Second session of the Preparatory Committee for the Third United Nations World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction: summary of the discussion (part 3)

Source(s): United Nations - Headquarters
by UNISDR

by UNISDR

Second Preparatory Committee for the Third United Nations World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction concludes session

The Second Preparatory Committee for the Third United Nations World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction this afternoon concluded its two-day session with agreement to hold open-ended negotiations on the first draft of the post-2015 framework for disaster risk reduction in Geneva in December and January. It was also agreed that the Third Preparatory Committee would be held on 13 March 2015 in Sendai, Japan.

Paivi Karaimo, Permanent Representative of Finland to the United Nations Office at Geneva and Co-Chair of the Second Session of the Preparatory Committee, said that after intense negotiations based on the zero draft of the post 2015 framework for disaster risk reduction, written proposals had been put forward on paragraphs 1 to 23 which would serve as the basis for further negotiations. It had been further agreed that States would be able to submit in writing amendments to paragraphs 24 to 40, which had not been discussed during the negotiations, until 20 November, 2014 by 6 p.m. Geneva time. These would be incorporated in the compilation document to be used as reference for the future negotiations. The first draft of the post 2015 framework for disaster risk reduction would be circulated by 21 November 2014, while the compilation document would be circulated on 28 November 2014. The Preparatory Committee would convene open-ended negotiations in two rounds in Geneva, to be held from 15 to 17 December 2014, and 12 to 14 January 2015, with a view to producing a second draft. This draft would be submitted, circulated and available on the Conference website by 31 January 2015.

After a number of countries objected to the timing of the open-ended negotiations in Geneva, Ms. Karaimo said they would come back to the dates as soon as possible.

Speaking were Peru, Algeria, Sweden, Morocco, Canada, Indonesia, Jamaica, Uruguay, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Australia, Panama, Barbados, Ecuador, Colombia, Mexico, Spain and Cuba.

In the discussion, some speakers said they agreed to the continuation of the process through an open-ended format as proposed by the Co-chairs, and then to the second reading of the first draft. Others proposed that Co-chairs synthetize the language in the first draft and produce a facilitated draft, which would then serve as the basis for the January 2015 negotiations. Some speakers felt that there was a need for convergence and reminded participants to avoid micromanaging the Co-chairs. Others recognized the facilitation role of the Co-chairs, but noted that the negotiation process was intergovernmental in nature and reminded that Governments held the ultimate responsibility for the implementation of the agreed framework.

The Second Preparatory Committee adopted its report and it was agreed that the main task of the Third Session of the Preparatory Committee would be the adoption of the post 2015 framework on disaster risk reduction. The Third Preparatory Committee would be held on 13 March 2015 in Sendai, Japan.

The Committee heard a summary of the Co-chairs’ dialogue with major groups from Thani Thongphakdi, Permanent Representative of Thailand to the United Nations Office at Geneva and Co-Chair of the Second Session of the Preparatory Committee, who said that promises of engagement had been formulated during the negotiations on the post 2015 framework for disaster risk reduction. The fundamental and true nature of disaster and its impact on sustainable development and economic growth was to be revealed and effectively managed.

Pilar Cornejo, Minister and Head of the National Secretariat for Risk Management of Ecuador, provided an update on the first technical workshop on indicators, monitoring and the review process for the post-2015 framework. She said that participants recommended analytical metrics, realistic baselines, and disaggregated data. There was a strong agreement to keep the proposed targets simple while capturing key information.

Toni Frisch, Ambassador and Senior Advisor of Switzerland and Member of Bureau for Preparation of the Third United Nations World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction, summarized the deliberations of the second technical workshop on the integration of disaster risks in financial regulation. He said that participants had explored the creation of an informal working modality for advancing collaboration between different stakeholders, and had highlighted options for accountability of financial institutions to the post-2015 disaster risk reduction framework.

Ito Yukimoto, Deputy Major of Sendai City, said that during the Third World Conference in Sendai, Japan intended to share their experience of recovery efforts after the 2011 earthquake in Eastern Japan. The aim of the World Conference in Sendai was to continue enhancing the global disaster risk reduction culture and help bring disaster risk reduction into the mainstream.

In concluding remarks, Margareta Wahlstrom, Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Disaster Risk Reduction, thanked the Co-chairs and the Preparatory Committee for the Third World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction, and all the participants for their hard work and contribution.

The two Co-chairs, Ms. Karaimo and Mr. Thongphakdi, thanked all delegations and moderators of the technical workshops for their hard work, and reminded that they would meet again next month in Geneva.

