THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 1

UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

THE UNDP APPROACH

TO RISK-INFORMED
DEVELOPMENT
March 2022
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 2

Disclaimer :
The views expressed in this document do not represent those of the member
countries of the United Nations, UNDP Executive Board or of those institutions
of the United Nations system that are mentioned herein. Their content is the
full responsibility of the individual authors. The designations and terminology
employed and the presentation of material do not imply any expression or
opinion whatsoever on the part of the United Nations concerning the legal
status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authority, or of its frontiers
of boundaries.

UNDP is the leading United Nations organization fighting to end the

injustice of poverty, inequality, and climate change. Working with our
broad network of experts and partners in 170 countries, we help nations
to build integrated, lasting solutions for people and planet. Learn more
at [Link] or follow at @UNDP.

March 2022
Copyright © UNDP
All rights reserved

Recommended citation: UNDP (2022), The UNDP Approach to Risk-

Informed Development, United Nations Development Programme.

Keywords: risk-informed development, systemic risk, risk governance,

SDGs.

Contact information: Ronald Jackson, Head, Disaster Risk Reduction

and Recovery for Building Resilience Team, UNDP Crisis Bureau,
[Link]@[Link]
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 3

Table of Contents
4 1. Introduction

6 2. The rationale for risk-informed development

10 3. Risk-informed development in the global policy context

13 4. Risk-informed development in the UNDP Strategic Plan

16 5. Lessons from past experiences

19 6. What is shaping UNDP’s risk-informed approach?

21 6.1 Risk governance

21 6.2 Systems thinking

22 6.3 Risk management

22 6.4 Agile and dynamic processes

22 6.5 Area-based approaches

23 6.6 Country context

24 7. The three pillars of UNDP’s risk-informed approach

26 7.1. Country pillar: policy and programme support

38 7.2. Partners pillar: UN system collaboration & partnerships

41 7.3. Internal pillar: risk-informing UNDP

44 8. Next steps

46 References

47 Annex 1: Overview of relevant tools

48 Annex 2: Glossary of terms

THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 4

1.
Introduction
UNDP’s approach to risk-informed development (RID)
is a corporate effort aligned with the UNDP Strategic
Plan 2022-2025 to articulate how UNDP embraces risk-
informed development as one of the accelerators of
sustainable development that will ensure that those who
are left behind participate in and benefit from development
progress and achieve human security. It gives directions
for forging internal and external partnerships for risk-
proofing the future of development and for driving new
resource mobilization opportunities for this line of work
for UNDP. The approach articulates how UNDP’s Global
Policy Network (GPN) can support UNDP Country Offices
and programme countries through existing and innovative
services and tools, while sketching out new ways to
pioneer the approach.

The paper presents the rationale for risk-informed

development, an approach that originated in the field of
disaster risk reduction and that has been expanded in
recent years to embrace climate change related risks and
now demands the integration of an even broader spectrum
of risks linked to health, conflict, environment, economic
shocks, human rights and related drivers such as migration,
human rights, governance and inequality. The COVID-19
pandemic, a disaster in essence,1 is a stark reminder of the
systemic and interconnected nature of risk.

The paper will, therefore, offer reflections

and an approach on how to evolve the
risk-informed paradigm with UNDP to
address systemic and multidimensional
risks in support of UNDP Country Offices
and the countries they serve.
The RID approach was developed by the Disaster Risk
Reduction and Recovery for Building Resilience Team (DRT)
in a broad consultation process with key members of the
UNDP Global Policy Network (GPN) working at global and
regional levels, as well as UNDP Country Offices, Regional
Hubs and partners in the course of 2021.2 It supports the
UNDP-Somalia-2016

implementation of UNDP’s new Strategic Plan 2022-2025.

