries reporting.

GRO

UP*

AGRI

CULT

URE

OTH

ER

PRO

DUCT

IVE

ASS

ETS

HO

USIN

G

CRI

TICA

L IN

FRA

STRU

CTU

RE

CULT

UR

AL

HER

ITAG

E

TOTA

L LO

SSES

GDP

LDCs (13)

453.0

1.4

15.5

12.5

15.4

497.7 194,689.8

LLDCs (12)

466.4

1.4

21.2

25.9

0.0

514.9 327,010.6

SIDS (3)

37.9

-

3.4

9.0

-

50.2 11,844.4

19

456

2356

950

963

1889

Africa

Arab States




For 2018 (2017), 50 countries (53 countries) with a total population of one billion (1.2 billion) people reported on Target D of the Sendai Framework. In these countries a to-tal of 401 health facilities, 4,755 educational facilities and 1,458 other critical infrastructural facilities were damaged or destroyed in 2018. Reporting countries recorded 14,501 disruptions of basic services including educational, health and other critical services.

Most of the infrastructure facilities destroyed were in the Americas and the Caribbean region (35.6 per cent), and in Europe and Central Asia (28.6 per cent) (Figure 12). How-ever, most of the instances of service disruptions were in Africa (72.7 per cent) and Asia and the Pacific (11.4 per cent) regions (Figure 13). The nine reporting LDCs ac-counted for 7.2 per cent of critical infrastructure damaged and destroyed, and 79 per cent of the disruptions of basic services (Table 5).

Figure 12: Number of Critical Infrastructure Facilities Damaged and Destroyed in Disasters by Region, 2018

19

III.D.

Target D: Substantially reduce disaster damage to critical infrastructure and disruption of basic services, among them health and educational facilities, including through developing their resilience by 2030

20

Africa

Arab States

Europe andCentral AsiaAsia and

the Pacific


10546614

1583

1652106

GROUP*

CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE DAMAGED OR DESTROYED

CRITICAL SERVICES DISRUPTED

LDCs (9) 479 11,450

LLDCs (13) 558 2223

SIDS (2) 0 0

Table 5: Critical Infrastructure Damaged or Destroyed and Critical Services Disrupted in LDCs, LLDCs and SIDS, 2018 *Figures in brackets indicate number of countries reporting

Figure 13: Instances of Disruption of Basic Services in Course of Disasters by Region, 2018

21




least one target125

Countries

Users







targets48



59%24

51%8

21%19




104Countries that


for 2018

53%25Countries that


2018

13%


2018

7%


25%



2018



21%



2018.

59%



2015-2019



3%



22%






Monitoring

29%

21

III.E.

Target E: Substantially increase the number of countries with national and local disaster risk reduction strategies by

2020

22

5

15

25

29

6

0.01 to 0.24

0.25 to 0.49

0.5 to 0.74

0.75 to 0.99

1

Number of CountriesCountries scoring

Unlike the other six targets of the Sendai Framework, Member States agreed to achieve Target E by 2020 in-stead of 2030, given that it constitutes an indispensable foundation for guiding the overall implementation of the Framework. To support Member States in achieving this Target, UNDRR has undertaken a massive initiative with significant financial commitments to increase the number of countries with national and local DRR strategies by the end of 2020.

For indicator E1 under target E related to national DRR strategies in alignment with the Sendai Framework, the global reporting of countries is not considered year by year, but from the time the Sendai Framework came into effect in 2015. This is because some countries that report the existence of national DRR strategies in one year, may not report the same in subsequent years when the same strategy remains relevant.

Figure 14: Alignment of National DRR Strategies with the Sendai Framework: 2015-2019

22

23

15

19

12

26

191

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0.250.5

0.75

1

Number of Countries

Countries scoring

Reporting countries are required to self-assess the align-ment of their national DRR strategies with the Sendai Framework based on ten criteria on a scale of 0 to 1. To gauge the alignment of national DRR strategies with the Sendai Framework, the latest relevant average score as-signed by countries is taken into consideration. Under in-dicator E1, over 2015-2019 until the time of this snapshot, a total of 80 countries have reported that their national DRR strategy is aligned to the Sendai Framework to some extent (Figure 14).

