1

United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction

DISTILLED

Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction United Nations

GAR19 Distilled
The United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) works with thinkers, Correspondingly, the latest GAR (GAR19) moves beyond disaster risk to consider the
practitioners, experts and innovators to investigate the state of risk across the globe, pluralistic nature of risk: in multiple dimensions, at multiple scales and with multiple
highlighting what’s new, spotting emerging trends, revealing disturbing patterns, impacts. It provides an update on how we – as governments, as communities and
examining behaviour and presenting progress in reducing risk. The findings make up the individuals – understand our relationship with risk and its reduction.
Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction (GAR), which is published every
It provides the first update from countries on progress against the seven targets of the
two years.
Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 (Sendai Framework): the
GAR is known for breaking new ground on risk and its reduction – challenging prevailing global guide to understanding and dealing with risk, and places special emphasis on the
norms and provoking us all to re-examine our behaviour and our choices. While disaster 2020 Target (e) - Substantially increase the number of countries with national and local
risk has been the point of departure, it is clear that in an increasingly connected world, disaster risk reduction strategies by 2020.
nothing about risk is siloed. We can’t afford to be narrow in our definition of risk, or in the
GAR19 Distilled collates 10 take-home observations from GAR19. These observations
way we address it.
should provoke us to re-examine what and how we think about risk – the issues and our
corresponding actions. Each observation is linked to the relevant section in the GAR19
main report, so you can dive in as deeply as you like.

“If I had to select one sentence to describe the state of the world, I would say we are in a
world in which global challenges are more and more integrated, and the responses are more
and more fragmented, and if this is not reversed, it’s a recipe for disaster.”
António Guterres, United Nations Secretary-General, January 2019
 2

Risk-info
r me
are ds
ys
we Com te
m
DISASTER RISK Efficient
pli Aligned
an s
tiv e

t
r

-b
MANAGEMENT PREVENTION
he

Proactive

as
e
W

Effective

ed
LIVING WITH DISASTER
ruc

DISASTER
Reactive

ap
Dest

RESPONSE

pr
Survival

UNCERTAINTY

oa
DISASTER MANAGEMENT

ch
an

es
d Integrated
ed
DISASTER RISK
LIVING WITH DISASTER
UNCERTAINTY de Enabling
n
ng
PREVENTION ci

Su
ta sio
RESPONSE

be
in

s
n-
ab
le ma to
ed

e
kin

tiv
Evolving a
er
Containment
g W h ere w e ne ge
n
Re
Surprise is the new normal
Issue Action
Our planet, circumstances, needs and choices have always evolved and changed. Risk There are clear actions we can take – as countries, communities, individuals and
is part of our collective human experience. Ironically, in this age of data, information organizations. We must act collectively. The Sendai Framework sets out an agreed global
and connectivity, even though we can quantify more of what was previously uncertain, blueprint for addressing risk. We must avoid creating new risk, and we must systematically
it makes apparent how much more we don’t know. What is evident, is that change is reduce existing risk. We must strengthen the capacity of people, communities, countries
happening more quickly and surprisingly across multiple dimensions and scales than we and systems to withstand and bounce back from shocks, persist through stresses and
ever thought possible. transform through crises.

This means that although modelling and metrics are important, we can no longer use We must anticipate and allow room to deal with surprise and non-linear change with
the past as a reliable indicator of the future. For example, risk analyses typically produce flexibility and nimbleness in our strategies and plans. We must be able to make real-time
values that are economically derived around the expected cost of specific disaster adjustments that anticipate and respond to change when pursuing economic activity and
types. These analyses are commonly based on hazard patterns, exposure patterns and sustainable development. This means adaptive, anticipatory planning frameworks that
measures of vulnerability that are being outpaced by reality on a daily basis. Moreover, seek to identify the drivers of risk across systems to prevent and mitigate risk, and that
new risks and correlations are emerging in a way that we have not anticipated. Threats allow implementers to react quickly, with funding decisions made as close to the ground
that were once considered inconceivable, no longer are. as possible. Our flexibility must be as dynamic as the change we hope to survive.