1. Ilan Kelman, 2020.

2. The consultation process was led by the Disaster Risk Reduction and Recovery
for Building Resilience Team, UNDP Crisis Bureau.
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 5

The UNDP Approach to Risk-Informed Development: What it is and what it is not

What it is What it is NOT

For all practice areas Only for the DRR and CCA practice

A futures-oriented approach/a process A service offer or tool

Supporting transformational change Maintaining the status quo

Addressing systemic risk Addressing conventional risk

A strategic and flexible guidance A blueprint or step-by-step guidance

A pathway to explore and co-create A ready-made solution

Helps risk-inform existing approaches, An add-on, parallel or competing

tools and methodologies approach

Implemented through a portfolio/ Implemented through disconnected

programme approach projects

Cross-practice and interdisciplinary Specialized, siloed solutions

UNDP-Panama-2020
2.
The rationale
for risk-informed
development
The frequency, magnitude and impact of crises
are on the rise, thus undermining progress in
sustainable development.

UNDP-Benin-2014
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 7

The frequency, magnitude and impact of

crises are on the rise, thus undermining
progress in sustainable development.
Despite advances in reducing disaster mortality related to some types of
events, direct economic losses from disasters rose by 68 percent between
the two 20-year periods of 1978-1997 and 1998-2017.3 Whilst economic
impacts have usually been higher in the richer nations, people in poor
nations have been over seven times more likely to die in disaster events
than equivalent populations in the richest nations.4 Impacts are significant in
both private and public infrastructure, leading to the disruption of services
and critical supply chains. This has made access to infrastructure services
for poor communities difficult with immediate and long-term consequences.
This points to the enormous impact disasters can have on development.
Also, global peacefulness deteriorated in 2020 for the fourth year in a row,
and human rights abuses are on the rise.5 Violent conflicts have become
more complex and protracted,6 sparked by a breakdown in the social contract
between governments and citizens. Also, the 2008 global economic crisis,
the 2014 Ebola outbreak, the 2015 Syrian refugee crisis, and most recently the
COVID-19 pandemic are stark reminders of the importance of understanding and
addressing risk in the development process. Issues that emerge slowly over time
can be just as crippling. The costs of climate change, for example, are upsetting
the development trajectories of even the wealthiest of nations.7 These examples
show that the road towards achieving the Sustainable Development
Goals (SDGs) by 2030 is seriously hampered by crises. UNDP programme
countries will soon need to give risk management a bigger priority than
mere economic growth.

The development process itself can be a

major driver of risk.
The relationship between risk and development works in both ways and
forms the core rationale for integrating risk reduction into development
policy, planning and budgeting. Decisions on development trajectories
and investments can contribute to the creation of risk. This is the case
when they lead to populations and economic assets being located in
3. Wallemacq, P., House, R. (2018).
exposed geographic areas; when risks accumulate in urban areas due to
4. When women’s rights and socio-economic status are rapid and unplanned developments; when excessive strain is placed on
not equal to those of men, more women than men tend natural resources and ecosystems; or when social inequalities for some
to die in disasters. Neumayer, E. Plümper, T. (2007).
5. [Link] population groups are exacerbated, resulting in grievances or conflict. Risk-
uploads/2021/06/[Link] informing development, hence, requires transforming the development
6. World Bank and United Nations, 2018.
7. IPPC, 2021.
agenda from within and needs to be led by development actors.8 It
8. See also the ‘development first’ approach to risk cannot be achieved by treating risk merely as an add-on in a silo. The new
management that is spearheaded by the Governance development paradigm, therefore, needs to be able to address both ‘risks
for Resilient Development in the Pacific Programme.
[Link] to’ and ‘risks from’ development.
library/rsd/[Link]
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 8