Among them, 41 countries have validated the data. Six countries – Armenia, Japan, Mongolia, Namibia, Qatar and Tajikistan have rated themselves at one on indicator E1, implying full alignment of their national DRR strategies with the Sendai Framework.

One of the ten key criteria for assessing national DRR strategies is the coherence of these strategies with global frameworks including the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Paris Agreement. On this criterion, 72 countries have reported that their national DRR strategy promotes policy coherence relevant to DRR to some extent(Figure 15).

For indicator E2 under Target E, 43 countries reported in 2018 that at least some of their local governments have a local DRR strategy.

Figure 15: Degree of Coherence of National DRR Strategies with Relevant Global Frameworks

23

24

42 countries reported on Target F in 2018, compared with 56 countries in 2017. In 2018, seven donor countries reported providing USD1.01 billion in total official interna-tional support5 for disaster risk reduction, while 16 recipi-ent countries reported receiving USD1.32 billion. In 2017, overall 13 donor countries reported providing USD2.36 billion in official international support for DRR while 16 re-cipient countries reported receiving USD0.17 billion (Figure 16).

Other forms of international cooperation include interna-tional, regional and bilateral programmes and initiatives for the transfer and exchange of science, technology and innovation in DRR for developing countries.

5 Official development assistance and other official flows.

A total of 35 such programmes were reported for 2018 and 272 for 20176.

In addition, 281 international, regional and bilateral pro-grammes and initiatives for DRR-related capacity-building in developing countries were reported for 2018 compared with 2278 such programmes and initiatives in 2017 (Figure 17).

6 Donor countries and recipient countries reported different numbers of programmes and initiatives for disaster risk reduction. The higher of the two reported numbers was considered for each year.

III.F.

Target F: Substantially enhance international cooperation to developing countries through adequate and sustainable support to complement their national actions for implementation of this framework by 2030

2.36

0.17

1.01

1.32

Donorcountries

Recipientcountries

Official international support (in bn US$)

20172018

24

Figure 16: Official International Support for DRR in Billion USD (current prices): 2017-2018

25

0

1

0.001 to 0.240

0.241 to 0.490

0.491 to 0.740

0.741 to 0.990

16

2

10

11

4

16

Range of Scores Number of Countries

III.G.

Target G: Substantially increase the availability of and access to multi-hazard early warning systems and disaster risk information and assessments to people by 2030

Figure 18: Scores Assigned by Countries to their Multi-Hazard Early Warning Systems, 2018

20172018

For DRR-related capacity-building

For the transfer and exchange of science, technology and

innovation in DRR

2278

272

281

35

1 10 100 1000 10000Number of programmes and initiatives (Logarithmic scale)

Figure 17: Number of Programmes and Initiatives in DRR for Developing Countries: 2017-2018

26

Multi-Hazard Early Warning SystemsMulti-Hazard Monitoring and Forecasting Systems

Appropriate Disaster Risk Information Available

11

10

8

8

22

11

10

11

8

8

7

19

11

9

8

5

2

5

12

8

6

0 5 10 15 20

Africa

Americas and the Caribbean

Arab States



LDCs

LLDCs

Figure 19: Number of Countries Reporting Multi-Hazard Early Warning Systems by Region and Grouping: 2018

For the year 2018, 59 countries reported on Target G of the Sendai Framework compared with 69 countries that reported on the target for 2017. About 27 per cent of the countries that reported having multi-hazard early warning systems in place, rated the coverage and potential effec-tiveness of their systems between 0.24 and 0.49 on a scale of zero to one (Figure 18).

For 2018, all 59 reporting countries reported having multi-hazard monitoring and forecasting systems, most of them in Europe and Central Asia, and Africa, and 32 countries reported having accessible, understandable, usable and relevant disaster risk information and assessment avail-able to people at the national and local levels (Figure 19). No SIDS reported having a multi-hazard early warning system in 2018.

27

iv. COnCLusiOn

The data reported in the previous two sections demon-strates considerable progress in the reporting on the implementation of the Sendai Framework by an important number of Member States during a period of just over 18 months. In addition to entering data for 2017 and 2018, several Member States have also started providing data for other years since 2005, and especially the baseline period of 2005-2015. This success is a result of the commitment of Member States, together with the technical support provided and capacity development undertaken by UN-DRR through its Regional Offices and its office support-ing Sendai Framework Monitoring based in Bonn. Given the cross-sectoral nature of the SFM reporting, a strong political commitment has emerged as a prerequisite for the convergence of various required data that are available in different parts of each government. The engagement of national statistical offices for enhancing statistical ca-pacity for the monitoring and reporting process has also been a factor for a number of Member States reporting successfully.

