boosing resilience through innovative risk governance - oecd report
Post on 27-May-2015
3.937 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
BOOSTING RESILIENCE THROUGH
INNOVATIVE RISK GOVERNANCE
OECD High Level Risk Forum
Public Governance and Territorial Development Directorate
• Past decade: USD 1.5 trillion in economic damages from man-made disasters (industrial accidents, terrorist attacks) and natural disasters (primarily storms and floods)
Why boosting resilience matters
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Annu
al ec
onom
ic los
ses i
n USD
billio
n
Source: EM-DAT: The OFDA/CRED International Disaster Database, Université catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium, www.emdat.be (accessed 14 November 2013).
Economic losses due to disasters in OECD and BRIC countries, 1980-2012 (USD Billion)
• Driven by significant increase in intensity and complexity: o Increased concentration of populations , especially elderly, more vulnerable
groups, and economic assets in risk prone areas o Accelerated urbanisation o Increased global economic integration, facilitated by transport mobility and
communication o Deteriorating environmental conditions coupled with climatic changes
Why boosting resilience matters
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Austr
alia
Austr
iaBe
lgium
Cana
daCz
ech R
epub
licDe
nmar
kFin
land
Fran
ceGe
rman
yGr
eece
Hung
ary
Icelan
dIre
land
Italy
Japa
nKo
rea
Luxe
mbou
rgMe
xico
Nethe
rland
sNe
w Ze
aland
Norw
ayPo
land
Portu
gal
Slov
ak R
epub
licSp
ainSw
eden
Switz
erlan
dTu
rkey
Unite
d King
dom
Unite
d Stat
esOE
CD T
otal
% of population aged 65 and over
2009 2050
Source: OECD (2009), OECD Factbook 2009: Economic, Environmental and Social Statistics.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Luxe
mbou
rgKo
rea
Czec
h Rep
.Sl
ovak
Rep
.Ire
land
Belgi
umNe
therla
nds
Hung
ary
Finlan
dAu
stria
Swed
enEs
tonia
Norw
aySl
oven
iaSw
itzer
land
Chile
Portu
gal
Denm
ark
Israe
lGe
rman
yPo
land
Japa
nFr
ance
Austr
alia
Gree
ceUn
ited K
ingdo
mMe
xico
Spain Ita
lyUn
ited S
tates
Turke
yCa
nada
New
Zeala
nd
Global value chain participation index
Source: Mirdoudot, S. and K. De Backer (2012), “Mapping Global Value Chains”.
• Some disasters caused economic losses in excess of 20% of GDP (Chile, NZ), with local economies especially affected
• Shocks propagate across economic sectors and geographic boundaries through interconnected economies
• Considerable uncertainty challenges good policy making for resilience
Why boosting resilience matters
-10%
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Annu
al R
egio
nal G
DP g
row
th
to p
revi
ous y
ear
The impact of disasters on local economies
Abruzzo Queensland New York
9/11 Attacks L‘Aquila Earthquake 6/4/2009
Queensland Flooding 2010/11
Source: OECD (2012), Large regions, TL2: Demographic statistics, OECD Regional Statistics (database), accessed on 14 November 2013, doi: 10.1787/data-00520-en
Why boosting resilience matters
Disasters occurring in times of economic crises are even more challenging for governments to deal with: • Japan was struck by the earthquake in 2011 in the
midst of a restructuring programme – Japanese economy contracted by 0.7% in real GDP and fiscal deficit increased to 9.5% as a result of the disaster in 2011
Resilience is…
… the capacity of a system to absorb disturbance and reorganise while undergoing change so as to still retain essentially the same
function, structure, identity, and feedbacks.
Source: OECD (2014). Boosting Resilience through Innovative Risk Governance. OECD Publishing, Paris.