Risk is now understood as being

multidimensional and systemic, with high
levels of interdependency, non-linearity,
feedback loops and uncertainty.
It is, therefore, paramount that risk reduction and resilience-building
consider multiple and intersecting threats. While systemic risk has always
existed, its local and national expressions are now more frequent and severe
and complemented by manifestations at global scale.9 Risks associated with
natural hazards are often coinciding with epidemics, conflict or economic
shocks that can interact and manifest as crises with cascading effects
across sectors.10 The COVID-19 pandemic clearly exposed that this crisis
is an expression of underlying risks and the differential vulnerability linked
to poverty, inequality and a lack of access to services that are a result of
unsustainable development pathways. The pandemic has been exacerbated
by inadequate risk management policy and gaps in the protection of human
rights. Solely pursing the risk integration process from one angle, therefore,
does not suffice. It requires comprehensive and joined-up efforts to build
resilience that transcends a range of sectors, risks and stakeholders.11 Thus,
risk-informed development can act as the catalyst for resilience-building
across sectors and segments of population.
⊲ Systemic risk, like all other forms of risk, is the result of the
interrelationship of hazard, exposure and vulnerability.
These variables are socially constructed through a range of underlying
drivers, including poverty and inequality, badly planned and managed
urban and infrastructure development, environmental degradation, climate
change, displacement and weak territorial governance. Understanding risk
as a social construct means that the actual crisis trigger – whether related
to conflict, a natural hazard or epidemic – is of secondary relevance
as compared to understanding the existing patterns of exposure and
vulnerability. These are pre-existing conditions that are common to
many different types of risk and can be modelled and estimated, also for
understanding systemic risks.12
⊲ Systemic risk is associated with the everyday exposure of
dispersed populations to repeated or persistent hazard conditions
of low or moderate intensity.13
It does not only manifest in low-frequency and high-severity events that
have major impacts at national and global levels. The cumulative impact
of everyday crises on local and urban contexts is often bigger than that
of large and less frequent events, and with far greater relative impact
on poor and low-income households.14 The failure of local infrastructure
systems, the interruption of local supply chains or ecosystems services,
9. UNDP (Maskrey et al.), 2021. crime, accidents, pollution and disease are all examples of every-day risk.
10. United Nations, 2019. Strengthening water and sanitation, power and energy, health, education
11. United Nations and UNSDG (2021).
12. UNDP (Maskrey et al.), 2021. and infrastructure services and systems are all practical entry points for
13. UNDP (Maskrey et al.), 2021. building resilience in a no-regrets approach with multiple benefits.
14. [Link]
disaster-risk/risk-drivers/poverty-inequality
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 9

In summary, risk is a normal and

inseparable part of economic activities
and development.
It is wired into our development pathways and practices and constructed
through day-to-day decisions by those who have an interest in a particular
pattern of development. Risk governance (see Glossary of Terms in Annex 2)
provides the enabling environment for risk-informed development to improve
the safety of people and critical facilities, to protect the natural and built
environment and to build resilient livelihoods and economic activity. The rapid
accumulation of multidimensional and systemic risk has reached a level that
shaped how risk is governed as a top priority, including practical approaches
to risk-inform development. In doing so, risk should not only be perceived as
leading to something undesirable or unwanted (such as a disaster, climate
impacts, epidemics, conflicts, etc.) but also ensure that risk governance
and related development choices also factor in that uncertainties can bring
benefits and opportunities. It is also noteworthy that the RID approach,
apart from avoiding losses, can have significant co-benefits by stimulating
economic activity due to reduced risks and a safer environment.

UNDP-ZMB
3.
Risk-informed
development in
the global policy
context
The integration of risk into development planning
and budgeting is not a new goal in global policy
processes.

