Costa Rica
IGOPP
Index of Governance and Public Policy in Disaster Risk Management
It quantifies the formal, documented existence of a series of legal, institutional and budgetary conditions that are considered fundamental for the effective implementation of public policies on Disaster Risk Management in each country. The IGOPP helps identify areas of opportunity with respect to public policy in Disaster Risk Management based on international best practices at the governance level.
The value of IGOPP varies between 0% (minimum) and 100% (maximum). A higher IGOPP reflects that a country has better governance conditions to implement public policies in disaster risk management.
Methodology
The design of the IGOPP is based on two conceptual pillars:
• Disaster Risk Management and its main processes
• Governance and its public policy phases
With respect to Disaster Risk Management (DRM), the IGOPP is made up of six components pertaining to each DRM reform process: General Framework of Governance for DRM (GF), Risk Identification and Knowledge (RI), Risk Reduction (RR), Disaster Preparedness (DP), Post-Disaster Recovery Planning (RC), and Financial Protection (FP). All six DRM components have equal weight.
All public policy phases and corresponding dimensions have equal weight.
Both factors (DRM and Governance) are shown in the IGOPP matrix structure, which has five columns that analyze the public policy phases, and six rows that analyze the components characterizing the reform processes of a suitable public policy for DRM. This matrix structure is expressed in 30 cells that make up a variable number of binary indicators.
Each cell can be identified by a DRM reform component prefix and a public policy phase suffix. For instance, cells GF-1A and GF-2 correspond to the respective interaction between the General Framework of Governance for DRM, with the Central Policy Coordination and Articulation and with Evidence of Progress in Policy Implementation, respectively. In total, the IGOPP is comprised of 241 binary indicators, which are aggregated to produce a score.
The design of the IGOPP is based on two conceptual pillars:
• Disaster Risk Management and its main processes
• Governance and its public policy phases
With respect to governance and its public policy phases, the IGOPP analyzes various phases of the policy reform process:
1. Inclusion on the Governmental Agenda and Policymaking, which is divided into three dimensions:
A. Central Policy Coordination and Articulation (1A)
B. Definition of Sectoral Responsibilities (1B)
C. Definition of Territorial Responsibilities (1C)
2. Policy Implementation
3. Policy Evaluation
All public policy phases and corresponding dimensions have equal weight.
Both factors (DRM and Governance) are shown in the IGOPP matrix structure, which has five columns that analyze the public policy phases, and six rows that analyze the components characterizing the reform processes of a suitable public policy for DRM. This matrix structure is expressed in 30 cells that make up a variable number of binary indicators.
Each cell can be identified by a DRM reform component prefix and a public policy phase suffix. For instance, cells GF-1A and GF-2 correspond to the respective interaction between the General Framework of Governance for DRM, with the Central Policy Coordination and Articulation and with Evidence of Progress in Policy Implementation, respectively. In total, the IGOPP is comprised of 241 binary indicators, which are aggregated to produce a score.
The index scoring ranges from 0 to 100 and uses the following classification system:
% Level of Favorable Governance Conditions for DRM
0% (minimum) to 100% (maximum) | ||
---|---|---|
|
91-100% | Outstanding |
|
71-90% | Very good |
|
41-70% | Good |
|
21-40% | Incipient |
|
0-20% | Low |
DDI
Disaster Deficit Index
The Disaster Deficit Index (DDI) evaluates the relationship between the economic losses that a country may suffer as a result of a catastrophic event and the resources that such country would need for emergency response and recovery.
A DDI greater than 1 implies a government's lack of financial resources to tackle large-scale disasters, even when it maximizes its debt. The higher the DDI, the larger the deficit.
LDI
Local Disaster Index
The Local Disaster Index, LDI, is an index that represents the propensity of a country to experience small-scale disasters and their cumulative impact on local development. The index attempts to represent the spatial variability and dispersion of risk in a country resulting from small and recurrent events. This approach is concerned with the national significance of recurrent small-scale events that rarely enter international, or even national, disaster databases, but which pose a serious and cumulative development problem for local areas and, more than likely, also for the country as a whole.
The LDI captures simultaneously the incidence and uniformity of the distribution of local effects. That is, it accounts for the relative weight and persistence of the effects attributable to phenomena that give rise to municipal scale disasters.