The reporting process has revealed certain challenges that must be overcome if the data from the SFM system is to improve our understanding of risk, inform the success in achieving the targets of the Sendai Framework, and enable Member States to better plan their risk-informed develop-ment investments.

First, the extent of the data in the SFM is not yet com-prehensive enough to enable derivation of meaningful national, regional or global trends. As seen in the reporting figures, coverage is more complete for targets A, B and E. However, for targets C, D and F, reporting by high income countries in one year and not in another can skew the ag-gregates, not just for the region but also globally.

Second, there is significant scope to improve the quality of the data in the SFM. The absence of a shared under-standing on how to identify critical infrastructure or critical basic services (Target D) or estimating losses to cultural heritage (Target C) has resulted in reporting of numbers that are not comparable across countries. In certain cases, for the purposes of this report, numbers that were significantly different in scale and magnitude from the rest of the data, and not congruent with the scale of disaster reported, were excluded as outliers, pending joint review with reporting institutions.

Third, if countries do not have well-managed and main-tained disaster loss databases and systematised methods of data collection, they are at a disadvantage in reporting the required data when needed. Without sufficiently dis-aggregated disaster loss databases, countries are also at a disadvantage in undertaking risk analyses. To assist Member States in establishing and populating disaster loss databases congruent with their needs, UNDRR has retrofitted the DesInventar disaster loss database system, to enable countries to record the required disaster loss and damage data in line with Targets A-D.

Currently Member States have the option to report data disaggregated by hazards, geography and by socio-eco-nomic characteristics of people suffering losses on the SFM. Since this is optional, most of the Member States have opted not to report disaggregated data in this initial period of the system. This presents a missed opportunity to render the data more useful to Member States them-selves for their risk assessment and planning purposes. Introducing a degree of uniformity in the hazards reported on, with clear climate markers can better inform reduction of climate-related hazard risk. This can also inform the drive towards greater coherence between climate change adaptation and DRR efforts.

27




least one target125

Countries

Users







targets48



59%24

51%8

21%19




104Countries that


for 2018

53%25Countries that


2018

13%


2018

7%


25%



2018



21%



2018.

59%



2015-2019



3%



22%






Monitoring

29%

28

AnnEx i: gLObAL tARgEts AnD inDiCAtORs OF tHE sEnDAi FRAMEWORK FOR DisAstER RisK REDuCtiOn 2015-2030

28

29

Global target A: Substantially reduce global disaster mortality by 2030, aiming to lower average per 100,000 global mortality between 2020-2030 compared with 2005-2015.

A-1 (compound) Number of deaths and missing persons attributed to disasters, per 100,000 population.

A-2 Number of deaths attributed to disasters, per 100,000 population.

A-3 Number of missing persons attributed to disasters, per 100,000 population.

The scope of disaster in this and subsequent targets is defined in paragraph 15 of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 and applies to small-scale and large-scale, frequent and infrequent, sudden and slow -onset disasters caused by natural or man-made hazards, as well as related environmental, technological and biological hazards and risk.

Global target B: Substantially reduce the number of affected people globally by 2030, aiming to lower the average global figure per 100,000 between 2020 -2030 compared with 2005-2015.

b-1 (compound) Number of directly affected people attributed to disasters, per 100,000 population.

b-2 Number of injured or ill people attributed to disasters, per 100,000 population.

b-3 Number of people whose damaged dwellings were attributed to disasters.

b-4 Number of people whose destroyed dwellings were attributed to disasters.

b-5 Number of people whose livelihoods were disrupted or destroyed, attributed to disasters.

Global target C: Reduce direct disaster economic loss in relation to global gross domestic product (GDP) by 2030.

C-1 (compound) Direct economic loss attributed to disasters in relation to global gross domestic product.

C-2 Direct agricultural loss attributed to disasters. Agriculture is understood to include the crops, livestock, fisheries, apiculture, aquaculture and forest sectors as well as associated facilities and infrastructure.

