Read this section to learn more about the topic of innovative and transformative financing for resilience, ensuring you come prepared to the session. 

Where do we stand? 

While financing for disaster risk reduction has received significant attention, with high-level events and publications emphasizing the need for financing, key challenges remain. These include: 

• Lack of specific measures to ensure resilience to future disasters. 
• Insufficient financing for prevention.  
• Lack of incentives for stakeholders to invest in prevention and resilience. 
• Lack of comprehensive and layered financial strategies.  

At the same time, there are opportunities which could put us on the path to sustainability and resilience. These include: 

• Accelerate financing in prevention through mechanisms such as blended finance, Environmental Social and Governance (ESG) standards, bonds and integrated national financing frameworks (INFFs).  
• Mainstreaming of disaster risk reduction in the activities of financial institutions. 
• Introduce prevention as a key criterion in ESG standards, as well as in existing bonds (climate-resilience bonds, green bonds, social and sustainability linked bonds), to help leverage finance for prevention, adaptation and mitigation actions. 
• Identify paths for improved cooperation between sectors and stakeholders for holistic decision-making and implementation of options 

Session guiding questions 

• In what ways are current finance models contributing or not contributing to resilience? What barriers need to be removed? 
• What sorts of innovative models are there that could be scaled up and implemented in different contexts?
• What policies and incentives for financing should be put in place to meaningfully engage different stakeholders?
• How can we ensure that humanitarian, development, DRR and climate change financing mechanisms support resilience in a more coherent, efficient and effective manner?

Read this section to learn more about the topic of Nature-based Solutions for disaster risk reduction, ensuring you come prepared for the session. 

Where do we stand 

NbS for DRR and CCA are being implemented worldwide. Yet, their inclusion in national and local DRR and CCA strategies is still rare, and no country has reported on them in the Sendai Framework Monitor. This session will be an opportunity to identify and tackle the main challenges related to NbS implementation in DRR: 

• Lack of financing, technology transfers and innovative solutions for the implementation of NbS in DRR/CCA 
• Lack of awareness on the benefits provided by NbS 
• Lack of knowledge on efficacy parameters (i.e. thresholds) and key performance indicators 

NbS offer the following opportunities for reducing disaster risk: 

• Improved knowledge and awareness of dynamics of hazards, exposure, vulnerabilities and resilience of both societies and ecosystems 
• Synchronization of NbS for DRR/CCA with programmes targeted to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic, climate risks and socioeconomic inequalities; 
• Integration of risk-based decision making in sectoral policies and planning, e.g. agriculture, fishery, aquaculture and forestry 
• Better harmony of individuals and communities with nature 

Session guiding questions

• What is the added value of NbS implementation to systemic risk reduction? 
• How can we scale up NbS good practices for DRR/CCA under different institutional and disaster contexts? 
• What is needed to strategically integrate NbS in DRR/CCA decision-making that also contributes to the achievement of multiple societal objectives? 
• What are the barriers to the implementation of NbS for DRR and how can we strategically address these through innovative approaches? 
• Which financing mechanisms are available to enable NbS? 

Learn more about why integrated climate and disaster risk management governance is important and how it can be ensured through comprehensive risk management 

Where do we stand 

Key Challenges 

• The impact of climate emergency is growing and will be increasingly felt. Climate-related disasters have almost doubled compared to the previous twenty years and the frequency and spread of extreme events such as droughts, floods and storms will considerably increase in future.  
• Governance mechanisms in countries remain siloed dealing with climate change and disaster risk separately, impeded by institutional and financing barriers. Such gaps can often be worsened by trade-offs in implementation between sectors. 
• Capacity gaps remain across governance mechanisms, especially in least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Small Island Developing States (SIDS). 

Opportunities  

• There is a growing understanding and political will to adopt integrated approaches across governance structures.  
• Increasing risk analytics, the big data revolution and the sustainable development goals (SDGs) provide common bases for integrated planning and implementation. Tools and guidance on integrated governance of climate and disaster risk have been developed that need to be applied and turned into concrete actions through capacity development. 
• Good practices exist across countries and regions that need to be replicated and contextualized to national needs.  
• Effective partnerships and coordination mechanisms have been developed that can support countries to successfully implement multi-sectoral, multi-hazard and multi-stakeholder approaches. 