There will be greater uncertainty with which we must contend. Uncertainty and surprise We must apply what we know and acknowledge the gaps in our knowledge, prioritizing
create discomfort (we humans crave control), but also opportunity. Although difficult, ways to understand what we do not yet know. Above all, we cannot let inertia and short-
accepting uncertainty and understanding that we cannot presume to control all change sightedness impede action. We must act with urgency and with greater ambition,
is imperative. It is also a more honest description of the world beyond simplified proportional to the scale of the threat.
metrics. This acknowledgement must shape behaviour to come. Extreme changes in
planetary and socioecological systems are happening now; we no longer have the luxury
of procrastination. If we continue living in this way, engaging with each other and the
planet in the way we do, then our very survival is in doubt. Such challenges can seem
insurmountable. Uncertainty can lead to paralysis, further compounding risk. For more, see GAR19
CHAPTER 2
PART I
PART III
4
Growing risk in a shrinking world
Issue Action
Change does not happen in silos or in straight lines. Non-linear change brings new threat The era of hazard-by-hazard risk reduction is over. We need to reflect the systemic nature
patterns; the variables that control our future are in flux. The choices we make are creating of risk in how we deal with it. We need to improve how we tune our understanding of
new, emerging and larger risks. Human activity grows exposure, increasing the propensity anthropogenic systems in nature to identify precursor signals and correlations to better
for systems reverberations, setting up feedback loops with cascading consequences that prepare, anticipate and adapt.
are difficult to foresee.
This means we must move away from working on distinct areas of risk (e.g. spatial,
Data and analytics (and news headlines) tend to compartmentalize risk, to make it seem geographic, temporal, disciplinary) when designing and implementing interventions.
simple and quantifiable. This is dangerous. A focus on numbers – particularly numbers While it can be practical to categorize risk so that we can delegate responsibility to
linked to single extreme events such as tsunamis or pandemics – emphasizes direct different organizations, institutions or individuals, we need to incentivize transdisciplinary
short-term consequences. This means that we routinely fail to correctly understand and integrated, multisectoral risk assessment and decision-making to improve efficiency,
portray risk, particularly its longitudinal impacts. For example, beyond direct impacts, reduce duplication of effort and allow for connected, collective action.
little analysis exists of the decadal consequences on well-being and the development
This is particularly critical at national government level. Risk must not be departmentalized.
aspirations of countries, provinces or cities where disasters have destroyed schools and
National planning bodies with representation from all sectors must be convened to
killed schoolchildren.
develop national disaster risk reduction strategies that assume an all-of-State institutions
With increasing complexity and interaction of human, economic and political systems approach to risk reduction. A process to develop a Global Risk Assessment Framework
(e.g. the international financial system, communications and information technology, (GRAF) has already been established to facilitate generating the information and insights
trade and supply chains, megacities and urbanization) and natural systems (marine, land that would sustain and guide this kind of effort. Sustained, multi-year and creative funding
and air), risk becomes increasingly systemic. and collaboration is needed so that State organs and leaders have the tools they need
to better recognize systemic risks and apply funded, sustainable risk management
Think of climate change due to global warming that is now contributing to environmental
strategies – at all scales.
degradation and biodiversity loss with corollary impacts on crop yields and food
production, international trade, financial market volatility and political instability. Or
NATECH disasters where for example an extreme weather event realizes a “hidden”
For more, see GAR19
technological risk, causing the partial or full disabling of a national power grid with
CHAPTER 2
cascading impacts on business continuity, critical infrastructure and civil security, or
PART I
disruption of basic services.
PART III
 6

*E
a

ch
co
mp
on
Environmental
ent

ent
Degradation

disp
Growing Income
CURRENT CONTEXT Population Inequality

lays
Capacity to absorb negative Agricultural
Global

co m
events is being reduced slowly Technical Limits
Warming
(e.g. population growth pushing

ple
the limits of agricultural

xc
or
technology) rel
a t i ons a
nd
Droughts
Dro ht International Trade fe
ed
ba
Complexity c
Heat-waves

k
lo
Loss Of

op
BUILDING STRESSORS Market Biodiversity

s
Speculation
Crop Vulnerability

Market Volatility
M
Displacement
acemen
Crop Failure
SUDDEN AND GRADUAL
TIPPING POINTS
Water Conflict Price Spikes
pike
An event of great magnitude or
ILU RE
multiple failures at the same T FA
time could suddenly exceed all
BA SKE
remaining capacity
R EAD
TIP LE B Food Insecurity
F ty
MUL
rre y
Currency
Desta
Destabilization Political
Destabilization
Food Rio
Riots
SYSTEMIC FAILURE Migration
War
Wa
Civil
v Unrest
 It’s complex – let’s deal with it
Issue
Understanding risk means understanding what we know, what we don’t know, and even The Sendai Framework takes an interconnected and pluralistic approach to understanding
trying to tackle what we know we don’t know. Risk is complex. We need to understand risk. It recognizes that the behaviour of systems is non-linear. It includes a broad
how to deal with it without resorting to reductive measures that isolate and ignore the spectrum of hazards beyond the natural to include the human-made (e.g. pollution,
systemic nature of risk. We must push back against institutions, governance approaches chemical accidents, avian influenza). It exhorts us to make a fundamental shift in the
and research modalities that treat risks in isolation and outside of their socioecological way in which we develop and use information to make our decisions – away from the
and socioeconomic contexts. deliberate simplification of a problem and its causes by removing it from its context.
Image Source: Gaupp 2019