UNDP-Uganda-2018
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 11

The integration of risk into development has its origins in the field of disaster
risk reduction, such as the 1989 Resolution on the International Decade for
Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR), the Yokohama Strategy and Plan of
Action (1994), and the Hyogo Framework for Action: Building the Resilience
of Nations and Communities to Disasters (HFA), which spoke of “integrating
disaster risk considerations more effectively with sustainable development
policies, planning and programming at all levels, preparedness and
vulnerability reduction.” Yet, the integration of disaster risk reduction into
policy and legal instruments remained in most countries at a nascent stage
by the end of the Hyogo decade and, where it had occurred, progress in
implementation was limited.15
⊲ The Sendai Framework on Disaster Risk Reduction committed Member
States to address disaster risk reduction within the context of sustainable
development and poverty eradication and to integrate disaster risk reduction
into policies, plans, programmes and budgets at all levels. It states that
effective disaster risk management and addressing underlying disaster
risk factors through disaster risk-informed public and private investments
contribute to sustainable development and recognizes the importance of an
all-of-society engagement and of integrating disaster risk reduction within
and across all sectors of development for achieving disaster and climate
risk informed development.16 The Sendai Framework also stipulates that
the global community must come to terms with a new understanding of the
dynamic nature of systemic risks, new structures to govern risk in complex,
and adaptive systems and must develop new tools for risk-informed decision-
making that allows human societies to live in and with uncertainty.
⊲ The Paris Agreement on Climate Change focuses specifically on
the reduction of climate change related risks through the integration
of mitigation and adaptation activities into development planning and
through a consideration of the impacts that these activities can have on
poverty eradication, food security and sustainable development. Also, the
Agenda 2030 acknowledges that disasters threaten to reverse much of the
development progress of recent decades and that climate change is one
of the greatest challenges of our time that can undermine the ability of all
countries to achieve sustainable development. There is, hence, overwhelming
agreement in the global policy agenda that the realization of the SDGs
hinges upon the ability to build resilience and to risk-inform development and
that it will thus depend upon the successful implementation of the Sendai
Framework and the Paris Agreement.17
⊲ The Secretary-General’s Prevention Agenda states that “the United Nations
(UN) must uphold a strategic commitment to a culture of prevention” and that
the organization needs “to bring together the capacities of diverse actors
[…] in support of people and countries in managing risks, building resilience
against shocks and averting outbreaks of crises. This means the horizontal
joining-up of all pillars of the UN’s work—peace and security, development,
and human rights—as well as vertical integration in each from prevention to
conflict resolution, from peacekeeping to peacebuilding and sustainable
development.” Recognizing that disaster and conflict risks are a result of similar
underlying causes and multiple vulnerabilities, means that a common analysis
of those risks offers opportunities for risk-informed development strategies and
15. United Nations, 2013. United Nations, 2015. targeted efforts to build resilience and sustain peace through a multidimensional
16. United Nations, 2005. approach. The ‘twin’ 2016 resolutions on sustaining peace provide additional
17. United Nations, 2019.
18. See also UN Peacebuilding Architecture and tools by recognizing that sustainable development and sustaining peace are
Common Agenda on Peace and Security. complementary and mutually reinforcing.18
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 12

Despite this global policy guidance, risk-informed development

is still not a political and economic imperative for public policies.
In countries that already have incorporated risk management
into their policies, the institutions are still weak, while funding,
capacities and multi stakeholder accountability are inadequate
vis-à-vis the magnitude of demand. In the context of COVID-19,
risk management policies must expand to include fiscal and
monetary measures and complex decisions over trade-offs
between health and economic goals.

UNDP-SAO-TOME-PRINCIPE
4.
Risk-informed
development
in the UNDP
Strategic Plan

UNDP-BOLIVIA
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 14

Building the resilience of societies, systems and

development assets to crises and shocks through a risk-
informed development approach that embraces multiple
types of risks, is a logical and important course of action for
a development organization such as UNDP.

The UNDP Strategic Plan 2018-2021

already envisioned this role for UNDP by contributing to

sustainable development and the resilience-building objectives
of the 2030 Agenda. It committed UNDP to help countries
eradicate poverty in all its forms and dimensions, accelerate
structural transformations for sustainable development and
build resilience to crises and shocks. The UNDP Signature
Solution on Resilience explicitly speaks to prevention of crises
and building resilience, with a focus not only on mitigating the
impact of crises on development but also on efforts to curb
the drivers of risk ingrained within development processes
themselves (UNDP, 2018). This has been a strong starting point
for pursuing risk-informed development. However, in practice,
the risk-informed paradigm was not yet fully embraced and
has largely remained siloed endeavours of UNDP’s dedicated
risk management practices such as climate change adaptation,
disaster risk reduction, conflict prevention, health, environmental
management, etc.