C-3 Direct economic loss to all other damaged or destroyed productive assets attributed to disasters.

Productive assets would be disaggregated by economic sector, including services, accord-ing to standard international classifications. Countries would report against those economic sectors relevant to their economies. This would be described in the associated metadata.

C-4 Direct economic loss in the housing sector attributed to disasters. Data would be disag-gregated according to damaged and destroyed dwellings.

C-5 Direct economic loss resulting from damaged or destroyed critical infrastructure attributed to disasters.

The decision regarding those elements of critical infrastructure to be included in the calcula-tion will be left to the Member States and described in the accompanying metadata. Protec-tive infrastructure and green infrastructure should be included where relevant.

C-6 Direct economic loss to cultural heritage damaged or destroyed attributed to disasters.

30

Global target D: Substantially reduce disaster damage to critical infrastructure and disruption of basic services, among them health and educational facilities, including through developing their resilience by 2030.

D-1 (compound) Damage to critical infrastructure attributed to disasters.

D-2 Number of destroyed or damaged health facilities attributed to disasters.

D-3 Number of destroyed or damaged educational facilities attributed to disasters.

D-4 Number of other destroyed or damaged critical infrastructure units and facilities attributed to disasters.

The decision regarding those elements of critical infrastructure to be included in the calcula-tion will be left to the Member States and described in the accompanying metadata. Protec-tive infrastructure and green infrastructure should be included where relevant.

D-5 (compound) Number of disruptions to basic services attributed to disasters.

D-6 Number of disruptions to educational services attributed to disasters.

D-7 Number of disruptions to health services attributed to disasters.

D-8 Number of disruptions to other basic services attributed to disasters.

The decision regarding those elements of basic services to be included in the calculation will be left to the Member States and described in the accompanying metadata.

Global target E: Substantially increase the number of countries with national and local disaster risk reduction strategies by 2020.

E-1 Number of countries that adopt and implement national disaster risk reduction strategies in line with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015 -2030.

E-2 Percentage of local governments that adopt and implement local disaster risk reduction strategies in line with national strategies.

Information should be provided on the appropriate levels of government below the national level with responsibility for disaster risk reduction.

31

Global target F: Substantially enhance international cooperation to developing countries through adequate and sustainable support to complement their national actions for implementation of this framework by 2030.

F-1 Total official international support, (official development assistance (ODA) plus other of-ficial flows), for national disaster risk reduction actions.

Reporting of the provision or receipt of international cooperation for disaster risk reduction shall be done in accordance with the modalities applied in respective countries. Recipient countries are encouraged to provide information on the estimated amount of national disas-ter risk reduction expenditure.

F-2 Total official international support (ODA plus other official flows) for national disaster risk reduction actions provided by multilateral agencies.

F-3 Total official international support (ODA plus other official flows) for national disaster risk reduction actions provided bilaterally.

F-4 Total official international support (ODA plus other official flows) for the transfer and ex-change of disaster risk reduction - related technology.

F-5 Number of international, regional and bilateral programmes and initiatives for the transfer and exchange of science, technology and innovation in disaster risk reduction for develop-ing countries.

F-6 Total official international support (ODA plus other official flows) for disaster risk reduction capacity-building.

F-7 Number of international, regional and bilateral programmes and initiatives for disaster risk reduction -related capacity- building in developing countries.

F-8 Number of developing countries supported by international, regional and bilateral initiatives to strengthen their disaster risk reduction-related statistical capacity.

Global target G: Substantially increase the availability of and access to multi-hazard early warning systems and disaster risk information and assessments to the people by 2030.

g-1 Number of countries that have multi-hazard early warning (compound G2-G5) systems.

g-2 Number of countries that have multi-hazard monitoring and forecasting systems.

g-3 Number of people per 100,000 that are covered by early warning information through local governments or through national dissemination mechanisms.

g-4 Percentage of local governments having a plan to act on early warnings.

g-5 Number of countries that have accessible, understandable, usable and relevant disaster risk information and assessment available to the people at the national and local levels.

g-6 Percentage of population exposed to or at risk from disasters protected through pre-emptive evacuation following early warning.

Member States in a position to do so are encouraged to provide information on the number of evacuated people.

Documents

Media - 46992 - Home | UNDRR