COMPLICATED
COMPLICATED COMPLEX
COMPLEX
 8

F i n a n ce a n d I n
Faiths ve s Action
io s /
n tm
Some degree of reductionism is unavoidable (and in science,
l i g en
R e s Wi s d o m t
u P
this approach has reaped significant benefits, such as advances
n o o li
g e c y
di s in molecular biology and our understanding of immunology

In
Ne te m s
and human disease). We must break away from the prevailing
uro
sc E co n o
c tu re Sy
ie mi e
cs h it practice of compartmentalized research, hazard-by-hazard
GENERAL
rc
n

n
ce

A
risk assessment and management if we are to improve our

ig s
De
understanding of complex systems and risk and collectively
Be
P o li

e
identify solutions. This applies as much to our institutional

Interfac
havi
ti c s

HUMAN / DESIGN configurations and mechanisms for risk governance as it does

u n i c at i o n
o u ra l S c i e n c

to community organization, our research endeavours and

SOCIAL SCIENCE
macroeconomic policy.
SCIENCE Risk-informed

mm
sustainable We need to adopt pragmatic, pluralist approaches that can

Co
e

development study risk phenomena at a variety of levels. For example,

E n g i n e e ri n g

Physics
we should redesign our research methodologies to operate

APPLIED NATURAL
G e o te c

in a transdisciplinary manner, to engage non-traditional

SCIENCE

lo g y
counterparts (e.g. indigenous wisdom, the faiths, citizen
SCIENCE

phy

Geo
science), and allow for innovative and collective action (e.g.
h ni

g ra
cs

no among seismologists, social researchers and city engineers, or

ea

Oc e
Ag

at through transdisciplinary incident management frameworks).

TECHNOLOGY Cl
i
m
r

ltu Ec
ic

o lo gy
u

re
/S gy Biolo
ce

o il s fo
In

en

rm ig
ati
on n t e ll For more, see GAR19
I
Da ial g
ta S Artific dellin CHAPTER 2
c i e n ce Mo PART I
PART III
The high cost of vulnerability
Issue
Risk, impact and capacity to cope evolve throughout a person’s life cycle. Vulnerabilities This is particularly evident in conflict-affected countries, where early findings from national
may emerge and change, compound and persist over long periods – leading to disparities reporting point to a two-way relationship in the occurrence, exposure and exacerbated
in income, inequality based on gender, ethnicity, household and social status. This can vulnerabilities induced by the interplay between disasters and conflict. Disasters may
contribute to the intergenerational transmission of vulnerability and widening inequalities. exacerbate conflict by placing additional stressors on fatigued governance systems and
Although vulnerability is not a function of poverty alone, disasters magnify existing social fuelling existing divides. Similarly, grievances determining the shape and duration of a
inequalities and further disadvantage those who are already vulnerable. conflict may be deepened by disasters, intensifying existing imbalances.

We must also acknowledge that not all of us have the same opportunity to make positive Measuring disaster as experienced by individuals requires consideration of how resources
choices. Location, age, gender, income group, disability, and access to/benefit from social are shared among communities, but also among members of the same households.
protection schemes and safety nets greatly affect the choices people have to anticipate, However, traditional measures have not been able to capture such variations because
prevent and mitigate risks. they stop at the national or subnational level. National averages, even city averages, often
mask wide disparities among population groups and households.