Session guiding questions

• How have national and local strategies for disaster and climate resilience evolved since 2015 and what have been the main takeaways in meeting Target E of the Sendai Framework? How have the relevant and complementary sectoral planning processes evolved? 
• Which governance arrangements have enabled the implementation of comprehensive risk management strategies and plans? Which governance challenges have hindered implementation? 
• What should we do to accelerate actions stemming from both the Sendai Framework and Paris Agreement at the local levels? 
• What are the COVID-19 crisis and the climate emergency teaching the DRR community in adapting disaster risk governance?  
• What is required in terms of accelerators and, drivers to transform the way we work? 
• Where do we want to be by 2030, and what needs to happen in the coming years to get there? 

Read this section to learn more about the topic of financing for risk prevention, ensuring you come prepared to the session. 

Where do we stand? 

Key challenges include: 

• Unprecedented debt accumulation amidst the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic  
• Vicious cycle of disaster-response-recover-repeat due to lack of ex ante investment in resilience 
• The true costs of climate change, crisis and disaster are not fully accounted for or known 
• Negative impacts are often disproportionately borne by marginalized groups as disasters impact people differently 

At the same time, risk prevention financing presents opportunities, notably: 

• Improving the effectiveness of risk prevention investments through better inclusiveness and access to funds at local and community level. 
• Better understanding of investment impacts through strengthened assessment and tracking of investments and accountability systems 
• Better use of climate risk and vulnerability assessments, as well as evidence and data of climate impacts, help demonstrate the need for early risk prevention measures as well as comprehensive insurance coverage 
• The possibility for international ratings agencies and major creditors to shift towards a sustainable business model by considering investments in risk prevention or adaptation.  

Session guiding questions 

• What challenges prevent investment in risk prevention both in public and private portfolios? How do investment challenges differ between national, local and community level?       
• What opportunities and good practices and mechanisms exist for making risk-informed investments?  Who are the emerging key players in this field?      
• What are the key steps for putting in place a common vision towards increasing risk prevention investments? 
• How can we ensure that investments in prevention support the and benefit the most vulnerable, including women?  

Join this session to learn more about decision-making and investments related to resilient infrastructure. 

Where do we stand? 

Key challenges in integrating resilience in infrastructure planning and management include: 

• Lack of agreed upon terminology and resilience metrics 
• Insufficient investment in prevention and resilience 
• Regulatory frameworks do not take full account of risks and vulnerability and do not include resilience measures 

At the same time, there are opportunities which could put us on the path to sustainability and resilience. These include: 

• Establishing overarching benchmarks for resilient infrastructure 
• Include infrastructure resilience in national DRR strategies and develop/update national and local regulations around infrastructure so that resilience measures are taken into consideration 
• Promote a ‘Think Resilience’ approach to all infrastructure investments, creating an enabling policy and investment environment for the integration of resilience into infrastructure development 
• Urge international financial institutions and development banks, as well as national financial institutions, to align their strategies, operations and activities with the 2030 initiatives. 

Session guiding questions 

• What do we understand by “resilient” infrastructure and what should some basic metrics of resilience look like? 
• What are some good examples of national DRR strategies incorporating infrastructure resilience and in what ways? 
• What tools and collaborations would best address the critical infrastructure damage and basic service disruption data gap in relation to SF Target D? 
• What regulatory and policy changes would bring the most dividends to communities and would ensure the resilience of infrastructure? 
• What kind of incentives could governments provide to private sectors to invest in resilience of infrastructure?  
• What are some of the bottlenecks for increasing investment in resilient infrastructure? 
• What measures and tools should we use to ensure that those investments are risk informed? 

Read this section to learn more about the potential of cross border cooperation for strengthened DRR capacity and action to ensure you come prepared to the session. 

Where do we stand? 

Challenges 

A mere 0.5% of the total amount of official development assistance between 2010 and 2019 was allocated to DRR. Moreover, only $5.5 billion was aimed at ex-ante risk reduction measures, compared to $119.8 billion spent on post-disaster response and recovery. Very few national development cooperation policies include disaster risk reduction. International development cooperation must become more risk-informed, given the increasingly complex risk landscape and the scope of resources and expertise required. A much broader range of experts and stakeholders must be engaged in cross-border collaboration for DRR. 

Opportunities 

Development cooperation can be a catalyst for disaster risk-informed domestic public and private investment as well as foreign direct investment. Yet traditional development partners cannot meet the scale of investment needed for DRR alone. COVID-19 recovery packages as well as C0P 26 commitments to increase financing for climate change adaptation provide opportunities to increase cross border collaboration for DRR. Moreover, the wealth of knowledge and expertise within civil society organizations, and academic, research and scientific institutions, in both developed and developing countries can be leveraged to strengthen cross-border cooperation and capacity support for DRR. 

