How has the HFA informed decision making or priority setting in country X/region Y?
How are HFA reporting mechanisms supporting its implementation?
Disaster risk continues to increase due to, amongst others, inappropriate socio-economic development practices and inadequate investments in disaster risk reduction. This question aims at exploring whether there is a perception that the HFA has been instrumental in achieving its intended outcome, and to what degree factors, such as development policies, national priorities and multilateral assistance, amongst others, can derail, delay or prevent HFA implementation.
What elements of the HFA have worked less well in reducing disaster risk in country X/region Y and why?
What were the three most critical factors that prevented effectiveness in the areas identified?
What are the specific constraints to start or increase investments in disaster risk reduction in country X/region Y?
A significant amount of information about actions taken in implementing the HFA is available through the HFA Monitor and ad hoc specific studies. What is less clear is what is hindering HFA implementation in certain countries and regions as well as certain thematic areas? What are the main constraints and how can they be overcome?
How should climate change adaptation be integrated in the next five years of the HFA implementation?
What kind of policy and programmatic linkages have proven to be helpful for the integration of DRR and climate change adaptation?
What would be the most conducive institutional arrangements at the national level to realize stronger integration between DRR and climate change?
Although the HFA recognized the importance of promoting the integration of risk reduction associated with climate change into strategies for disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation, this issue has come to the forefront of the international debate only in more recent years. This question aims at exploring ways in which climate change adaptation programming and funding should be integrated in the next five years of HFA implementation and beyond.
What kind of international instrument/tool do you think would be most useful in furthering DRR to follow-up to the HFA beyond 2015?
Would setting up specific international and national targets help improving DRR impact at the national and local level?
What kind of international institutional structures/instruments would be most helpful to continue to accelerate and support risk reduction work?
The HFA is a voluntary international instrument. Has the voluntary nature of the HFA played a positive or negative role in its implementation and buy-in at the international and national level?
This question aims at exploring whether an international instrument on disaster risk reduction post-HFA should also be of a voluntary nature; whether there is sufficient interest and international momentum to build up a campaign to advocate for and successfully negotiate a legally binding instrument.
Access the archives of all online debates.