Location, age, gender, income group,

disability, and access to/benefit from
social protection schemes and safety nets
greatly affect the choices people
have to anticipate, prevent and
mitigate risks.
 10

Action
Advocating, based on our common humanity, for those unable to make choices is We need to understand how life circumstances affect individuals’ likelihood of being
critical. Faced with the cumulative and cascading nature of vulnerability, we need timely healthy and educated, accessing basic services, leading a dignified life and eventually
interventions to effectively protect those groups whose vulnerability profiles (many of “building back better” after a shock. We need sound socioeconomic management that is
these structural and many tied to the life cycle) make them more susceptible to disaster more fair, inclusive and equitable, and that is underpinned by a systemic, multidimensional
risk. Changes in technology and forms of collaboration offer solutions to some of the understanding of vulnerability (including inequalities and disparities in shared prosperity
problems related to understanding and managing risk. as the world grows wealthier). We must invest in human capital to enable risk-informed
choices, empowering the vulnerable as the drivers of change.
However, to better understand vulnerabilities, we need systematic effort and sustained
funding for integrated risk assessment and disaggregated data collection. This involves Disaggregated data (e.g. by sex, age, disability, ethnicity, income or geographic location)
harnessing data across different global frameworks and indicators that can be used to can be an enabler, revealing the differential impacts and experiences of people in
compare outcomes and changes over time – among and within countries and households disasters. Such data will identify gaps and more comprehensively reflect the conditions in
– and to ensure that the needs of the most vulnerable populations do not continue to go which risk accumulates and is realized, so as to inform policy interventions that prioritize
uncounted. prospective and corrective risk management above compensatory risk management.

For more, see GAR19

PART I
PART II
PART III
Nothing undermines development like disasters
Issue Action
The world has been unable to move away from a vicious cycle of disaster–respond– The global policy agenda incorporates a common message - Understanding hazard
rebuild–repeat. Financing has historically focused on picking up the pieces post-disaster. characteristics and how they interact, as well as managing exposure and vulnerability
However, this “band-aid” approach is not appropriate. It continues to undermine progress (the core aspects of risk), are imperative for development to be achievable, let alone
towards sustainable development. Risk generated by the interaction of complex human sustainable.
and natural systems, amplified by changes in climate, is reversing efforts to achieve the Unacknowledged, unaddressed and unknown risk sits at the heart of the global threat
goals of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (2030 Agenda). The very survival to sustainable development. As a practical framework for dealing with risk, the Sendai
of humans on the planet is at stake. Framework is the connecting tissue for the post-2015 international agreements: the 2030
Agenda, Paris Agreement, New Urban Agenda, Addis Ababa Action Agenda and Agenda
Development assistance for risk reduction has been highly volatile and marginal, and
for Humanity. It also makes the logical connection between reducing risk and building
dwarfed by financing for disaster response. A total of $5.2 billion for disaster risk reduction
resilience, because an enhanced understanding of risk, strengthened risk governance,
between 2005 and 2017 represents a marginal fraction (3.8%) of the total amount of
increased investment and better preparedness creates a foundation for the resilience of
overseas development assistance. In general, post-shock assistance (i.e. for disaster
people, communities, governments and businesses.
response, reconstruction, rehabilitation and recovery) dominates at the expense of
funding dedicated to understanding the underlying vulnerabilities contributing to risk and Development planning must be risk informed to create sustained change. Risk-informed
to reducing them. Global resource requirements to deal with growing risk are increasing development means that initiatives must incorporate contextual and integrated
faster than national and international capacities to meet them, leaving millions of affected assessments that acknowledge the range and complexity of current and potential
people behind. interacting hazards and risks. It means acknowledging the interaction of risk, human
choices and natural systems, and emphasizing the rational use of limited available
resources. To do this, we must move away from short-sighted, segmented planning and
implementation to transdisciplinary, collaborative approaches that build resilience (e.g.
approaches that promote local and diverse food systems that fully meet the requirements
for human dietary health for all in a stable manner) and that regenerate relevant resources,
avoiding both expected and unexpected negative consequences.
For more, see GAR19
CHAPTER I
PART I
PART III
 12

1950 Hazard-based
1960 approaches

1970
Expert group meeting
(UNDRO) Habitat I Social dimension
1980 Risk and vulnerability analysis of disasters

International Decade for

1990 Natural Disaster Reduction
(IDNDR)

DISASTERS
United Nations

MANAGING
Earth Summit Framework Convention
The Yokohama Strategy on Climate Change
Highlighted socioeconomic
vulnerability
Habitat II

International Strategy
for Disaster Reduction
Millenium
2000 (ISDR)
Development Social construction
Goals (MDGs) of risk
Hyogo Framework
for Action
2005-2015

2010 Managing underlying risks

in building resilience of RIO + 20
nations and communities

Sendai Framework for 2030 Agenda for

Paris New Urban Systemic risk and
2015 Disaster Risk
Reduction 2015-2030
Sustainable
Development (SDGs)
Agreement Agenda systems-based approaches

