DROUGHT RISK REDUCTION ACTION PLAN FOR THE HORN OF AFRICA REGION PARTNERS PLANNING WORKSHOP ELEMENTAITA, KENYA

Transcription

1 DROUGHT RISK REDUCTION ACTION PLAN FOR THE HORN OF AFRICA REGION PARTNERS PLANNING WORKSHOP 23 RD TO 25 TH JULY, 2012 ELEMENTAITA, KENYA A project funded by ECHO A project coordinated by FAO

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS... 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... 4 DAY ONE: OPENING SESSION... 5 BACKGROUND PRESENTATIONS... 7 REGIONAL DRRAP PARTNERS ACTIONS DRAAP ADVOCACY STRATEGIES PRESENTATION BY THEMATIC LEADS ON COMMUNITY BASED APPROACHES CLOSING REMARKS CONCLUSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS LIST OF ANNEXES

3 ACRONYMS ACTED AU CAADP CMDRR CSO CSP DFID DRM DRR DRRAP ECHO FAO FSNWG GS&L IFRC IGAD KRC NDDCF NGO NDMA NGO NRM REGLAP UN UNDP UNICEF USAID VICOBA Agency for Technical Cooperation and Development African Union Comprehensive Africa Agriculture Development Programme Community Managed Disaster Risk Reduction Community Service Organization Conflict Sensitive Programming Department for International Development (UK) Drought Risk Management Drought Risk Reduction Drought Risk Reduction Action Plan European Community Humanitarian Office Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations Food Security and Nutrition Working Group (East Africa) Group Savings and Loan International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies Inter-Governmental Authority on Development Kenya Red Cross National Drought and Disaster Contingencies Fund Non Government Organization National Drought Management Authorities Non Government Organization Natural Resource Management Regional Learning and Advocacy Programme United Nations United Nations Development Programme United Nations Children s Fund United States Agency for International Development Village Community Banking 3

4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This workshop was organized to launch the European Commission DG for Humanitarian Aid and Civil protection (DG ECHO) funded 2012 Drought Risk Reduction Action Plan (DRRAP) for the Horn of Africa region for actions in Ethiopia, Djibouti, Kenya, Somaliland and Uganda. The DRRAP programme is the 5 th phase of the DG ECHO support to drought risk reductions projects in the Horn of Africa. It was the first event for all DRRAP partners under the funding decision. The DRRAP programme will have a maximum duration of 18 months within the period. The workshop s main objective was; 1. To formally present the DRRAP to the regional, cross border and country implementing organizations, understanding the operational framework and implementation modalities. 2. To finalize the project s scope and work plan, including the deliverables expected at the regional, cross border and country levels. 3. To identify and establish the DRRAP advocacy strategy, technical support and coordination required during the implementation. 4. To provide an opportunity for DRRAP partners to review the main areas of focus and the projects priorities, through sharing of Lessons learnt and good practices with emphasis on long term DRR strategies in the region. To achieve this, IGAD being the lead in drought resilience in the Horn of Africa was invited to share their long term drought resilience strategy. This provided DRRAP partners opportunity for alignment of their drought resilience work at national and regional levels. During the 2 days, the following outcomes were realized: 1. Partners were informed of the IGAD s Regional Drought Resilience Initiative. The opportunities available for engagement such as the IGAD CSO Meeting in September 2012 where their representation and roles will be defined. Actual date of the meeting will be defined in the invitation letter. 2. Draft country, regional and cross border joint work plans forming the basis of country inception workshops. 3. Identification of technical support areas for partners. 4. Coherent and harmonized communication messaging including a toolkit for dissemination of thematic DRAAP output. Further elaboration of the communication messages will be defined at country levels. 5. Key country and regional advocacy areas and opportunities for engagement with government and IGAD were identified. The Partners Planning Workshop was organized by the DRRAP regional partners with the financial support of the European Commission DG for Humanitarian Aid and Civil protection. The workshop was held between th July 2012 at the Elementaita Country Lodge, Kenya and attended by 75 participants representatives of 27 organizations funded under the DRRAP programme (see Annex 3). The workshop was officially opened by the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) Executive Secretary, H.E. Engineer Mahboub Maalim. 4