The UNDP Strategic Plan 2022-2025

aims to overcome this divide and ensure that risk-informed

development can fully permeate the organizational development
practice.19 It embraces risk-informed development from the
perspective of social inequality including gender and other
factors of the intersectionality of leaving no one behind (LNOB).
For COVID-19, this means promoting public policies for recovery
that transform dominant development pathways that shaped
systemic risks and the pandemic impacts in the first place,
including reducing socio-economic inequalities. The GPN will
have an important role in leading the way for UNDP towards
managing and mitigating multidimensional risks to sustainable
and peaceful development pathways, addressing underlying or
structural factors that create risks and investing in risk governance
capacities through approaches applicable across the range of
19. See also First Regular Session of UNDP Executive development outcomes.
Board of February 2021. [Link]
executive-board/reports-on-sessions
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 15

The approach thus contributes to the overall objectives of sustainable

development and is fundamental for accelerating the three directions of
systemic change that UNDP intends to support under its new Strategic
Plan: building resilience, leaving no one behind and structural transformation.

RID and the three UNDP directions of systemic change:

Resilience-building: Risk-informed development allows for development to
become a vehicle to reduce risk, avoid creating risks and build resilience by
strengthening capacities and governance processes to prevent, mitigate and
respond to crisis, conflict, disasters, and climate, social and economic shocks.

Leaving no one behind: The lives, well-being and health of those left furthest
behind are disproportionately at risk of suffering from the impacts, hazards and
threats that are further entrenching poverty and deepening inequalities. Risk-
informed development can enrich social exclusion analysis and help identify
inequities and vulnerabilities to help prevent unnecessary loss of life and
reverse poverty in a rights-based approach that is centred on empowerment,
inclusion, equity, human agency and human development.

Structural transformation: In countries that are characterized by fast-growing

economies and the accompanying structural transformations, risk-informed
development ensures that investments in systems and structures do not create
new risks, but instead foster green, inclusive and resilient transitions.

The approach is also aligned with related UNDP offers or approaches emerging
within the GPN and the UNDP Regional Bureaux, such as the Prevention
Offer: Development Pathways to Conflict Prevention and Peacebuilding, the
20. See Section 7.3 for more information on how the
risk-informed approach links up across the GPN practice Integrated Governance Offer, the Resilient Recovery Offer, and the Urban
areas. Resilience Strategy.20

Megan Escobosa Photography

5.
Lessons from past
experiences

UNDP-Turkey-2020
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 17

During consultation process that informed the design of the approach, UNDP
experts21 and our partners shared important challenges and barriers in their
work towards risk-informed development that will need to be overcome,
including:
⊲ Governance arrangements, institutional and legislative frameworks
not designed to identify and address risks and to incentivize a systematic
approach in addressing them.
⊲ Technical capacities for analysing multidimensional risks, communicating
and acting on them not being adequate and not uniformly available across
countries and sectors.
⊲ Much of education and development being siloed in disciplines and
sectors that typically do not connect in understanding and solving
multidimensional issues.
⊲ A lack of coordination across countries in understanding the risks and
21. The internal consultation process covered: (i) UNDP
addressing them systematically.
experts engaged in the implementation of many
relevant UNDP programmes and projects, such as ⊲ Development becoming more complex due to new technologies and
the Governance of Climate Change Finance (GCCF) rapid changes.
Programme, SIDA-UNDP Global Programme on
Environmental and Climate Change, Pacific Res4Gov
Programme, UNDP Global Programme on Environmental
⊲ The gendered dimensions of risk not being adequately identified and
and Climate Change, Connecting Business initiative addressed.
(CBi), NDC Global Support Programme, CADRI, and
Crisis Risk Dashboard; (ii) GPN practices such as Conflict
Prevention, Peacebuilding and Responsive Institutions
⊲ A shortage of disaggregated data and analysis to understanding
(CPRI), Nature Climate and Energy (NCE), SDG Finance disproportionate risks and tackling underlying vulnerabilities.
Sector Hub, Recovery Solutions and Human Mobility,
Crisis and Fragility Policy Engagement, Health, SDG ⊲ Siloed international and domestic funding architectures that do not
Integration, Istanbul Center for Private Sector in incentivize systems and multi-risk approaches.
Development; (iii) Regional Hubs in Addis Ababa,
Amman, Dakar, Istanbul, Nairobi, Panama and Suva; and
(iv) UNDP Country Offices in Iraq, Lebanon, Mauritius,
⊲ A dearth of tools and methodologies to foster and support integration,
Philippines, Seychelles and Somalia, and the Syria 3RP. including shortage of interdisciplinary learning opportunities.