Considerations on the Post-2015 Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction

Future Consultations

PAIVI KARAIMO, Permanent Representative of Finland to the United Nations Office at Geneva and Co-Chair of the Second Session of the Preparatory Committee, invited the Preparatory Committee to resume its considerations on the post 2015 framework for disaster risk reduction and went over the timeline for the negotiations. After intense negotiations based on the zero draft of the post 2015 framework for disaster risk reduction, which had been circulated on 20 October 2014, written proposals had been put forward on paragraphs 1 to 23 which would serve as the basis for further negotiations. It had been further agreed that States would be able to submit in writing amendments to paragraphs 24 to 40, which had not been discussed during the negotiations, until 20 November, 2014 by 6 p.m. Geneva time. These would be incorporated in the compilation document to be used as reference for the future negotiations. The first draft of the post 2015 framework for disaster risk reduction would be circulated by 21 November 2014, while the compilation document would be circulated on 28 November 2014. The Preparatory Committee would convene open-ended negotiations in two rounds in Geneva, to be held from 15 to 17 December 2014, and 12 to 14 January 2015, with a view to producing a second draft. This draft would be submitted, circulated and available on the Conference website by 31 January 2015.

Peru noted that the proposed dates for the December 2014 session of open-ended negotiations were in conflict with a conference on climate change scheduled to take place in Lima. Peru believed that the Co-chairs should provide guidance in the reading of the first draft of the post 2015 framework for disaster risk reduction in order to allow for the completion of the draft before the World Conference in Sendai. It proposed to Co-chairs an initial consensus reading of the draft paragraphs, and asked for guidance from Member States.

Algeria agreed to the continuation of the process through an open-ended format as proposed by the Co-chairs, and then to the second reading of the first draft. It added that the possibility of further consultations would be very useful in future work, but that it would entail the participation of a limited number of delegations.

Sweden said it would like to see the Co-chairs produce a new draft proposal that would serve as the basis for the negotiations in January 2015. Due to the shortage of time, Sweden supported Peru’s proposal that an agreed version of the text should be completed before the World Conference took place in Sendai.

Morocco praised the multilateral spirit of the informal negotiations held during the Second Session of the Preparatory Committee, and thanked Jamaica for its work on indicators of the first draft of the post 2015 framework on disaster risk reduction. Morocco supported postponing the continued open-ended negotiations until after the conference on climate change in Lima in order to achieve full participation and transparency of the process.

Canada appreciated the exchange during the Second Session of the Preparatory Committee, but noted that due to time constraints Member States needed to focus on priority areas. Thus it supported Peru’s proposal that Co-chairs synthetize the language in the first draft and produce a facilitated draft, which would then serve as the basis for the January 2015 negotiations.

Indonesia said the future document should be easily translated into concrete activities on the ground. Indonesia supported the Co-chairs’ proposal that continued open-ended discussions be held in December 2014 in order to finalize the first reading of the first draft, and then further discussions in January 2015 in order to fully address all the paragraphs in the draft.

Jamaica stated that what was missing in the draft was a declaration of responsibility. Each of the brackets in the text was assumed to be a submission of some Member State. Therefore each proponent had a duty to be engaged in the search for convergence. Jamaica recommended that delegations that had contributed to the insertion of new elements where these had met with opposition should assist the Co-chairs by beginning immediately after the conclusion of the meeting to consult with each other, so that they could contribute to a more effective engagement in December. Jamaica reminded that the Rules of Procedure suggested that the conclusions on the post 2015 framework for disaster risk reduction would come by consensus.

Uruguay insisted that the Co-chairs take into account the Conference of Parties meeting on climate change to be held in Lima from 1 to 2 December, when setting the dates for the two upcoming rounds of negotiations to be held in Geneva.

Bangladesh believed that substantial progress had been made. It found tremendous benefit that proponents of ideas and suggestions and brackets needed to be engaged in order to find a common pathway.

Pakistan reminded that as draft one would be the basis for further negotiations, what they had now was half of draft one. In other words, the participants would not have a complete draft one until December. Therefore, Pakistan insisted that what had been said and done today be retained. They had been incorporating their suggestions and different ideas.

Australia felt that there was a need for convergence. At the same time, however, Australia reminded participants to avoid micromanaging the Co-chairs, and stated that they trusted the skills of the Co-chairs. This was an inclusive process. There were many proposals on the table, and they trusted that the Co-chairs would take them all into account.

Panama agreed that the first reading of draft one should be carried out right through, and believed that the proposals of alternative paragraphs could be made. This process could be facilitated by the Co-chairs, via consultation with States.

Barbados agreed on finalizing those areas where there was already convergence. However there was always a need for oversight in these matters so as to avoid repetition. Barbados suggested that between now and December the Co-chairs also review the document for coherence so as to avoid repetition, and in order to make draft one more coherent.

Ecuador was also in favour of changing the dates for the two upcoming negotiation meetings, and expressed a desire to have consistent agendas for sustainable development, climate change and risk reduction. Ecuador also supported the need for convergence.

Ms. Paivi clarified that they would come back to the dates as soon as possible.

Colombia supported Peru’s proposal that the Co-chairs provide guidance to Member States in the reading of the first draft. It also asked to be informed on the dates of the sessions of the open-ended consultations in December 2014 and January 2015.