MANAGING
Systemic risk lens
2020

RISKS
2030

2040
2050
2060 Risk-informed sustainable development
Levelling the playing field
Issue Action
The multilateral approach to global development and global policy is facing significant International cooperation must be predicated on an equitable and accessible system that
challenges. The benefits of socioeconomic development, economic integration and trade recognizes the vulnerability inherent in differing stages of socioeconomic development.
are shared by a limited number of countries, leaving others with constrained policy space Reform of financial systems is essential – notably those that tie countries into debt
to negotiate terms commensurate with their needs. There is growing evidence that the mechanisms from which it is difficult to escape.
benefits of increasing economic integration have not been equitably shared among and
We must recognize that an international development financing system that allocates
within countries. Unsustainable patterns of growth hide the build-up of systemic risks
approximately 20 times the funding to emergency response, reconstruction, relief
across different sectors (e.g. macroeconomic overdependence on single crop/sector
and rehabilitation activities rather than prevention and preparedness, acts counter to
coupled with the overshoot of 1.5°C global warming above pre-industrial levels), which
sustainability principles. And so we must redesign global financing and international
will severely disrupt economic activity and inflict long-term damage to sustainable
development cooperation systems to include proportionate and context-driven solutions
development.
commensurate with the disproportionate exposure to environmental and economic risk
We witness severe inequalities of burden sharing between low- and high-income faced by certain countries.
countries, with the poorest bearing the highest toll and greatest costs of disasters. Human
International pressure for a fairer, sustainable, equitable planet must materialize mixed
losses and asset losses relative to gross domestic product (GDP) tend to be higher in the
and innovative financing approaches, pro-growth tax policies and well-managed domestic
countries with the least capacity to prepare, finance and respond to disasters and climate
resource mobilization that respond to the cascading and interlinked nature of these risks.
change, such as in small island developing States (SIDS). For many SIDS, future disasters
represent an existential threat.

In recognizing this challenge, Sendai Framework Target (f) calls for substantially enhanced
international cooperation to developing countries, so allowing space for countries to adopt
effective policies that enhance domestic public finance for risk-informed sustainable
development.

For more, see GAR19

PART I
PART II
 14

Disa uction

Assessm
Red gies
Stra

ster

Risk
te
Ac

Risk
c

ent
In R ess
fo is T
/W rm k o
ar a
ni tio
ng n
ba
s
A ba nda Fr Sen
am da
dis ge ew i
Coo Ad ion A or
per Ac
t k UCE
atio RED
n
i l i ence
Res
s
s
al
al

o
tg
go

en
nt
d e v e l o p me

developm
RISK-INFORMED

Agenda for
Humanity
SUSTAINABLE

Agenda
2030
DEVELOPMENT

ble

ble
na

na
ai

ai
st

st
Su
Su
Pre n
v e ntio
SE Mo
REA rta
INC lity
Ne is
w
Ag Urba Par ent
end n e e m
a Agr

Af eo
fe ple
P
ct
ed
Eco oss
Infrastrcu
Disru es
Servi

Damage

L
nom
B ic
a
ption

s
c

ic
tue
Climate change - the great risk amplifier
Issue
Climate change is a major driver and amplifier of disaster losses and failed development. If the 1.5°C threshold is breached, the possibilities to adapt will diminish as ecosystem
It amplifies risk. Decades-old projections about climate change have come true much services collapse – unable to support current economic activity and human populations,
sooner than we expected and at a calamitous scale. The threshold of limiting global migration on a scale never before seen may be triggered from arid and semi-arid regions
warming increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels that the Paris Agreement sought to to low elevation coastal zones, building risk. Negative emission technologies (NET) – such
cap, will be surpassed in the late 2030s / early 2040s. Worse, the Intergovernmental Panel as reforestation, afforestation or soil carbon enhancement – will be the only recourse, but
on Climate Change (IPCC) estimates that if countries restrict effort to the commitments these will have massive first- and second-order risk implications at a regional scale.
made in the Paris Agreement, we are looking at warming in the realm of 2.9°C–3.4°C by
Risk reduction processes have multiple connections with climate change mitigation,
the end of the century.
adaptation and vulnerability reduction (e.g. more secure land tenure and better access to
Non-linear change in hazard intensity and frequency is already a reality. Affecting the electricity and agricultural extension services can facilitate drought mitigation). And yet
intensive and extensive nature of risk, climate change can generate more powerful few disaster risk reduction plans take these connections into account. Failure to include
storms, exacerbate coastal flooding, and bring higher temperatures and longer droughts. climate change scenarios in assessment and risk reduction planning will build inherent
Emergent climate-related risks will alter most of our current risk metrics. Growth in death, redundancy in all we do.
loss and damage will surpass already inadequate risk mitigation, response and transfer
mechanisms in much of the developing world. If global warming is not contained within
1.5°C in a generation, the IPCC Special Report on 1.5°C estimates that the number of
people exposed to declining crop yields could rise from approximately 35 million at 1.5°C
to 370 million at 2°C.
 16