The Process of co-creating UNDP’s approach to risk-informed development:

The formulation of UNDP’s approach to risk-informed development has been
informed by a thorough consultation and co-creation process that kicked off with a
Global Consultation on Risk-Informed Development on SparkBlue in early 2021.
The approach also benefitted from a global expert panel that explored the topic
“Evolving the Concept and Practice of Risk-Informed Development” at the UNDP
Development Dialogues on Rethinking Solutions to Crises in the Decade of Action in
April 2021. A series of targeted consultations conducted with members of the UNDP
GPN working at global, regional and country levels from May to August 2021 provided
further opportunities to deep-dive into the issue.
A UNDP Discussion Paper on “The Social Construction of Systemic Risk: Towards
an Actionable Framework for Risk Governance” was commissioned to contribute
to the understanding of and discussion of systemic risk and how to promote risk
governance at local and national levels, while offering a guide for promoting cross-
thematic collaboration within UNDP on risk reduction and prevention.
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 18

Lessons also indicate that risk-informing development at

the local and subnational levels encounters in principle
challenges and constraints that are similar to those at the
national level but that are more pronounced since resources
and capacities gaps are usually greater.

For local level efforts to be successful and take root, they are
best to be pursued as part of a wider national undertaking
that spans all scales of government administration, several
sectors and groups of stakeholders.22
UNDP’s experience in integrating disaster and climate
risks into development has been particularly insightful,
as this is the area where the bulk of our support to risk-
informed development has concentrated to date (albeit not
yet in a multi-risk approach). Whilst there have been many
encouraging experiences also globally, the effort is still at a
nascent stage as per the Sendai Monitor, which measures
the implementation of the Sendai Framework. These gaps
are even more pronounced when it comes to integrating
multidimensional or systemic risk into development
planning and budgeting as this is still an emerging field with
considerable challenges in the conceptual understanding
and practical approaches.
Yet, joined-up or integrated approaches in mainstreaming
various types of risk and cross-cutting issues, such
as disaster risk reduction, climate adaptation, conflict
prevention, gender equality, and transformative
pandemic related recovery, are likely to result in more-
cohesive, effective and impactful action. In many capacity-
constrained contexts, such as the Pacific island countries,
integrated approaches to disaster risk reduction and
climate adaptation have gained much traction, but some
voices have cautioned about the risk of overburdening
already-strained capacities.23
A risk-informed approach that is grounded in the
understanding of risk as multidimensional, however,
[Link]

is likely to resolve capacity problems in the medium to

long term by adding efficiency, avoiding duplication and
introducing digital solutions and advanced technology.

22. United Nations, 2015.

23. [Link]
policy-analysis-disaster-risk-reduction-and-climate-
change-adaptation
6.
What is shaping
UNDP’s risk-
informed approach?

UNDP-Jamaica-2018
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 20

The approach is deeply rooted in risk governance, systems thinking,

area-based approaches, agile and dynamic processes, risk management
and context-specific solutions. The approach produces reduced levels of
vulnerability and hazard exposure and thus contributes to prevention and
resilience-building in support of sustainable development (see figure).
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 21

6.1. Risk governance

The COVID-19 pandemic has unleashed a discourse within UNDP and
beyond on the future of governance and the need to reconfigure known
governance systems to better deal with a new age of risks.24
The rapid and uncontrolled spread of COVID-19 starkly exposed drivers
intrinsic to governance processes such as the interconnectedness of
the global economy, governance failures at multiple and highest levels,
transborder trade, mass air travel, labour migration, and inadequate digital
governance maturity that has allowed the spread of misinformation.
The concept of risk governance has evolved in UNDP since the early 2000s from
a focus on ‘strengthening institutional and legislative systems for disaster risk
management’, which pursued a DRR-centric view, to today’s ‘risk governance’
concept. This was prompted by the challenges we faced in fragile countries and
the realization that single-track solutions for disaster risk needed to integrate
other types of risk, such as climate and conflict risks.25 By embracing ‘risk
governance’ for the first time, the wider governance framework became
the starting point for the management of interlocked systems of risk, to
make risk governance an organic process in the formulation of decisions
about the trade-offs and alternative pathways to sustainable development,
including budgeting and fiscal/financial management.