Mexico joined Member States which supported Peru’s proposal that the December session of open-ended negotiations be postponed until after the climate change conference in Lima in December 2014
 

Spain supported the consensus among Member States during the negotiations, and supported Peru’s proposal that the Co-chairs provide a facilitated draft of the post 2015 framework.

Cuba recognized the facilitation role of Co-chairs, but noted that the negotiation process was intergovernmental in nature and reminded that Governments held the ultimate responsibility for the implementation of the agreed framework. Cuba added that it wanted to avoid any surprises and alternative texts, and emphasized the importance of the transparency of the process.

It was decided that Member States would hold additional sessions of open-ended negotiations in December 2014, and that it would hold further negotiations as required in order to produce the second draft of the post 2015 framework for disaster risk reduction.

Adoption of the Report

ANDREY NIKIFOROV, Rapporteur of the Second Session of the Preparatory Committee, presented a summary of the discussions of the Second Session of the Preparatory Committee, and recommended the draft report to the Preparatory Committee for consideration.

The draft report as presented was adopted by Member States.

It was agreed that the main task of the Third Session of the Preparatory Committee would be the adoption of the post 2015 framework on disaster risk reduction, and would be held on 13 March 2015 in Sendai, Japan.

Summaries of the Work of the Technical Workshops and the Chair’s Dialogue with Major Groups

PILAR CORNEJO, Minister and Head of the National Secretariat for Risk Management of Ecuador, providing an update on the first technical workshop on indicators, monitoring and the review process for the post 2015 framework, said that participants had recommended modalities, analytical metrics, baseline targets, and disaggregated data. There was a strong agreement to keep the proposed targets simple while capturing the key information. Participants also agreed to the need for increased proportion of public private investments, and more systematic assessment of asset risk losses factors. It was also agreed that the targets had to be the result of agreement and negotiations among Member States.

TONI FRISCH, Ambassador and Senior Advisor of Switzerland and Member of the Bureau for the Preparation of the Third United Nations World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction, summarized the deliberations of the second technical workshop on integrating disaster risks in financing. The participants had recognized that proactive collaboration between governments, regulators, science, business and financial institutions was fundamental if the true nature of disaster risk and its impact on sustainable development and economies was to be revealed and effectively managed. The Technical Workshop had explored the creation of an informal working modality for advancing collaboration between different stakeholders, and had highlighted options for accountability of financial institutions to the post-2015 disaster risk reduction framework. It had also emphasized the importance of reference to the role of financial regulation in the framework, and the fact that disaster risk reduction needed to be part of all financial transactions and decisions. Finally, it had welcomed the proposal by the science community to partner with governments and the financial community to research, test and scale up understanding of how to increase visibility of disaster risk in financial systems.

THANI THONGPHAKDI, Permanent Representative of Thailand to the United Nations Office at Geneva and Co-Chair of the Second Session of the Preparatory Committee, summarizing the Chair's Dialogue with Major Groups, indicated that promises of engagement had been formulated during the negotiations on the post 2015 framework for disaster risk reduction. The fundamental and true nature of disaster and its impact on sustainable development and economic growth was to be revealed and effectively managed. The subject of promoting coherence among the international attenders included climate agreements and the Millennium Development Goals, and threw out a number of concrete suggestions. Major groups had offered to support governments through interconnectedness.

Closing Remarks

ITO YUKIMOTO, Deputy Mayor of Sendai City, reminded participants of the Great East Japan Earthquake that had hit Japan in 2011, with the cost of damage amounting to 1.4 trillion yen. During the Third World Conference, Sendai intended to share Japan’s experience of the recovery efforts. All public events on disaster risk related initiatives and achievements would be open to participants. There would be more than 20 events free of charge which would provide participants with a first-hand view of recovery efforts. Sendai aimed to continue enhancing the global disaster risk reduction culture and help bring disaster risk reduction into the mainstream.

MARGARETA WHALSTRÖM, Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Disaster Risk Reduction, complimented the Co-chairs for their leadership throughout the Second Session of the Preparatory Committee for the Third World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction. She also extended thanks to all the participants, as well as to Switzerland for sponsoring the Preparatory Committee, and the Director-General of UNOG and his staff for making the work possible. This had been a very successful meeting.

The two Co-chairs, PAIVI KARAIMO and THANI THONGPHAKDI, thanked all delegations and moderators of the technical workshops for their hard work, and reminded that they would meet again next month in Geneva.

For use of the information media; not an official record

M14/019E

Explore further

Share this

Please note: Content is displayed as last posted by a PreventionWeb community member or editor. The views expressed therein are not necessarily those of UNDRR, PreventionWeb, or its sponsors. See our terms of use

Is this page useful?

Yes No Report an issue on this page

Thank you. If you have 2 minutes, we would benefit from additional feedback (link opens in a new window).