Action
The 2018 IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C presents new evidence on
climate change that was not available when the Sendai Framework was adopted. It
identifies that we must be more ambitious about the speed and magnitude of the changes
“If solutions within the we need to make. Any vulnerability reduction measures – captured in national and local

system are so impossible adaptation plans and disaster risk reduction plans – must be developed in conjunction
with the simultaneous systemic changes that must be engineered in energy, industrial,

to find, maybe we should land, ecological and urban systems.

change the system itself.” The development of disaster risk reduction strategies and plans at the local, national
and regional levels, and the assessments that underpin them, must integrate near-term
climate change scenarios, and elaborate the enabling conditions for transformative
Greta Thunberg, Sweden, youth advocate for
adaptation presented by IPCC.
global action on climate change, 2019

For more, see GAR19

CHAPTER 6
CHAPTER 13
Data, direction, decisions
Issue
Without accurate evidence of where we currently stand, we cannot confidently chart While integrated monitoring and reporting on the Sendai Framework and the Sustainable
our path forward. Turning the aspirations of risk-informed sustainable development into Development Goals (SDGs) is a reality – thanks to use of common metrics and the
reality will require robust data and statistics that are timely, accurate, disaggregated, online (SFM) – data collection is fragmented, non-universal, not commeasurable and
people centred and accessible, and which enable us to capture progress and direct biased. There is often a disconnect among “knowing” something, making it “available and
investments accordingly. accessible” and “applying” what is known.

Some four years after the adoption of the 2030 Agenda and the Sendai Framework, Data availability and quality are improving steadily. The landscape of statistical capacity-
countries have taken concrete steps towards meeting the ambitious aspirations of building is opening up to accommodate collaboration and synergies across increasingly
these transformative plans. Early lessons from the first years of reporting – using the complex data systems. International attention and focused funding across different
Sendai Framework Monitor (SFM) – reiterate previous trends showing the highest toll of targets and indicators are increasing and slowly starting to yield results (e.g. data
disasters being experienced in the most vulnerable segments of the world’s population, availability and study of agricultural losses by crop type).
underlining the gross inequality of burden sharing among countries. Low- and middle-
It is critical that momentum is not lost, and that coordinated, integrated global and national
income countries bear the greatest impact in terms of mortality and yearly average
efforts strengthening data generation, statistical capacity and reporting continue.
economic loss relative to GDP.
There are many countries unable to report adequately on progress in implementing the
Data is traditionally the province of the equipped and the funded. Many national
Sendai Framework and risk-related SDGs. This will not change without a sense of urgency
governments do not have the capacity to analyse and use data, even if they have the
translated into political leadership, sustained funding and commitment for risk-informed
means to collect it. Development actors and the private sector have the capacity, but the
policies supported by accurate, timely, relevant, interoperable, accessible and context-
true dividends of interoperable, convergent data and analytics are missed.
specific data.
 18

HA
ZA
RD
HA
ZA
RD

EX
PO
SU
RE

VU
LN
ER
AB
ILI
TY

HA
ZA
RD
Understanding risk is more than Linking an understanding of Interconnecting all our knowledge
just understanding hazards multiple hazards, plus exposure is complex, but the better linked the
and vulnerability gives a clearer data, the better the interconnected
picture of risk nature of risk is explained
Data, direction, decisions
Action
We cannot expect good plans in the absence of good data. We must resist the temptation We must bring data collection efforts for the Sendai Framework into the domain of
to own data. We must commit to open data platforms, and data sets that seek accuracy official statistics – in coordination with national statistics offices – standardizing event-
and honesty, to show the real picture. People must be put at the centre of data generation disaggregated disaster loss accounting practice in support of more credible analysis and
and collection, so that information collected is contextual and improves our understanding Sendai Framework monitoring.
of how people experience risk and loss, allowing the development of solutions that are
We must invest in physical infrastructure, especially in the information technology sector,
relevant and effective. Risk information must be integrated into development indicators,
to ensure better online reporting and loss accounting at all administrative levels while
and inform the sequencing of planning, budgeting and action.
building capacities in cartography and geospatial data. Data innovations, including
We need to look at indicators afresh, across goals and targets, and establish metrics for integration of geospatial information, as well as citizen-generated data, must be
those dimensions of disaster impacts that accrue to the most vulnerable. Notably, this mainstreamed. Aligned regional targets and indicators (or at least with other countries
should be done by going deeper into distributional analysis, moving away from regional, with similar geopolitical and hazard profiles) should be established so that spatial
national and subnational data to the household level. We must understand in finer detail comparisons can be made.
how shocks affect people’s lives in a systemic way. We must then support governments
to find solutions and influence human behaviour, to successfully prevent the creation and
propagation of risk, as well as to rebound from disasters.
 20