A low LDI value (0-20) means a high concentration of small disasters in few municipalities and a low spatial distribution of their effects between the municipalities where they have taken place. Medium LDI values (20- 50) shows a small disaster concentration and distribution of their effects are intermediate; high LDI values (from 50 onward) indicate that the majority of municipalities suffer small disasters and their effects are similar in all affected municipalities. High values reflect vulnerability and hazards are generalized in the territory.
PVI
Prevalent Vulnerability Index
The Prevalent Vulnerability Index, PVI, characterizes a country's existing vulnerability conditions in terms of exposure in disaster-prone areas, socio-economic fragility and limited resilience capacity. These items provide a measure of direct as well as indirect and intangible impacts of hazards.
The PVI score varies from 0 to 100. A value over 80 reflects very high levels of vulnerability; a score between 40 and 80 indicates high levels of vulnerability; a value between 20 to 40 specifies average levels of vulnerability, while a score of 20 or lower shows low levels of vulnerability.
RMI
Risk Management Index
The Risk Management Index, RMI, evaluates a country’s performance in disaster risk management. The RMI comprises four components: Risk Identification (RI); Risk Reduction (RR); Disaster Management (DM); and Financial Protection (FP).
The RMI score ranges between 0 and 100, where 0 represents the lowest performance score and 100 is the highest attainable score. The higher the RMI score, the better the disaster risk management performance of a country.
First select the year and then the indicators
Year:
Public policy phasesDRM reform components |
1. Inclusion on the government agenda and policy making | 2. Policy implementation | 3. Policy evaluation | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Central policy coordination and articulation | Definition of sectoral responsibilities | Definition of territorial responsibilities | Evidence of progress in implementation | Monitoring, accountability and participation | |
General framework of governance for DRM (GF) | GF-1A | GF-1B | GF-1C | GF-2 | GF-3 |
Risk Identification and Knowledge (RI) | RI-1A | RI-1B | RI-1C | RI-2 | RI-3 |
Risk Reduction (RR) | RR-1A | RR-1B | RR-1C | RR-2 | RR-3 |
Disaster Preparedness (DP) | DP-1A | DP-1B | DP-1C | DP-2 | DP-3 |
Recovery Planning (RC) | RC-1A | RC-1B | RC-1C | RC-2 | RC-3 |
Financial Protection (FP) | FP-1A | FP-1B | FP-1C | FP-2 | FP-3 |
Public policy phasesDRM reform components |
1. Inclusion on the government agenda and policy making | 2. Policy implementation | 3. Policy evaluation | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Central policy coordination and articulation | Definition of sectoral responsibilities | Definition of territorial responsibilities | Evidence of progress in implementation | Monitoring, accountability and participation | |
General framework of governance for DRM (GF) |
|
|
|
|
|
Risk Identification and Knowledge (RI) |
|
|
|
|
|
Risk Reduction (RR) |
|
|
|
|
|
Disaster Preparedness (DP) |
|
|
|
|
|
Recovery Planning (RC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Financial Protection (FP) |
|
|
|
|
|
IGOPP
Index of Governance and Public Policy in Disaster Risk Management
It quantifies the documented existence of legal, institutional and budgetary conditions that are considered fundamental for the effective implementation of public policies on Disaster Risk Management in each country. The iGOPP makes it possible to identify the content of public policy reforms in Disaster Risk Management based on international best practices at the governance level for disaster risk management.
% Level of Favorable Governance Conditions for DRM
0% (minimum) to 100% (maximum) | ||
---|---|---|
|
91-100% | Outstanding |
|
71-90% | Very good |
|
41-70% | Good |
|
21-40% | Incipient |
|
0-20% | Low |
% Level of Favorable Governance Conditions for DRM
0% (minimum) to 100% (maximum) | ||
---|---|---|
|
91-100% | Outstanding |
|
71-90% | Very good |
|
41-70% | Good |
|
21-40% | Incipient |
|
0-20% | Low |
GF
General Framework of Governance for DRM
This refers to the appropriate regulatory basis for the organization and coordination of DRM in each country, the availability of resources to implement DRM processes, and the establishment of adequate data and citizen participation mechanisms, as well as monitoring and evaluation processes for DRM.
RI
Risk Identification and Knowledge
It refers to the existence of regulatory, institutional and budgetary frameworks that facilitate the continued development of risk analysis in order to identify risk factors and causes and evaluate probable damages and losses caused by natural events.