5 DAY ONE: OPENING SESSION The workshop was opened with speeches from the FAO Sub- Regional Coordinator for Eastern Africa and FAO representative to Ethiopia, AU and ECA, Mr. Castro Camarada, the DG ECHO Regional Head of Office Mr. Aldo Biondi and the IGAD Executive Secretary H.E. Engineer Mahboub Maalim, who made the official opening of the workshop. SPEAKER: FAO SUBREGIONAL COORDINATOR FOR EASTERN AFRICA, FAO REPRESENTATIVE TO ETHIOPIA, AU AND ECA Mr Castro Camarada Highlights: There is increased response in the region, especially at country level in disaster risk reduction. Much has been done, but more needs to be done. The key message coming out of the various high level stakeholder meetings in the region is that as development actors, there is need to do better and be better coordinated towards ending drought emergency in the horn of Africa. There is an urgent need for: Adequate implementation of policy and stronger institutional implementation Focus on the coordination and prioritisation of country led processes and the IGAD led resilience initiative Increased investments in peace building initiatives, agriculture and food security Implementation of more up to date technology in agriculture FAO values collaboration on policy and strategy work in the region as it is at the core of FAO s work. This is also reflected in FAO s renewed commitment in a hunger free Horn of Africa, notably through; Integration of FAOs emergency response to the resilience building unit. This decentralization process is aimed at increasing FAOs effectiveness in resilience building in the region. Improved coordination through support to IGAD drought resilience initiatives. Sharing of good practices, as will be highlighted during Share Fare in October to share good practices in the region and promote country experience sharing across borders. SPEAKER: ECHO HEAD OF REGIONAL SUPPORT OFFICE-Mr. Aldo Biondi Highlights: Emphasis should now be placed on the best way to strategically capitalize the investment so far made. ECHO has invested 70 million Euros in supporting drought risk reduction in the Horn of Africa during the last six years since In this phase ECHO will invest 20 million ( ), bringing the total funding to 90 million Euros, despite this support more investment still needs to be done to make the community resilient to drought. Disaster Risk reduction being a developmental process, a balance must be found between the top down and the bottom up approach. While building momentum for the next funding 5

6 phase, the intergovernmental commitment towards long term resilience building is a prerequisite. This should also involve crucial alignment with donors and government development policies and strategies to bolster the process. The Focus now should be on translating the tools and lessons learnt from the pilot interventions to various and specific decision making processes for facilitation of up scaling and replication. DG ECHO having supported the bottom up approach, a step further to meet the top down approach is required. The Governments and non-governmental organizations should take stock and make use of the lessons learnt and best practices and implement them into the development process so as to, build community resilience to drought and second make the best use of the European taxpayers money invested in the region. OFFICIAL OPENING: IGAD EXECUTIVE SECRETARY- H.E. Engineer Mahboub Maalim Highlights: The EU has had a long term partnership with IGAD and is particularly grateful for the funding towards this particular project. IGAD and FAO have been collaborating on building resilience in the region, such as in the formulation of the regional CADAP process, the Country Programming Papers (CPP), the Regional Programming Framework (RPF), co-chairing the Food and Nutrition working group, on the FSTP- cross border which is a follow up of IGAD LPI, capacity enhancement support (secondment) amongst others. We have always been dealing with drought disasters in our region. We now need to ask how we should prepare ourselves and focus on; Sharing information with other civil society stakeholders Early warning systems Coordination, and we need to ask ourselves if we need to be coordinated Response to recurring disasters Better formulation of policies and investment in research Capacity enhancement support, among others. Agencies must work together and move away from competitiveness at a time when people are losing their lives. Coordination at the regional level has suffered, when drought, animal diseases, conflict and other issues continue to affect communities across the borders. IGAD'S has a regional coordinating platform for drought resilience, approved by it member head of States who are a part of a steering committee that includes donors and is managed by a secretariat team of four (4) people. The DRRAP project has a lot of advantages as it provides a very good foundation, addresses cross border/regional issues and provides an opportunity to implement best practices, and provides agencies direct linkages to the DRR platform. We should now look to at how 6

7 regional programming will be implemented, align action plans together and link better with communities and the civil society. IGAD is also discussing how to engage with the civil society before the planned September conference for the platform launch and the partners of DRRAP will be invited to this meeting. The workshop was officially opened at 9.11 am PARTICIPANTS EXPECTATIONS Participants' expectations were outlined and formed the basis of discussions during the two days of the DRRAP workshop. (See Annex 2) BACKGROUND PRESENTATIONS These presentations were meant to set the climate for the workshop and provide a common overall understanding to the DRRAP partners PRESENTATION OF DRRAP DECISION - ECHO Objective: To provide an overview of the DRRAP funding decision. This presentation provided the in depth analysis of ECHO investment in support of DRR globally with specific attention in the horn of Africa. Presentation Highlights Since 1992, ECHO has mobilized 14 billion Euros in 140 countries around the world for humanitarian interventions. The Horn of Africa in 2012 has been allocated 102 million Euros towards humanitarian intervention. In the last six years, 70 million Euros has been spent on community based pilot projects, regional projects for activities such as advocacy, documentation of best practices and lessons learnt, coordination and technical assistance to the implementing partners. The main objective of the DRRAP ( ) is to increase resilience and reduce vulnerability in local communities through support to strategies to mitigate and respond to drought. The funded projects should have a specific focus on community based approach with a linkage to policy level engagement, with a timeline of up to 18 months. DRRAP priorities: Building on the achievements of past decisions and continue support towards resilience building. Documentation of best practices through monitoring and evaluation and operational research which is critical for advocacy Dissemination of lessons learnt and good practices. 7

8 Investment: ECHO investment in the DRRAP project can be broken down into, Country- 47% Cross border 31 % Regional 22% Expected Outcomes: Ensure implementation of lessons learnt and best practices from past DRR funding decisions are disseminated in a top down and bottom up approach for a harmonised and evidence based implementation strategy. Identify critical steps needed to take the lessons from/for practitioners at another level to influence the greater development agenda Strengthen synergies between regional support projects (FAO, REGLAP consortium, UNISDR, UNDP and UNICEF), and the National and cross border projects through agreement of joint/shared strategies among all partners. Challenges foreseen: Partners should think of the process beyond the project with a focus on transition rather than exit Anchoring of any community DRR within existing contextual systems/ Government frameworks and processes such as Millennium Development Goals(MDGs, Country Poverty Reduction Strategic Papers( PRSPs ). Finding a balance between government led top-down process and community driven bottom-up measures Opportunities: Country National Drought Management Authorities ( i.e. the NDMA in Kenya ) Coordination and linkage among ECHO Partners and other DRR stakeholders Governments and donors commitments should continue focus on DRR by aligning humanitarian aid with development in order to build resilience and to do business differently in both areas Expected Workshop outcomes Formulation of country and regional implementation plans that ensure that DRR information and good practices are trickled down to field staff and local partners and are taken up jointly to policy and decision makers through shared communication and advocacy strategies. 8

9 PRESENTATION OF IGAD REGIONAL DISASTER RESILIENCE AND SUSTAINABILITY PLATFORM Objective: To provide an overview of the IGAD regional Disaster Resilience and Sustainability platform. This presentation updated the DRRAP stakeholders with the overall structure of working of the IGAD regional disaster resilience and sustainability platform. Linkages and coordination mechanism at regional and national level were clearly defined in this presentation. Key Presentation highlights On the Africa Regional Platform and Hyogo Framework for Action IGAD is in the process of establishing a regional operational disaster fund with the cooperation of global finance institutions and its regional partners (FAO and UNISDR) ACPU Natural Disaster facility project will focus on hazard mapping for the region IGAD is also in consultation with the civil society and NGOs; looking at opportunities to bring the lessons learnt to the existing high level fora (for the key decision makers), such as representation of NGOs in the steering committees Emphasis on governance and mechanisms to insure that large amounts of donor funding towards DRR are directly benefiting communities. We should use the country mechanisms and existing organisations such as the Kenya Red Cross who are actively involved in community level intervention. Concern over duplication of interventions We must leverage politically at the government level Reactions: Q: On consultation on CSO and community voice in the CADAP and country plans, what are the broad based consultation processes for civil society on a regional level? A: Presentations have been done in the past, next one intended before the IGAD General Assembly scheduled for September 2012, where there will be an opportunity for civil society representation in the IGAD NGO civil society programme Q: What mechanism is in place for allocation of funding that is coming into IGAD that will directly benefit communities? A: Country mechanism will be used where funds come through the countries. Implementation is also done through regional partners where mechanisms are in place to ensure the communities are better implemented. Q: Clarification was raised on the resilience platform, whether it involves all the disaster or is focusing only on drought? A: The platform is disaster based. Because of political leverage, the IGAD Drought Resilience Platform was evolved so that countries can have more ownership of drought risk management. 9

10 CROSS BORDER AND FUNDING WATCH- LINK BETWEEN FSTP AND DRRAP- FAO Objective: This presentation was made to better understand the upcoming funding discussion in the region and cross border investment. This presentation provided linkages between DRRAP and upcoming/ongoing action and particularly the regional initiative in support of vulnerable pastoralist and agro pastoralist in the horn of Africa and other regional drought programme. Key Presentation highlights The objective of the Initiative for Ending Drought Emergencies (EDE) in the Horn of Africa (HoA) is to: Improve livelihoods and enhance resilience of drought-prone communities in the IGAD region. FSTP target areas are in Ethiopia, Uganda and Kenya. Specific focus is on Natural Resource Management (NRM) Market access and trade Livelihood support Pastoral risk management Research Conflict resolution The presentation highlighted the core functions of FAO that contribute to pastoral resilience such as coordination, technical support, planning and linkages, regional studies and documentation, PFS approach and support to IGAD Disaster resilience initiatives and institutional policy support. Furthermore the presentation highlighted the synergetic effect between Regional Initiative in Support of Vulnerable Pastoralists & Agro-pastoralists RISPA and the current action DRRAP where they share common themes such as Community Empowerment, Partners Coordination, Cross Border operations, Lesson Learning, Evidences Policy & Advocacy, Institutional Strengthening (communities, coordination) consolidation & linkages (community /traditional institutions, national structures, linkages to IGAD structures. REGIONAL DRRAP PARTNERS ACTIONS The presentations from the DRRAP regional partners were made to give an overall understanding of the DRRAP regional partners work and the linkages at national and regional level. SESSION: PRESENTATION OF DRRAP COORDINATION MECHANISM AND TECHNICAL SUPPORT-FAO Objective: To provide an update on the FAO overall DRRAP coordination, technical support and advocacy role in the region. This presentation provided DRRAP partners the role of FAO at regional and national level in DRRAP coordination, technical support and advocacy. 10

11 Presentation highlights Purpose Support to overall DRRAP coordination and bringing technical support to the field through; 1. Direct technical support to DRRAP partners 2. National level joint field monitoring missions. 3. Cross border technical support missions for ECHO partners 4. Technical support to REGLAP learning groups (water, Community approaches to DRR, evidence based practice) 5. Coordination-regional, national and cross border 6. Communication toolkit and support to national/regional DRRAP advocacy The presentation focused on FAO s functions as a knowledge network (livestock & crop production, forestry, fisheries, water & irrigation, nutrition, economists, statisticians, social scientists, and other professionals). FAO provides technical support to ECHO partners, conduct national level joint field monitoring missions and cross border technical support missions for ECHO partners, technical support to REGLAP learning groups (water, community approaches to DRR, evidence based practice). Furthermore, FAO coordinates technical support to regional partners coordination, IGAD Platform, regional workshops, cross border partners coordination, national DRRAP partners meetings - DRR coordination (National DRR & Resilience Platforms ATF-DRM, KFSSG, FSAL), National DRRAP advocacy forum, Field DRRAP coordination, coordinate, manage and disseminate DRRAP project data, information and knowledge through SESSION: PRESENTATION OF THE REGIONAL PARTNERS AND FEEDBACK UNDP-DDC, UNICEF, ISDR, REGLAP The presentations from regional partners UNDP, UNICEF, UNISDR and REGLAP highlighted their respective task and responsibilities as DRRAP partners and the comparative advantages that each brings on the overall DRRAP implementation. Presentation highlights: 1. Technical support to be provided to the DRRAP partners related to the organizations sectors of expertise 2. Advocacy support, i.e. policy dialogue entry points, to be provided to reach different groups of audience 3. Coordination function to be undertaken by the organizations related to the agency comparative advantage 4. Human and technical resources to be offered to the various DRRAP partners for joint achievement of the overall DRRAP goals and objectives, e.g. organogram (human resources) and of some key budget line/ activities. 5. Advocacy Opportunities: 3rd African Ministerial Conference and Africa Regional Platform on DRR (17th to 19th Oct in Zimbabwe International day for DRR celebrations Africa Working group meetings Post HFA consultations in Africa 11

12 Coordination framework with UNDP-DDC Questions: Q: Are there list of indicators we can use to measure resilience? A: Still in the development of the concept. Challenges include different definition and understanding of perceptions for resilience. FAO is currently working with IGAD to develop this. There are no resilience indicators, but in Ethiopia, there is in process a review with different DRR stakeholders on impact on programs. The two organizations are also working to frame advocacy messages that would be channeled to the high level policy making levels in support Q: To which extent are all these efforts benefiting the IGAD platform on a policy level and directly in the field? A: UNDP is developing quantitative tools methodologies for community stakeholders in the short or long term for them to assess the impact. Other comments: 1. Concerns were raised on IGAD capacity to drive DRR agenda and support should also be directed to them as their policies will outlast agency interventions. The Joint policy papers for IGAD have been developed in the past in conjunction with FAO and OCHA to support IGAD in terms of advocacy and messaging. There is room for improvement. 2. Agency participation in IGAD forums should increase. There should be facilitated discussions at the forum for development of indicators for DRR at the practitioner level 3. Somalia was not included in the ECHO decision therefore the lack of focus on its DRR, but agencies should continue to push for involvement of other donors in the Somalia specific interventions. 4. There is multiple inter agency comparative advantage opportunities to take advantage of. 5. As Somalia, Ethiopia and Djibouti are not as covered in all agencies, we should identify opportunities for cross border collaboration. 6. There is poor linkage with IGAD from Djibouti. Agencies should better link with each other in these countries especially since a lot of work is being done in Djibouti, Ethiopia and Somalia. 7. IGAD in Djibouti is also taking advantage of the UN discussion mechanism, although challenges still exist politically in implementing DRRAP policies at the country level. DRAAP ADVOCACY STRATEGIES Objective: The objective of this session was to share the draft DRRAP advocacy strategy and messaging at national and regional level. Participants identified that the main target audience for advocacy is the relevant ministries and authorities in each of the countries government, additional audiences and other stakeholders and the communities to whom this information filters down to. Upon discussions on advocacy the following are key discussions points that came up from the country and regional groups. 12

13 UGANDA 1. The group observed that much of the focus of the strategy is on the DEWs and LDS with no emphasis on the contribution of livestock towards the overall livelihoods in Karamoja. In response it was appreciated that DCA is expected over the next 10 months to responsibly exit handing over the two initiatives to government. In this case broadening the activities would not be possible. There is need to generate updated statistics on livestock with key attributes (population, sales) and concrete evidence for its contribution to community livelihood, which can be taken up to advocacy forum. 2. Observed that the advocacy strategy indicated was quite ambitious in terms of activities but the meeting was assured that the indicators were time bound and therefore achievable in the project time. 3. Also there is need effort to create synergy and integration with existing initiatives, it was noted that there are some institutions with specialized expertise such as International Institute for Rural Reconstruction (IIRR), operating in Karamoja as their involvement may create cross fertilization of ideas 4. Recommended to explore a follow up discussion with ECHO to support putting up a case for the Karamoja livestock based livelihood and cross boarder lessons building upon some of the already existing studies 5. A recommendation was made to take stock of the contingency plans in Karamoja and review the reason why they are not taken up into the district planning process. 6. Noted with concern that whereas the policy on disaster preparedness and management was enacted, it lacks the legal framework, for its implementation., it is not yet operational (no Act of parliament) and yet this is a crucial factor for the success of any advocacy efforts. However, it was realized that the process of preparing the Act may take longer than the project period. 7. Agreed that there was need for the Uganda team to have a follow up meeting to develop a more broad strategy for advocacy beyond the REGLAP interest under this ECHO decision and explore how other ongoing initiatives like the FSTP can support aspects not covered by the ECHO project. Noting that REGLAP is making great contribution in documenting lessons, sharing knowledge and formulating advocacy messages, but its effort is being constraint by time and donor requirement. KENYA Kenya advocacy group members CORDAID (lead), RECONCILE, PDNK, UNISDR, FAO, Oxfam GB What informed the choice in advocacy areas? 1. Past engagement/research 2. Opportunity to engage and make a difference now 3. Importance for Dryland resilience Policy areas selected 1. Appropriate rollout of the NDMA, National Drought and Disaster Contingencies Fund (NDDCF) and Kenya s country plan on Ending Drought Emergencies. 2. Lobby for and create awareness on the ASAL Sessional paper and the ASAL Secretariat 13

14 (replacement for the MNKOAL) and ASAL unit in MOP. 3. Promote integrated, participatory planning processes. 4. Promote appropriate development of community land legislation. 5. Build country level capacity for advocacy dependent on funds from La Nina consortium Key strategies 1. Lobbying- through roundtables, one on one meetings. 2. Participation in the processes and influence from within. 3. Policy briefs 4. Media/press releases. 5. Sensitization workshops /REGLAP journal. Reactions to the Presentation Discussions: 1. The Kenya Advocacy Group is not limited to the listed members, other organisations can participate. 2. On NDMA- there needs to be harmonisation of operations with the Kenya meteorological authority. 3. All capacity building will be done by partners. It is also assumed that the Kenya Meteorological Department generates the information for use by NDMA 4. Consultants will be employed by the concerned agencies to determine who is doing what and where so as to consolidate information that exists, identify good practices. 5. There needs to be advocacy at both national and country level, although it is not clear who will take up this role. 6. At country level, La-Ninia had planned to capacity build on policy issues there needs to be targets to cover advocacy in the next 18 months. 7. Targets that cannot be achieved can be covered by other funding agencies with more long term engagement. DJIBOUTI Djibouti advocacy group members ACF, UNICEF and FAO 1. Djibouti has a good platform to present and exchange information among the coordination system there exists the food security, the wash, nutrition cluster the inter cluster system using clusters as an avenue. 2. There is the DRR platform based at ministry of interior dedicated to all the disasters and has been functional since last year, and has monthly meetings. 3. Cluster system is directly linked to the national DRR platform for each sector 4. There exists coordination mechanism with IGAD: national resilience platform for Djibouti is the FSRD cluster. Under discussion to have the national DRR platform as a link to the IGAD resilience platform UNICEF: - sector diagnosis highlighting gaps and opportunities will be used an advocacy tool. Advocacy: attain the same level of understanding among the 3 partners Present at national level the goal of the DRRAP at national and regional levels 14

15 Advocacy at regional within the country, linked with ACF working on community based DRR in Dikhil. Communication strategy 1. Communication - DRR website tool used to send docs, reports on meetings a good communication tool. 2. Invite national platforms to get access and get involved in the website to include their docs, work etc. 3. Kick start with national meetings to present for the national stakeholder and decision makers Reactions: Q: IFRC and KRC How will Redcross be integrated into REGLAP advocacy work at country level? This will be through the country advocacy leads and participation into the national advocacy activities Q: How can we consolidate and synergise the various advocacy strategies from various partners? A: -FAO is compiling the tool kit which will somehow consolidate the advocacy message. -ISDR: Need further consultation with other partners -1% of development needs to go into DRR -10% into long term development plan. FEEDBACK OF THE REGIONAL ADVOCACY STRATEGY DISCUSSION GROUP The group discussed on the regional advocacy requirement and needs and came up with the following key highlights: There is a need to improve on our IGAD UN NGO communication, as well as improve on the communication between REGLAP members. Proposed Action: create a mailing list where information can be frequently shared. There is a need for heightened engagement between IGAD Regional Resilience Platform, and REGLAP. On possible entry points by REGLAP to increase its engagement with IGAD, it was suggested that one way could be by working closely with the Knowledge Management and Information Sharing Manager. This position is presently being filled. Proposed Action: Look towards working closely with this Manager upon recruitment. In working closely with IGAD, we need to bring to the fore and amplify relevant IGAD policies and documents. Within our work we need to demonstrate better knowledge of, articulation of and use of IGADs existing policies. There is great traction in having our messaging supported by provisions from these policies. There is an urgency to prioritize work that will see the implementation of also other existing regional policies such as AU, NEPAD Policies. There is a need to find out from IGAD what their research gaps / needs are, and look into opportunities to undertake research that can meet those needs. 15

16 There is a need to improve on how we share information to IGAD, information that is useful for Member States. We need to look into how to best ensure that evidence based messages are shared to member states. The Learning Group should keep interested organizations abreast of the work they are doing; and invite non-member organizations to share good practice information and lessons that can also be profiled. There was a need to determine the linkages that can made between country learning groups and the regional learning group - perhaps pick up on the country messaging and amplify this. On messaging and contributing language to policy: The Learning Group needs to develop messages advocacy asks. With several areas of possible messaging, the learning group will need to prioritize its tasks. When we have agreed messages these need to be sharp and clearly articulated in a way that member states can adopt. Learning Group should continue to provide good practice learning for the different audiences. Reactions and comments from the advocacy presentations Q- How do you plan on implementing the advocacy linkage with Ethiopian government agencies in as far as resettling pastoralist communities? Q- How can we measure the impact of the advocacy interventions? Q- Are there any government initiated strategies towards supporting the pastoralist zones in as far as managing natural resources? C: The Ethiopian government has taken steps towards resettlement of pastoralist communities. We need more evidences to support our arguments towards DRR and sustainability of pastoralist livelihood system. C: Problems have been experienced in advancing advocacy due to technicalities of accessing the policy for key government decision makers, especially where mobility is an issue. C: There has been slow realization of success in using case studies on mobility of pastoralist communities towards policy use by governments. 16

17 PRESENTATION BY THEMATIC LEADS ON COMMUNITY BASED APPROACHES This session was on update of the key thematic community based approaches that ECHO has been supporting. The focus was on the good/ bad practices and lessons that have been learnt in implementation the approaches at the field level. SESSION: IMPROVING PRACTICE: THEMATIC LEAD PRESENTATION ON GOOD AND BAD PRACTICES Objective: To present and share good and bad experiences in implementation of community based practices. These presentations highlighted the key issues and provided background required for the country planning. The community based approaches covered in this sessions were CMDRR bycordaid, water and natural resource management by IUCN, VICOBA/VSLA and income generating activities by CARE and finally conflict sensitive programming by VsF- G.(See web link) Principle of community based approaches: (REGLAP) REGLAP presented the general principle of community based approaches and urged DRRAP partners to reflect on the good practice principles developed in the previous ECHO phase. The importance of impact assessment of the past programming in DRR was identified as a gap; that requires to be addressed in this phase. Community managed DRR: from concept to good practices (CORDAID) Presentation highlights: New approach to re-design and define development agenda from risk reduction perspectives is needed CMDR training should not be less than 14 days but other practitioners do it in 3 to 5 days which is insufficient as it requires an in-depth understanding of the Participatory Rural Appraisal tools. CORDAID is working on a CMDRR visual toolkit using arts, pictures, songs, poems to promote learning and practice Rangeland and water management- good and bad practice (IUCN) Presentation Highlights Dryland areas are characterized by limited primary productivity, unpredictability of resource endowment and extreme climatic events. Mobility of livestock is at the centre of rangeland management as it enables quick response to changing environments and spreading of risk. Well managed rangelands are effectively managed landscapes requiring complex institutions, rights power and communal governance Water planning and range management planning go hand in hand 17

18 Bad practice examples. Focus on technical emergency responses which rarely recognizes the complex management systems of land and water, leading to inappropriate water development Lack of coordination between actors Favoritism in consideration of multiple users of water Little focus on sustainable institutions and their risk management systems Way forward Develop checklist of what to consider when undertaking water development in ASALs. Group savings and loan (GS&L) CARE KENYA Presentation highlights: 1. Popularly known as village saving and loan but is termed differently by different agencies and countries 2. Has been integrated in the livelihood and health programs 3. Data posted and up to date online 4. Partnerships have been formed with financial institutions for implementation through mobile technology. 5. GS&L are defined by their use of revolving fund mechanism and do not require seed capital. They are popular because the savings focus build asset and profiles economic empowerment, access to financial services, financial inclusion and contributes towards building resilience of poor communities. 6. GS&L have proven to be key in providing access to finances for women in vulnerable communities. This has empowered women in the regions to increase their purchasing power,mostly to meet their household basic needs, children education and hospital access for family members. Conflict sensitive programming (CSP) - VSF-G Presentation highlights 1. Facilitation is key particularly the technical staff s emotional and ideological commitment 2. Leaders and governance systems at the local levels must be linked to CSP 3. Cross border pastoralist frameworks- there is a need for contingency funds for peace building initiatives Dangerous assumptions: 1. CSP will automatically bring peace 2. Peace building builds CSP 3. Development promotes conflict prevention Crucial factors for peace committees 1. Should apply technical capacity building recommendations applied in various guidelines such as Do No Harm. 2. Simple and clear monitoring plans/systems in place 3. Structured linkage with district security team or any other local authority structure in place 4. Should network with external services and support I.e. at the national levels 18

19 PLENARY: Participants were requested to identify their technical support, documentation needs and to share what they are planning for good practice documentation. Questions: 1. What can participating agencies do differently to improve implementation within the DRRAP implementation period? 2. What technical support is needed training, cross visits, mentoring? 3. What Good practice documentation support is needed? The feedback from this question can be obtained in Annex 4 DRRAP COMMUNICATION TOOLKIT A short presentation was made highlighting the contents of the proposed communication toolkit to the DRRAP partners for their inputs. Issues raised on this were; Different key messages for each cluster of stakeholders needs to be identified. Need to develop a harmonized DRRAP communication material that is clear and less technical Communication output on the project should also build on the existing policy briefs, but with a view to make them less technical in simpler language but still capturing what the project is doing in the different countries. Group work: - Suggested Communication thematic areas The common thematic areas grouped into clusters are: 1. DRR DRR Planning CMDRR( Disaster development plans, contingency plans and contingency funds Early Warning Systems (modern and traditional) 2. NRM Holistic Range Management Water for Drylands Mobility for pastoral areas Conflict sensitivite programming 3. Livestock Animal health Mobile livestock production Transboundary movements 4. Advocacy and Knowledge management. Policy documents Best practices and innovation Coordination and information sharing Behavioral change 19

20 Reactions to the common thematic areas Livestock was felt to be too narrow as it does not comprehensively cover livelihoods, consider renaming to livelihoods DRR is too broad; some of the major topics were not captured. Conflict sensitive programming needs to be cross cutting, not just for NRM Suggested themes Evaluation and Impact assessment DRR and integration into basic services- consider rename to the title of DRR to capture this SESSION: STRENGTHENING MONITORING AND EVALUTATION AND LEARNING WITHIN DRRAP PROJECTS- UNDP-DDC Key Highlights The key purpose of Impacts Assessment methodology shall be: Examine how the humanitarian and development support initiatives influence the drought affected communities in both short term (e.g. next drought cycle) and long terms (e.g. 10 years later) in quantitative as well as qualitative manner. Measuring resilience impacts in quantitative value may provide an important indicator for efficiency, effectiveness, relevance and sustainability of DRR initiatives but does not intend to score them to judge which initiative is better than others, as there is no one size fits all approach to DRR. Impact Assessment: Presentation highlights: Risk reduction, vulnerability reduction, resilience building were highlighted There is a new shift towards evidence based approaches In this DRRAP phase there is need to increase efforts to document and upscale good practices. Participants to focus on Cost effectiveness of current impact assessment methodology SESSION OUTPUT: CONSOLIDATED ACTIVITES AND EVENTS AND DRRAP COUNTRY COORDINATION FRAMEWORK This session encouraged so much discussion among partners and provided very good understanding of what each individual organisation has planned for DRRAP at national and regional level. It gave the opportunity for partners to identify areas of synergies and complementarities in the DRRAP implementation. Issues for follow up related to joint implementation were highlighted and were to be further detailed at the country inception workshop. Actual dates for the workshops would be known once consultation with the national DRR teams is made. This session was done through groups as below; DISCUSSION GROUPS: 1. Uganda 2. Kenya 20

21 3. Ethiopia 4. Djibouti 5. Cross border partners for Ethiopia- Kenya border Comments: Partners to coordinate and cross check with each other to avoid overlap of activities. Conflict sensitive programming must be integrated into facilitation processes especially for the cross border communities The overall outcome of these sessions culminated into the production of the country joint work plan and some key events were identified which DRRAP partners should participate (see Annex 5) SESSION: PRESENTATION ON DRR WEBSITE Highlights; This presentation covered the key elements of the website, including information sharing, mapping, databases, search functionality, partner user profile registration among others. This features include an easy to use platform with possible multiple uses that is partner driven. Website usability indicators from 2010 to date Traffic indicators Partner indicators New partnerships and activities on the website 42,401 visits 1118 documents JICA Kenya will be using the projects maps to map its Kenya projects. 186,119 pages 201 projects IFRC will also be adding their projects 8,270 unique users 99 partners Doing Cash and Voucher mapping with CaLP ( discussions are ongoing to have WFP, UNICEF and others 150 countries 2 donor endorsements Average 300 visits a month/ Superstar Users REGLAP, ACTED, FSNWG Q. What is the final goal of the website? What is it supposed to be after the ECHO decision ends? A. The website is primarily an information and coordination tool. How much further it goes is dependent on the recommendations that partners give on its future continued use. 21

22 Participants were then guided through a Website and User Feedback questionnaire survey that would help in the redesign of the DRR website. CLOSING REMARKS Comments by ECHO Country Technical Advisor for Ethiopia-Mr. Johan Heffinck Highlights 1. The DG ECHO DRR programme has six years of experience to build on the successes, challenges and lessons learnt.. 2. In the future there is need to focus on how to share the information and lessons learnt with government and other stakeholders 3. It is also important to also explore opportunities for partnership with IGAD and linking with the IGAD platform 4. There are many interested donors in DRR. We must reach out to others and build on the donor endorsements, such as DFID, JICA, and USAID. 5. The project must continue to communicate and coordinate more and better amongst the partners. CLOSING COMMENTS BY DAN RUGABIRA FAO REPRESENTATIVE TO KENYA My colleagues from UNDP, UNICEF, UNISDR and, of course FAO, Representative of different DRR focus organization present and REGLAP, all protocol observed. Ladies and Gentlemen, FAO extends its special thanks to ECHO for funding Drought Risk Reduction Action Plan in the Horn of Africa, and for making this workshop possible. coordination of our action is a crucial elements in making sure that we all deliver tangible and comprehensive inputs to the communities. Kenya (Garissa, Marsabit and Turkana), Uganda Karamoja (Moroto and Kotido), Ethiopia (Oromia and Somali region) and in Djibouti advocacy work related to what we do in the field which may have significant effect on the life of the communities is crucial and the DRRAP lessons needs to be translated to key messages and information products to support decision-making needs. Thank you very much for your interest in DRR and DRRAP, your hard work and all the enjoyable moments you and I spent together during these two days. I wish you every success in your DRRAP work and I now declare this workshop closed. 22

23 CONCLUSIONS DRRAP partners appreciated overall the planning workshop and particularly were interested to explore further the key discussion that came out of the different session at the country level. Partners were made aware of the IGAD Regional Drought Resilience Initiative and the opportunities for engagement through the platform, country programming papers and regional programming framework. This resulted into discussion on the resilience agenda and the linkages with other already ongoing initiatives. The workshop concluded that there should be continued building on the achievement of the past decisions supporting Drought Risk Reduction and community-based operations. Develop a library of well-documented, context-specific experiences through good monitoring, evaluation, and operational research which are critical for advocacy. Dissemination of lessons learnt and sharing of good practices should continue. Communication output on the DRRAP project should build on the existing policy briefs, but with a view to make them less technical in simpler language but still capturing what the project is doing in the different countries. The issue of classification of target groups for DRR interventions was highlighted and that emphasis be put on the customary institutions as they are crucial in managing mobility and pastoral resources and that they should be more involved in policy decision making process. It was also concluded that the advocacy should focus on broad based approach that includes pastoralist community leaders in validating issues that directly relate to them for tabling at national and regional policy discussion. The workshop also concluded that La Nina consortium (composed of Oxfam GB-lead, VSF- Belgium, VSF-Germany and VSF-Suisse) funded by ECHO will work in partnership/complimentary with the DRAPP partners. DRRAP country inception workshops will be held in September to further elaborate on the joint workplan and activities developed at the DRRAP regional workshop with participation of government. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. The draft DRRAP country work plans to be further developed and finalised during country inception workshops, with a key output being a partners' intervention map. 2. Finalisation of key messaging for communication of the DRRAP project by communication officers of the implementing partners. The regional partners communication departments in coordination with the DG ECHO will support the initiative. 3. Partners were encouraged to participate fully in the upcoming end user survey for the disaster risk reduction website towards a more user friendly website. 4. It was recommended by the country team to have a follow up meeting to develop a more broad strategy for advocacy and to explore how other ongoing initiatives like the FSTP can support aspects not covered by the ECHO project. 5. The agreed advocacy messages should be sharp, concrete and clearly articulated for specific target groups. 23

24 LIST OF ANNEXES i) Workshop Agenda ii) Participants expectations. iii) Participants List iv) Workshop presentations a) Background presentations. b) Regional partners presentations. c) Communication and DRR website presentation v) Advocacy strategies presentations. vi) DRRAP Work plans vii) Consolidated country and regional joint plans. Available for download on the DRR website HERE 24