We need to build partnerships with other stakeholders and expert organizations to enable
strong data-sharing networks and comprehensive reporting, including those addressing
the data challenges of the 2030 Agenda. Such partnerships should explore multiple uses

...a sense of urgency

of data, so that there is higher demand and intrinsic incentivization for data collection
and sharing. And we must engage with the private sector (e.g. the insurance industry,
the housing sector and chambers of commerce and industry) for a more comprehensive translated into
capture of economic losses.
political leadership,
These are time-critical actions if the goals of the Sendai Framework and the 2030 Agenda
are to be achieved by the end of the next decade. Urgency is required in improving access sustained funding
to good data, if Member States are to be able to adequately monitor and report on
progress, and determine requirements for course correction.
and commitment
for risk-informed policies
supported by accurate,
timely, relevant, interoperable,
accessible and context-
specific data.

For more, see GAR19

PART I
PART II
Governments – why planning for a rainy day makes sense
Issue Action
Governments have a responsibility for creating an environment in which people prosper Sendai Framework Target (e) requires governments to develop aligned national and local
and the planet thrives. This is non-negotiable. Investing in risk reduction is investing in disaster risk reduction strategies. It is the only target to be met by 2020. These national
the public good, but political cycles, competitive agendas and strained budgets make and local disaster risk reduction strategies are the foundation for the achievement of the
planning and taking responsibility for delivering change difficult. 2030 targets. Progress has been steady, but we are not on track to meet the 2020 target.

Despite the evidence that no one – individual or country – is immune to risk, budgeting National and local governments must shift the emphasis from disaster response
for the “what-if” scenario does not come naturally to governments. But planning and risk- to preventing the creation and propagation of risk. Governments must incentivize
informed investment is common sense and should be translated into action. and demonstrate risk reduction, leading by example. Electorates, non-governmental
organizations and civil society must hold governments accountable for doing so, without
Being able to generate and collect robust data, define risk and implement initiatives that
neglecting their own share of responsibility. Governments therefore need to invest in
respond accordingly make for smart decisions and investments. The predilection for
building and sharing risk data (within and among State institutions, administrative levels
diverting or mobilizing funds for financing recovery and reconstruction after disasters
and the general public), and in using it to formulate context-specific national risk reduction
succeeds only in accumulating risk over time.
strategies.

Governments need to understand the social, ecological and economic dimensions of

exposure and vulnerability. Plans and strategies need to focus on inclusion and equality to
effectively promote whole-of-society resilience. Vulnerability reduction measures written
into national and local sustainable development plans, climate change adaptation plans,
and disaster risk reduction strategies and plans must be linked across sectors, scales and
territories. These strategies and plans need to be underpinned by, and drive resources,
both financial and human, towards risk-informed action.

For more, see GAR19

PART II
PART III
 22
Famine Early

r voir Chemical A Warning

R e s e ccident
Water etion
Social

Depl Epidemic Outbreak

Safety Nets

Recent And
Accurate
Census
Long Term
Public
Labour Migration Populist Rhetoric Planning
Social Division Multiple
Scale/Systems
Commodities Price Spikes Weak Enforcement
Informal Urbanization
Open Source
Deforestation Interoperable
Currency Speculation State Of Emergency Data
Proprietary Data Corruption
Boom
Construction Public Debt Water Scarcity
Tragedy Of The Commons Ethical
Consumption
Ecosystems-
Monoculture Ag
riculture Based
Solutions
t
l Ac ciden t
n mica rmen
tio Che powe S
FACTOR
la ve s
gu -wa erabi
lity Disem N G
eR
e
Hea
t uln AT I
ua
t
hts sity
C rop V
g Pop ulation
urveilla
n ce MITIG
d eq ug ver Growin ease S
Ina Dro B iodi rming ua t e D is
s Of al Wa Inadeq n
Los Glob nical L
imits radatio
Tech m e n t al Deg
ultural Enviro
n
Agric
Inequa
lity
RESS ORS
ING ST
ion
Discr iminat
BUILD