RR
Risk Reduction
It refers to the existence of regulatory, institutional and budgetary frameworks that enable the timely and appropriate intervention to mitigate the causes that generate vulnerability conditions.
DP
Disaster Preparedness
It refers to the existence of regulatory, institutional and budgetary frameworks that enable the implementation of mechanisms aimed at a quick and appropriate response in the event of an emergency situation, imminent or otherwise.
RC
Recovery Planning
It refers to the existence of regulatory, institutional and budgetary frameworks that enable the implementation of mechanisms aimed at reestablishing livelihoods, basic services and infrastructure so that improvisation, inefficiencies and ineffectiveness in post-disaster recovery processes be reduced.
FP
Financial Protection
It refers to the existence of regulatory, institutional and budgetary frameworks that enable the design and implementation of appropriate structures for the retention and transfer of disaster risk.
1A
Central Policy Coordination and Articulation
The IGOPP analyzes the inclusion of DRM in the government’s agenda through the verification of the existence of appropriate legal frameworks for DRM.
1B
Definition of Sectoral Responsibilities
The IGOPP analyzes the inclusion of DRM in the government’s agenda through sectoral regulations.
1C
Definition of Territorial Responsibilities
The IGOPP analyzes the inclusion of DRM in the government’s agenda through territorial regulations.
2
Policy Implementation
The IGOPP analyzes evidence of implementation by verifying the actions taken or the availability of resources allocated to the parties responsible for implementing DRM policy, in its various components and levels of government.
3
Policy Evaluation
The IGOPP analyzes the evaluation of public policy from the perspective of the existence of monitoring and accountability mechanisms, as well as information and citizen participation processes.
Select the Year
Year:
|
Governability |
|||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Inclusion on the government agenda, formulation and public policy decisions |
2. Implementation of public policy |
3. Evaluation of the public policy |
||||||||||
Central policy coordination and Articulation
|
Definition of sectorial responsibilities
|
Definition of territorial responsibilities
|
Evidence of progress in implementation
|
Monitoring, accountability and participation
|
||||||||
Risk Management Processes | General framework of Governance for DRM (GF) | |||||||||||
Risk Identification and Knowledge (RI) | ||||||||||||
Risk Reduction (RR) | ||||||||||||
Disaster Preparedness (DP) | ||||||||||||
Post-Disaster Recovery Planning (RC) | ||||||||||||
Financial Protection (FP) |
Annual Expected Loss
Values
LDI
Local Disaster Index
The Local Disaster Index, LDI, measures the geographical distribution of the effects of small-scale or local disasters. The LDI comprises three indicators: deceased persons, people affected by disasters, and disaster-related economic losses in each municipality of a country. The LDI score ranges from 0 to 100.
Components Select components to compare
K
Total of deaths, extracted from the DesInventar database
A
Total affected people, extracted from the DesInventar database
L
Total economic losses, extracted from the DesInventar database
Values
PVI
Prevalent Vulnerability Index
The Prevalent Vulnerability Index, PVI, characterizes a country's existing vulnerability conditions in terms of exposure in disaster-prone areas, socio-economic fragility and limited resilience capacity. These items provide a measure of direct as well as indirect and intangible impacts of hazards.
Components Select components to compare
ES
It reflects a country’s susceptibility to dangerous events, whatever their nature or severity.
SF
It reflects a country’s predisposition for adverse social and economic impacts in the face of dangerous phenomena, regardless of their nature or intensity.
LR
It reflects the capacity to recover from or absorb the impact of dangerous phenomena, whatever their nature and severity.
Values
RMI
Risk Management Index
The Risk Management Index, RMI, evaluates a country’s performance in disaster risk management. The RMI comprises four components: Risk Identification (RI); Risk Reduction (RR); Disaster Management (DM); and Financial Protection (FP).
Components Select components to compare
Risk Identification (RI)
This component assesses the capacity to systematically identify risks and objectively evaluate their impact based on an understanding of a society's various vulnerabilities
Risk Reduction (RR)
This component measures the level of implementation of structural and nonstructural risk prevention and mitigation measures. It implies a process of anticipating potential sources of risk, putting into practice procedures to either avoid hazard, when it is possible, or reduce the economic, social and environmental impacts through corrective and prospective interventions of existing and future vulnerability conditions
Disaster Management (DM)
This component corresponds to the appropriate post-disaster response and recovery, which depend on the level of preparedness of the operating institutions and the community. Disaster management aims to respond effectively once the risk has already materialized and it has not been possible to prevent the impact of dangerous phenomena. Its effectiveness implies a tangible organization, capacity and operational planning of institutions and the various stakeholders involved in the event of a disaster.