Cross-border cooperation between such organizations and actors: 

• supports the exchange of risk data and science and technology for disaster risk reduction 
• allows for more systemic and regular sharing of expertise, best practices and lessons learnt 
• promotes coherence and synergies between their work 
• supports cost-sharing for a more effective use of both financial and human resources more efficiently. 

Session guiding questions 

• How can DRR be better integrated into international development cooperation across all sectors? 
• What kind of approaches to cross-border disaster risk governance and cooperation have been most effective, including across shared ecosystems, water resources, and infrastructure assets?  
• What opportunities exist to better integrate academic, research, and science and technology institutions into cross-border cooperation for risk reduction? What types of policies, mechanisms and networks are needed? 
• To what extent are South-South and triangular cooperation being sufficiently leveraged as means of implementation? 

Read this section to learn more about the topic of local financing for climate and disaster resilience, ensuring you come prepared to the session. 

Where do we stand? 

Investing in disaster risk reduction is a precondition for developing sustainably. Given the differentiated impact of disasters on women, children and other groups, an investment in gender, age and disability-responsive disaster risk reduction is needed. Studies indicate Benefit to Cost Ratios (BCRs) that range between $1.7 and $150 of benefit for every $1 spent on programming for women and girls. Also, with much of the socio-economic, infrastructural, and other development likely to take place in urban centers, there is a need to augment local financing for resilience. The climate finance flows for cities reached an estimated USD384 billion annual on average in 2017/2018. This is far less than existing needs, estimated at USD4.5 to 5.4 trillion annually. 

At the same time, many grassroots groups have developed new financial mechanisms to help increase pre-disaster investments.  For example, the Community Resilience Fund (CRF) is a flexible financial mechanism that puts money at the hands of grassroots communities to develop risk-informed planning and actions, builds partnership with the local government and drives locally-led implementation. The municipality of Livingston, Izabal in Guatemala, agreed to finance actions aimed at community resilience, which are implemented by local leaders. The Municipality of Wiwili in Nicaragua, agreed to allocate a municipal fund of 10% for disaster risk reduction projects at the grassroots level, specifically targeting women's organizations.  
But while successful examples exist, the question remains: “How can these examples be scaled up to achieve results across communities and continents?” 

Session guiding questions 

• How can local governments and communities work together for better access to financing that empowers the most vulnerable in decision making?  
• How can civil society and women’s organizations influence financing decisions and policy making?  
• What are the emerging trends for increasing the financing at the local level?  
• At global, national, and community levels, what actions are needed to accelerate progress to strengthen capabilities and capacities of local governments to better prepare DRR/resilience project portfolios? 

Join the session to learn more about the latest discussions around Early Warning Systems including Early Action. 

Where do we stand 

Since 2006, the Early Warning System Checklist serves as a fundamental concept in early warning systems. It enhanced the understanding of early warning as a people-centered system with four key components (risk knowledge, monitoring and forecasting, dissemination and communication, and response capability).  

While the international community has recognized the importance of early warning systems and significant progress has been achieved at regional, national and local level, challenges still remain, including: 

• Increasing frequency and intensity of climatic events; 
• Increasing population dynamics in hazardous zones; 
• Slow and rapid onset pandemic; 
• Conflicts posing new risks to people, livelihoods, infrastructure and services; 
• Regional and global interconnectedness allowing propagation of risk and impacts across borders and systems; 
• Digital inequalities causing a lack of access of marginalized groups to EW information; 
• Need of improvement of multi-sector effective governance and financing mechanisms. 

At the same time, the EW/EA offers key opportunities to maximize DRR implementation: 

• Contributing to more precise and accessible warnings which provide actionable information for people and organizations alike; 
• Enhanced effectiveness of preparedness to disasters; 
• Strengthened people-centred inclusive approaches to multi-hazards; 
• Progress made in terms of information and communication technology access and use; 
• Increase in science, technology, climate and disaster risk data availability as well as forecasting and predictive modelling capacities. 

Session guiding questions 

• What is the role of EW/EA in averting, minimizing and addressing risks, losses and damages? 
• What are the current opportunities and challenges to enhance effective and inclusive governance and financing of EWS? 
• How can we trace the evolution of methodologies and tools to design and implement multi-hazard and risk-centered EWS that enable early action across scales? 
• What is the wider application of EWEA to help reduce vulnerabilities to climate and disaster risk and reduce the impact of disasters on inequalities?