OECD countries have made substantial progress in achieving resilience…
Source: Source: EM-DAT: The OFDA/CRED International Disaster Database, www.emdat.be - Université catholique de Louvain - Brussels - Belgium". Data for OECD and BRIC countries (1980-2012). Figures are shown true to the year of the event. OECD Stat National Accounts GDP per capita in US$, constant prices, reference year 2005
Australia
Bangladesh
Bolivia Chile
Costa Rica
Egypt
Estonia
Ethiopia
Fiji Finland
France Germany
Greece
Haiti
Honduras India
Indonesia Iran
Italy
Jamaica
Japan
Kenya Madagascar Malawi
Mexico
Mozambique
Nepal Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Pakistan
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Slovenia
Thailand Turkey
United Kingdom United States
Venezuela
Yemen
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
2.7 3.2 3.7 4.2 4.7
Aver
age
Dea
th T
oll p
er D
isas
ter 1
980-
2013
(lo
g)
Real GDP per Capita, Year 2010 (log)
Significant decrease in fatality rates from disasters with increasing income 1980-2013
OECD Non-OECD
• Improved disaster risk management framework conditions: o General level of social and economic welfare o Facilitating institutional environment
• Concrete and successful disaster risk management measures: o Increased understanding of risks o Central government leadership o Mainstreaming of disaster risk management across public
policy areas o High level of risk awareness and information sharing
OECD countries have made substantial progress in achieving resilience…
… but considerable economic damages challenge even highest income countries
Source: EM-DAT: The OFDA/CRED International Disaster Database, www.emdat.be - Université catholique de Louvain - Brussels - Belgium; OECD (2013), “Gross domestic product (GDP) MetaData : GDP per capita, US$, constant prices, reference year 2005”, National Accounts OECD Statistics Database, accessed on 14 November 2013, http://stats.oecd.org/
Significant gaps are made apparent during disasters…
Storm Surge, Norfolk, United Kingdom, December 2013
… In protective infrastructure and its maintenance (e.g. dam breaks during floods in 2002/13 in Europe; great infrastructure destruction during Great East Japan Earthquake in 2011) … Lagging regulatory reforms (e.g. building codes that are not adapted to new housing design - in Italy L’Aquila 2009; rigidity in air safety regulations during volcanic eruption in Iceland 2010) … Lagging enforcement of regulations (e.g. significant increase in population around the Vesuvius despite known hazard exposure; informal construction of houses in Mexico in risk-prone areas)
Revealing resilience shortcomings on the part of the government …
… Private sector–gaps in business continuity planning (e.g. large bankruptcy rate during Great East Japan Earthquake 2011; UK floods 2007 – average of 9 days of interruption); … Individual households do not invest in self-protection (e.g. 84% of population affected by UK floods 2007 believe nothing they can do to protect better; only a fifth of population of Istanbul took protective action after the Marmara EQ in 1999; in Germany only 25% of HH insured against flood risk) … Low levels of international collaboration (e.g. lack of incentives to share information; lack of appreciation of benefits of joint investments; diverging capacity levels across borders)
… but also among non-governmental stakeholders
Trust in government put to particular test during disasters: o previous neglects in resilience measures
has disproportionately negative effects on trust in government
o Governments and also companies have to react with drastic measures to restore trust (e.g. resignation of government officials in charge)
o and implement expensive spending measures, e.g. bank liquidity injection after 9/11; clean-up costs and compensation funds after Deepwater Horizon
… undermining trust in government
Source: BP (2014), "BP ADS Share Price History", British Petroleum, http://ir2.flife.de/data/bp/hpl_us.php (accessed 8 April 2014); McDermott, M. (15 November 2012), “BP will pay biggest criminal fine in US history for Gulf oil spill”, Treehugger, www.treehugger.com/energy-disasters/bp-will-pay-biggest-criminal-fine-u-s-history-gulf-oil-spill.html.
• Constraint resources • Lack of awareness (households, private sector
etc.) • Limited knowledge of resilience measures
among stakeholders • BUT shortcomings in risk governance may be
an important and often overlooked cause
Why do resilience gaps persist?
→ Risk governance mechanisms determine whether an actor participates in putting resilience measures in place; for example:
o Households may decide not to self-protect in expectation of governments doing so for them
o Local governments may not build protective measures as result of other jurisdictions benefiting but not contributing to the costs
o Central government actors reluctant to invest in resilience – ex-ante investments not visible and levels of rewards low
o Countries may not collaborate because of disincentives for data-sharing
o …
Why do resilience gaps persist?
• How to identify governance shortcomings and addressing them?
→ Employ diagnostic framework that can identify institutional barriers and realign incentives
How to address governance gaps?
Policy Recommendations
INCLUSIVENESS Adopt a whole-of-society approach to engage all actors in strengthening resilience.
RISK OWNERSHIP
Emphasise the role of risk ownership by increasing risk communication, raising awareness, engaging in risk dialogues among all stakeholders and owners and managers of risks.
REWARDS Build a culture of rewards that encourages pro-active behaviour to increase resilience.
TRUST Emphasize the role of trust already prior to disasters to avoid costly measures to restore trust in the aftermath of an event.
COOPERATION Encourage joint action through international collaboration, public-private partnerships and across governmental sectors and levels to address the trans-boundary and complex nature of future risks.
SHARING Increase the collection and sharing of risk information by taking advantage of „Big Data“. Triangulate information from governments and the private sector as well as use crowding information from web-based sources.
MONITORING Ensure resilience measures adapt to changing risk patterns by monitoring and evaluation risk trends and efforts based on a multi-hazard analyses.
OECD Council Recommendation on the Governance of Critical Risks
Five Core Principles
Establish a comprehensive, all-hazard and trans-boundary approach to risk governance at the national level
Anticipate and build preparedness through foresight capacities and financing frameworks
Raise awareness to foster whole-of-society investments in prevention
Develop adaptive and inter-agency crisis management capacities
Include principles of good governance in risk management decision-making including transparency, accountability and continuous improvement
For further information please contact: catherine.gamper@oecd.org
top related