Financial Protection (FP)
This component evaluates the adequate allocation and use of financial resources for disaster management as well as the implementation of appropriate strategies for the retention and transfer of disaster-related losses
Values
- The DDI is a function of two elements: probable maximum losses associated with the Maximum Considered Event (MCE) and Economic Resilience (ER).
- MCE probable maximum losses (US$) are calculated using functions of probability for different hazards and the physical vulnerability of the elements exposed to those phenomena.
- ER (US$) is an estimate of the financial resources available to the government to fund emergency and recovery expenditures that are considered the responsibility of the public sector.
- The DDI is calculated as follows:
- The LDI is equal to the sum of three local disaster sub-indicators that are calculated based on data from the DesInventar database for number of deaths, number of people affected and economic losses in each municipality.
- The LDI is calculated using information for four phenomena: landslides and debris flows, seismotectonic events, floods and storms, and other events.
- It takes into account only small-scale events, i.e. those where the maximum number of deaths is 50, the number of homes destroyed is fewer than 500 and those affected are fewer than 2,500.
- Each LDI indicator ranges from 0 to 100 and the total LDI is the sum of the three components, which means that it ranges from 0 to 300.
The PVI consists of three components, each having eight indicators. The three components are:
-
Exposure and Susceptibility (PVIES): which reflects a country’s susceptibility to dangerous events, whatever their nature or severity.
-
Socioeconomic Fragility (PVISF): it reflects conditions of social and economic fragility that favor the indirect and intangible impact.
-
Lack of Resilience (PVILR): it reflects the ability to anticipate, absorb consequences, respond efficiently and recover.
Each component ranges from 0 to 100. The total PVI is the average of the three components:
The RMI has four components:
- Risk Identification (RI), which comprises the best available technical and scientific information on hazards, exposure and vulnerability.
- Risk Reduction (RR), which corresponds to the execution of structural and non-structural measures in order to avoid or reduce the economic, social and environmental impact of natural hazards.
- Disaster Management (DM), which corresponds to the appropriate response during emergencies and post-disaster recovery.
- Financial protection (FP), which comprises several ex ante financial instruments.
- Each of the four components has six indicators, which are categorized based on a five-level performance scale: low, incipient, significant, outstanding and optimal. Each category has a corresponding score from 1 to 5.
- After assessing the performance of each indicator, a non-linear aggregation model is employed to determine the value of each RMI component, ranging from 0 to 100.
The RMI is the average of the four components described above:
The Disaster Deficit Index (DDI) measures the relationship between the economic loss that a country could suffer from a catastrophic event and the resources the public sector needs to address the disaster.
Potential losses (i.e., numerator of the index) are calculated by taking into account, on the one hand, different hazards, which are calculated in a probabilistic manner based on historical records of the intensities of the phenomena that characterize them and, on the other hand, the current physical vulnerability presented by the elements exposed to said phenomena. Economic resilience (i.e., the denominator of the index) represents the possible internal and external funding sources that, in the event of a disaster, the government, owning or being responsible for the recovery of the affected goods, could access at the time of the DDI evaluation. Access to these funding sources has restrictions and associated costs, hence why it is necessary to estimate them as feasible values according to the macroeconomic and financial conditions of each country.
This evaluation takes into account several considerations: (1) the insurance and reinsurance payments that a country could approximately receive for the government's insured goods and infrastructure; (2) the reserve funds for disasters that a country has at its disposal in the year of the DDI evaluation; (3) the assets that can be received as aid and donations, both public and private, national and international; (4) the potential amount of new taxes that a country could additionally raise in the event of a major disaster; (5) the estimate of the budget reallocation margin that a country has, which usually corresponds to the discretionary spending margin of the government; (6) the feasible value of external credit that a country can obtain through multilateral organizations as well as external capital markets, and (7) the domestic credit that a country can obtain through commercial banks, and in some instances, when it is legal, through the central bank.
MCE loss is calculated using information from several analyses: |
---|
First, a hazard assessment, which determines the relationship between intensity and probability of hazard events by estimating scenarios using historical disaster data and source-plane geometric model inventories based on available information. |
Second, the estimation of exposure values, quantifying assets exposed to the potential hazard events. Inventories at the national, territorial and sectoral level, as well as locations, typologies and materials of elements exposed to the hazard, are identified and their economic value is estimated, by territory and sector. |
Third, the construction of a vulnerability function, to establish the relationship between the magnitude of the hazard events (acceleration, velocity, displacement or any other, which correlates better) and the level (%) of damage in the physical elements exposed to the hazard events by type of construction. |
LDI Hazard Categorization | Types of Phenomena |
---|---|
Landslides and Debris Flows |
External Geodynamic Phenomena |
Landslides: avalanche; alluvium; debris flow; mass wasting; mudflow; rockslide; land subsidence; sinking |
|
Seismo-tectonic |
Internal Geodynamic Phenomena |
Earthquake; volcanic eruption; tsunami; transform fault; liquefaction |
|
Floods and Storms |
Hydrological phenomena |
Flood; sedimentation; erosion; surge; overflow; aquifer exhaustion; drought |
|
Atmospheric phenomena |
|
Storm (electric and tropical); strong wind; hurricane; rain; fog; hailstorm; snow storm; frost; heat wave; forest fire |
|
Other Events |
Technological phenomena |
Fire; accident; explosions; pollution; structural collapse |
|
Biological Phenomena |
|
Epidemic; plague |
Indicators of Exposure and Susceptibility (PVIES)
Indicator | Relevance | Source |
---|---|---|
ES1. Population growth, average annual rate (%) |
Population growth, in general, implies a greater number of people exposed to natural hazards or who may reside in disaster-prone areas. |
UNDESA, World Bank |
ES2. Urban population growth, average annual rate (%) |
The accelerated process of urbanization as a result of migration from the countryside to the city or the arrival of people displaced by conflict poses challenges in the urban environment, such as incomplete coverage of public services and informal settlements in disaster-prone areas. |
UNDESA, World Bank, UN-HABITAT |
ES3. Population density (people/km2) |
The spatial concentration of the population crowds infrastructure and increases human and economic exposure in flood- and landslide-prone areas. |
UNEP |
ES4. Percentage of population with income under US$ 1 per day (PPP) |
The lowest-income population strata are disproportionately affected when risk materializes. The urban poor may be constrained in their ability to find adequate housing, whereas the rural poor may be more susceptible to lose their source of income. |
World Bank, UNICEF |
ES5. Capital stock, US$ million/1000 km2 |
The assets and infrastructure of both the public and private sectors constitute the exposed physical elements that may be damaged, destroyed or otherwise negatively affected as a result of natural hazards. |
World Bank, Ministries of Finance or Planning |
ES6. Imports and exports of goods and services, as a share of GDP |
The economic transactions that account for the volume of commercial activities in the agricultural, industrial and service sectors, are economic flows that can be affected by disasters. |
World Bank |
ES7. Government domestic fixed investment, as a share of GDP |
Capital expenditures made by the government represent investments in assets that increase the stock of capital and, therefore, the volume and value of exposed elements that may be affected by disasters. |
World Bank |
ES8. Arable land and permanent crops, as a share of land area |
Crops and arable lands are sensitive to the effects of natural hazards such as floods, landslides or volcanic eruptions, which particularly impact vulnerable populations. |
FAO |
Indicators of Socio-economic Fragility (PVISF)
Indicator | Relevance | Source |
---|---|---|
SF1. Human Poverty Index for Developing Countries (HPI-1) |
The conditions of poverty and the lack of access to basic services reflect limited capacity of resilience against any type of threat. The people in conditions of extreme poverty are disproportionately affected by disasters. |
UNDP |
SF2. Dependency ratio |
The ratio of older people and children to the working age population represents the share of the population that is generally at a higher risk in the event of a disaster. |
World Bank |
SF3. Social disparity, measured using the Gini coefficient |
The high concentration of income by a small segment of the population represents a condition of reduced well-being. quality of life and disaster coping capacity for the majority of the population, even in the context of economic growth. |
World Bank |
SF4. Unemployment rate |
Lack of employment is an economically disadvantageous condition, as the absence of income implies a reduced capacity of access to resources and means of protection against disasters. |
ILO, World Bank |
SF5. Food inflation rate, annual |
A deterioration in the purchasing power is economically disadvantageous, since it reflects a reduction of the capacity of the population to access resources and means of protection against disasters. |
UNICEF, World Bank |
SF6. Share of GDP growth per annum attributable to the agricultural sector |
High economic dependence on primary activities results in higher vulnerability to extreme climate events and global climate change. |
World Bank |
SF7. Debt service, as a share of GDP |
High indebtedness means a low availability of resources as well as the potential need to increase debt to finance recovery efforts in the aftermath of a disaster. In some instances, countries are unable to assume new obligations, compromising their capacity of financial recovery. |
World Bank |
SF8. Anthropogenic Soil Degradation |
Anthropogenic soil degradation is a relevant dimension of environmental deterioration and inadequate use of natural resources. Human-induced soil deterioration exacerbates the occurrence of some natural hazards. |
FAO, UNEP |
Indicators of Lack of Resilience (PVILR)
Indicator | Relevance | Source |
---|---|---|
LR1. Human Development Index |
The Human Development Index represents the level of development of the population. It takes into account life expectancy, educational attainment, and income (at purchasing power parity), among other factors. The higher the human development levels, the greater the capacity to reduce disaster risk. |
UNDP |
LR2. Gender Development Index |
The Gender-Related Development Index adjusts a country’s level of development by measuring disparities between men and women in the same dimensions captured by the Human Development Index. This index captures how gender gaps affect the capacity of society to cope with disasters and other shocks. |
UNDP |
LR3. Social expenditures (pensions, health, and education), as a share of GDP |
Social expenditures take into account the allocation of resources aimed at improving the security of the most vulnerable groups of the population. An adequate coverage of social investment programs reduces the vulnerability of people in the face of disasters. |
World Bank |
LR4. Governance Index (WGI) |
The Governance Index is a measure of the efficiency of public management, legitimacy, transparency and democratization. Higher levels of social governance reflect better institutional capacity, legislation, equity and integration of risk management considerations in development planning processes. |
World Bank |
LR5. Infrastructure and housing insurance spending, as a share of GDP |
An adequate coverage of potential losses in housing and public and private goods by the insurance industry reflects greater financial protection of the population against natural hazards. |
Ministries of Finance or Planning |
LR6. Television sets per 1000 people |
The reception of information by means of audiovisual technologies facilitates timely and continuous dissemination of knowledge, improves the understanding of disaster risk and positively influences perception and awareness conditions. |
World Bank |
LR7. Hospital beds per 1000 people |
An adequate health sector infrastructure reflects a greater capacity to support the population when disasters and emergencies occur. |
World Bank |
LR8. Environmental Sustainability Index (ESI) |
An effective environmental management, as measured by the Environmental Sustainability Index, has a positive impact on the reduction of vulnerability and disaster prevention. |
WEF |
Indicators of Risk Identification
Indicators and Performance Levels |
---|
RI1. Systematic disaster and loss inventory |
|
RI2. Hazard monitoring and forecasting |
|
RI3. Hazard evaluation and mapping |
|
RI4. Vulnerability and risk assessment |
|
RI5. Public information and community participation |
|
RI6. Training and education in risk management |
|
Indicators of Risk Reduction
Indicators and Performance levels |
---|
RR1. Risk Consideration in land use and urban planning |
|
RR2. Hydrographic basin intervention and environmental protection |
|
RR3. Implementation of hazard control and protection techniques |
|
RR4. Housing improvement and human resettlement from risk-prone areas |
|
RR5. Updating of building codes and compliance oversight |
|
RR6. Reinforcement and interventions to reduce the vulnerability of public and private goods |
|
Indicators of Disaster Management
Indicators and Performance Levels |
---|
DM1. Organization and coordination of emergency operations |
|
DM2. Emergency response planning and implementation of warning systems |
|
DM3. Provisioning of equipment, tools and infrastructure |
|
DM4. Simulation, updating, and testing of interinstitutional response |
|
DM5. Community preparedness and capacity development |
|
DM6. Refurbishment and reconstruction planning |
|
Indicators of Governance and Financial Protection
Indicators and Performance Levels |
---|
FP1. Interinstitutional, multisectoral and decentralized organization |
|
FP2. Contingency funds for institutional strengthening |
|
FP3. Budget allocation and mobilization |
|
FP4. Implementation of social safety nets and funds |
|
FP5. Insurance coverage and loss transfer strategies for public assets |
|
FP6. Housing and private sector insurance and reinsurance coverage |
|