# 4.3.1. Existing indicators

**UNISDR –** **<u>HFA2 Indicator System.</u>** The HFA2 indicator system, which was proposed for discussion in 2014, aims to revise the 22 existing HFA core indicators on disaster risk management and link input indicators to outputs and outcome. At the Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction in Sendai in March 2015, seven global targets for disaster risk reduction were agreed upon to guide indicator development.<sup>13</sup>

**EU‐JRC – InfoRM.** InfoRM, released in 2015, measures the risk of humanitarian crisis and disasters and how the conditions that lead to them affect sustainable development. It is global and open‐source. Risk is calculated as the product of three, equally weighted components: (1) hazard and exposure, (2) vulnerability, and (3) lack of coping capacity. Hazard and exposure is sub‐divided into natural and human sub‐indicators. Vulnerability is sub‐divided into socioeconomic vulnerability and vulnerable groups, and lack of coping capacity is sub‐divided into institutional and infrastructure. Results are available <u>online.</u><sup>14</sup>

**ND‐GAIN – Index.** A country’s ND‐GAIN score is the readiness score minus the vulnerability score for each country. Vulnerability measures a country’s exposure, sensitivity, and capacity to adapt to the negative effects of climate change looking at six sectors: food, water, health, ecosystem services, human habitat, and infrastructure. Each of the six sectors provides a measure, and the vulnerability score takes the simple mean of these six scores. Readiness measures a country’s ability to leverage investments and convert them into adaptation actions, looking at three components: economic readiness, governance readiness, and social readiness. For the calculation, each sub‐indicator of vulnerability and resilience is scaled to give a score between 0 and 1, with all components weighted equally. Results from ND‐GAIN can be viewed online.<sup>15</sup>

**OECD –** **<u>Guidelines for Resilience Systems Analysis.</u>** The OECD has completed a “how‐to‐guide” for a Resilience Analysis Tool, which has been piloted in 3 countries, and allows users to design roadmaps for boosting resilience in a system, community or state. Indicators are based on the status of assets identified for resilience, with type/status of assets context‐specific (OECD 2014). The relevant indicators depend on the resilience strategy followed in a given country. The process is based on a consultation process in the country (initial pilot took 5 weeks – 2 weeks preparation and 3 weeks in‐country; consultations to follow will likely take less time). The methodology was first developed through a pilot in the Democratic Republic of Congo, and has since also been piloted in Lebanon and Somalia. The results from the three pilot countries can be viewed online.<sup>16</sup>

**GIZ – Two indicator‐based approaches.** Germany’s Development Agency, the GIZ, has developed a Vulnerability Assessment Sourcebook, which provides guidelines for developing vulnerability indexes and for using this index to measure changes over time (GIZ 2014). The GIZ is also currently developing a methodology on Climate Resilience Indicators, which aims to assess resilience at country‐level based on globally available data complemented by country‐specific data. An example of a Climate Resilience

> 13 http://www.wcdrr.org/uploads/Sendai_Framework_for_Disaster_Risk_Reduction_2015‐2030.pdf

> 14 http://inform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/Results/Global

> 15 http://index.gain.org/

> 16 http://www.oecd.org/dac/risk‐resilience.htm

26