Migration
Displacement
Price Spikes
ation
Po litical Destabiliz
ilization
War Currency Destab

C
EMI
Civil Unrest Food Insecurity
Food Riots
S T
SY URE
F A I L
Risk is everyone’s business
Issue Action
We encounter, contribute to and deflect risk daily. It is human nature to look for the positive We must mobilize to collectively determine solutions. As individuals, we must commit to
angle, and to procrastinate over things that are complex, or for which informed decisions engaging daily with the question: “Am I living today in a way that I can assure my, and my
are difficult. We are especially good at shifting responsibility: thinking that reducing risk children’s tomorrow?” We must recognize that the risk we are accumulating – whether at
is something that can be passed on to a third party – the government, our neighbours, …, the planetary or individual level – is often the function of our own decisions and choices;
our children. our inaction as much as our action.

The truth is that this responsibility is a shared one, and that risk reduction is everyone’s We must honestly review how our relationship with behaviour and choice transfers
business. Risk is ultimately the result of decisions that we all make, either individually or to individual and collective accountability for risk creation, or its reduction. This
collectively, as to what we do and don’t do. understanding should translate into action, for example, by revisiting how and what we
produce and consume, and by reshaping food, energy and transportation systems.
The consequences of inaction in addressing the systemic nature of risk to individuals,
organizations and society are becoming increasingly apparent. Even half a planet away, We must provide decision-friendly scenarios and options at individually relevant geospatial
risk that is allowed to grow unchecked – and in plain sight – can affect us. Just recall the and temporal scales, providing relevant data and information to support people to better
global financial crisis in 2008. While governments are responsible for incentivizing (e.g. understand the nature of their own risk and how to deal with it.
by putting in place rules and regulations) and leading risk reduction, as individuals, we
must own the consequences of our decisions, our action or inaction, and the risks that
we create and propagate. This means fundamental changes in our own behaviour. Each
of us.

For more, see GAR19

CHAPTER 2
PART II
PART III
 24

G
DESTROYIN
RING
IGNO
G
TIN
NA GEN
A STI DER
CR EQU
PRO DELAYING FUNDING ALIT
Y
SAFEGUARDING SILENCING ACCO
UNTA
National Governments BILIT
Y
Non-governmental
Regional Organizations

G
Organizations

ACTIN
IN G RECYCLING

DEL
RT

ING
O
PP

IVE
ISO
G

ION
DIN SU

DISTR

G
APP

RIN
N

LAT

AIDIN
TIT
RISK MA ROP REDUCING
DE ME RIA SUSTAINABLE

PE
ING
AS TIN
UR G
ING DEVELOPMENT

G
TIN
Hazards are less CONSERVING

UP
ISOLATING

RR
predictable

UN
CO

DE
EDUCATING Organizations

RM
Exposure is Grass Roots STIN
G
Individuals INVE ION

INI
ENC

ING
growing US

NG
DISS OUR L
OCIA INC
SHA

AGI
PIR TING NG
Vulnerability is
NS

NG
RIN

CO

TI G

G
compounding RIN
G

EC

IN
E

IZ
OT

OW

IV
PR

NT
TRAPPING EM

CE
Communities

IN
Companies ING ING
NN AT
PL
A NG R
OBSC IDI NE
URING DIV GE
COMP REG
ULA RE
ETING City Governments
TIN
CO G
NC
EA
LIN
G

The individual at the centre of this diagram is you – the

reader. No one is an island. Our actions – how we live in
community, how we interact, how we advocate with our
governments and what products we buy – and the actions
that we don’t take will either contribute to the problem, or to
the solution. Change is not negotiable.
United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction

DISTILLED

Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction United Nations

 26

Disclaimer
The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do
To explore and download the document visit: not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the
United Nations concerning the legal status of any country or territory or of its authorities
gar.unisdr.org
or concerning the delimitations of its frontiers or boundaries. The designations of
country groups in the text and the tables are intended solely for statistical or analytical
convenience and do not necessarily express a judgment about the stage reached by a
particular country or area in the development process. Mention of the names of firms and
To share your comments and news on the commercial products does not imply the endorsement of the United Nations.
GAR on Twitter and Facebook, please use:
This publication may be freely quoted but acknowledgement of the source is requested.

#GAR2019
Citation: UNDRR (2019). Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction.
Geneva, Switzerland. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR).

United Nations 2019. All rights reserved.

Design, graphics and layout: James Brown, DesignisREAL.com

Printing: Imprimerie Centrale.

UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction