Management and Advocacy, Kobe, (b) Training and Capacity Building, Turin, and (c)Enhancing Recovery Operations, Geneva.
As described in the Terms of Reference, the IRP Kobe functions as the IRP secretariat andis responsible for convening IRP steering committee meetings and disseminating informationon IRP activities and outcomes.
* IRP members: Asian Disaster Reduction Center (ADRC), Hyogo Prefectural Government,International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC),
International Labour Organization (ILO), Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Italy,
Cabinet Office of Japan, Swiss Agency for Development and Coordination(SDC), United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP),United Nations
Development Programme (UNDP), United Nations Human Settlements
Programme (UN-HABITAT), United Nations Secretariat of the International
Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR), United Nations Office for theCoordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UN/OCHA), and the World Bank.

6-3. IRP Activities in FY 2010
6-3-1. International Recovery Forum 2011
The International Recovery Forum 2011 highlighted the importance of pre-disasterrecovery planning to help avoid diverting scarce resources, originally intended fordevelopment programs, for recovery after a natural disaster. Attendance at the Forum wasover 150 participants from 26 nationalgovernments

and

10

internationalorganizations. It brought together key players
in pre-disaster recovery planning, including
FEMA United States, Tokyo Metropolitan
Government, ASEAN, ADB, and a number ofother organizations to discuss the modalities ofplanning, options, and experiences.
At the opening session, the Governor of
Hyogo Prefecture, the Chair of IRP Steering
Committee, and the Associate Administrator ofFig.6-3-1-1 International Recovery Forum 2011

FEMA-ORR commonly communicated the key message that pre disaster recovery planning
can increase the efficiency of recovery activities including debris removal, utility restoration,management of funds, and coordination amongst stakeholders. The Guidance Notes on
Recovery was also launched to provide global best practices to be integrated in recovery
planning processes. Additionally, reports on recovery initiatives from Haiti, China, Myanmar,

60

6. The International Recovery Platform (IRP): History and Current Activities

and the Philippines were presented in the context of preparing for future disasters. The
afternoon session comprised reports on recovery planning, group and panel discussions. Caseson recovery planning were presented by Mr. Mitsutoshi Kimura, Hyogo prefecturalGovernment and Ms. Adelina Kamal, ASEAN Secretariat. Three different groups presented
recommendations along recovery planning processes, coordination mechanisms, andfinancing recovery. The panelists further discussed the need for pre-disaster recovery planning,and outlined key considerations for ensuring recovery support functions. Participants
recognized that disaster recovery planning is beneficial for governments such that it expedites
recovery, it reduces risk of future disasters by building back better, it enables demand-driven
and inclusive recovery, it minimizes development deficits, and it reduces recovery costs.

6-3-2. “Forum on Disaster Risk Reduction” Working Group 3–Operationalising disaster reduction in
post-disaster transition to development
In 28-30 July 2010, “Forum on Disaster Risk Reduction” was held in Shanghai, China with150 participants from local governments around the world, national representatives, academia,and civil society. The Forum was held within the context of the Shanghai EXPO 2010- “BetterCity - Better Life”

and convened by DEVNET and co-organized by UNISDR, incollaboration with UN-Habitat and ICLEI, supported by IRP.
In the Forum, plenary presentations
and three working groups permitted
participants to learn, exchange experienceand design ways forward to improvedisaster resilience in urban areas.
IRP organized Working Group 3 –Operationalising disaster reduction inpost-disaster transition to development.
The Working Group served as a venue forcountries

affected

bycatastrophic

Fig.6-3-2-1 Forum on Disaster Risk Reduction
Working Group 3

disasters to share lessons and goodpractices in post-disaster recovery, where Mayor Jean-Yves Jason of Port au Prince, Haiti, Mr.
Gou Xining Yuan, Deputy Director General, Department of Civil Affairs, Sichuan Province,
Mr. Mitsutoshi Kimura, Superintendent for Disaster Management, Hyogo Prefecture, Japanand other speakers presented their experiences in the recovery process.
Based on the shared lessons and experiences, the participants of the Working Group 3 had afruitful discussion and reached a conclusion of the following recommendations.
- Governments should maintain a permanent, as opposed to temporary and ad hoc,mechanism for long term recovery.

61

- Governments should plan a recovery framework prior to any disaster.
- Recovery should be utilized as an opportunity to upgrade the resilience of public
infrastructure, including schools and health facilities.
- Donor funding for recovery should be flexible and long term, not targeted to specificprojects and areas, but allow local government to decide areas of priority for recovery.
Communities should: actively participate in recovery; understand the-constraints of governments; support government and agency programs for recovery; andadvocate compliance with local building standards.

6-3-3. IRP-ADRC Side Event “A Tool for Better Recovery:
Introduction to Guidance Notes on Climate Change
Adaptation in Recovery" in The Fourth Asian
Ministerial Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction(4th AMCDRR)
This event explored how DRR-CCA can beincorporated into the recovery process toenhance value, resilience, and the life ofinvestments. IRP and ADRC raised issues
related to the enhancement of climate-resilient
livelihoods and infrastructures as well as suchotherissues

asinstitutional

support,community-based approaches, and humanFig.6-3-3-1 IRP-ADRC Side Event in 4thhealth. The overarching challenges of raisingawareness and building capacities for DRR-CCA in the context of recovery were commonly
reported by Hyogo Prefecture, the Maldives, Nepal, and the Philippines. There were questions
about whether recovery should be pursued quickly after a disaster.
Presenters outlined initiatives to address identified issues and gaps. Hyogo Prefecture
promoted the use of computerized hazard maps with following features (i) hazard information
for five different kinds of natural disasters shown on one web site, (ii) real time informationon the amount of rainfall and water level of rivers, (iii) easy-to-use hazard information using
maps and search tools using addresses or postal codes, and (iv) the provision of disaster
images, photos, and videos. The Maldives introduced various climate change adaptation
measures in different sectors such as its infrastructure, health, water resources, and food. It
instituted various policies and strategies such as the National Environment
Action Plan (NEAP) and National Adaptation Plan for Action (NAPA), which included
efforts to climate-proof its infrastructure. The Philippines has passed a Law on“Mainstreaming Climate Change in Government Policy Formulations,” thereby establishing
the framework strategy and program on climate change and creating the Climate Change62

6. The International Recovery Platform (IRP): History and Current Activities

Commission. Nepal mentioned the impacts of climate change on the Himalayan ecology,
which directly affects access to water for 1.6 billion people.
Based on inputs from the participants, the IRP-ADRC Side Event concluded that a wide
variety of tools are available for integrating DRR, CCA, and recovery. The improved
dissemination of these tools will enhance the resilience of governments and communities.
Additionally, capacity building for achieving the integration of DRR, CCA, and recovery will
improve dissemination of these tools.

6-3-4. Capacity Building on Resilient Recovery forGovernment Officials
In line with GFDRR, World Bank activities to scale up capacity development, IRP piloted atraining that is aimed at enhancing the capacity of government officials on “post-disaster
resilient recovery” in Vietnam and the Philippines. The back to back training events enhanced
the capacities of one hundred individuals on resilient recovery.
The training in Hanoi, Vietnam was held from November 30 to December 3, 2010, andattracted thirty eight participants from different government ministries. The training in Makati
City, Philippines was held from December 6-9, 2010 with thirty eight government officials
from different departments participating. With excellent video conferencing facilities, itallowed the participation of government officials from National Disaster Management Agency(BNPB) in Indonesia and visiting researchers at Asian Disaster Reduction Center (ADRC) in
Japan with Tokyo Development Learning Center (TDLC) in Tokyo serving as hub.
The delivery of four-day training included sitevisit,

case

study

presentations,andgroupdiscussions. In Vietnam, the site visit was in “TamCoung Embankment” in Pho Thu Province.
Representatives

from thecommune

providedbriefing on the embankments. Long-term recovery
programs from floods include relocation of people
living in flood-prone areas. In the Philippines, thesite visit was in the Pasig City in Metro Manila. The

Fig.6-3-3-4-1 Site Visit

construction of dykes along the Pasig River facedsome governance issues, which need to be resolved
at recovery phase after typhoon in 2009.
Key lessons in recovery process are presented ineach case study. The cases provided menu of
options from global experiences and knowledge. It
also facilitated sharing of expert and practical inputson general concepts, principles, and guidance for63

Fig.6-3-3-4-2 Group Discussion

recovery. Group discussions drew reflections from participants on how to develop pre-disasterrecovery plans based on certain scenarios. Related tools to facilitate the development of theRecovery Action Plans, primarily focused more on the strategies and approaches for recovery,
were reflected in the group presentations.
The pilot training was evaluated by the participants, and their recommendations andsuggestions were reflected in the revised training module and materials.

64