Risk-informing development is thus predominantly a governance

process. Risk is conditioned by each society’s perceptions, needs,
demands, decisions, behaviours and practices, including the
prevailing political economy, gender relations and inequalities.
Risk-informed development aims to ensure the systemic
integration of risk considerations into development policy,
planning and budgeting. By doing so, it advances overall risk
governance, which, in turn, sets the enabling environment for risk-
informed development.

6.2. Systems thinking

As previously explained, multidimensional risk manifests as crises across
global, regional, national, subnational and local scales with knock-on effects
among interconnected social, governance, ecological and physical systems.
This necessitates a systems approach to risk-informed development that allows
for the identification of risks and their interlinkages across systems in specific
24. UNDP, 2020. geographic areas. A systems approach also facilitates the management of
25. Planitz, 2015.
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 22

the trade-offs between different interests and policy options across systems
and can be used to describe the fundamental relationships among risks and
sustainable development issues at multiple levels.26

6.3. Risk management

Risk-informed development requires a much greater focus on prospective
risk management practices that foster actions that anticipate and avoid the
creation of future risks. Currently, most risk management strategies still rely
on measures that assume that the threats will happen eventually, such as: (i)
corrective measures that reduce existing levels of risk (e.g., retrofitting key
infrastructure and homes, mediation and conciliation to diffuse contention
before it escalates); (ii) reactive measures that foster response, early warning
and preparedness; and (iii) compensatory measures to absorb impacts
of crises (e.g., recovery, insurance or social safety nets). Prospective risk
management, in comparison, aims to identify and prevent crisis events from
ever happening in the first place and provides opportunities to manage
uncertainty and quickly evolving risk dynamics. All risk management
strategies aim to reduce vulnerability and exposure to threats and hazards
and to increase capacities.

6.4. Agile
and dynamic processes
UNDP experience has shown that countries are pursuing a range of
different entry points in their quests to risk-inform development. Hence,
there are no ‘blueprint’ approaches. This makes risk-informing development
a dynamic process. Since development does not follow a linear path, it is
important to be sufficiently flexible and agile to seize the opportunity to
risk-inform development when and where the political economy is ripe.
Given increasing levels of uncertainty, the ability to quickly adjust to changing
contexts is paramount and needs to be boosted by foresight analysis.
In UNDP’s practice, five entry points have emerged through which the
integration of risk into development can be fostered flexibly and dynamically,
namely, knowledge, organization, policy, stakeholders and finance.27

6.5. Area-based approaches

Integrating risk into development strategies and plans is highly context specific.
A country’s governance arrangements and capacities, the hazards and
prevailing risk drivers, the political economy as well as the cultural and social
26. United Nations and UNSDG, 2021. ODI and UNDP, make-up of society will need to be taken into consideration when devising an
2019. appropriate course of action. None of these will have significant impact unless
27. UNDP’s approach to risk-inform development
is grounded in UNDP’s disaster and climate risk territorial governance is strengthened at the local and subnational levels – in
governance practice, which provides a solid basis that urban and rural areas – through resources, know-how and capacities. Risk-
can be built upon to embrace a wider gamut of risks.
The entry points are also applied in the UNDP ‘Risk-
informed development that addresses systemic risk in local social services,
Informed Development: Strategy for Tool Integrating infrastructure systems, supply chains and ecosystems services yields the
Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Adaptation into greatest traction in achieving the 2030 Agenda. Community initiative,
Development’ (UNDP, 2020), which is informed by
country experiences over the past decade. participation and people-centred approaches are essential ingredients.
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 23

6.6. Country context

The risk-informed approach is relevant across the spectrum of contexts in
which UNDP operates. Whilst it has been acknowledged that risk-informed
development needs to become a normal and inseparable part of development
for achieving resilience and the SDGs, it is evenly applicable for risk-
informing recovery and stabilization processes that are also embedded in
sustainable development and aim to reduce existing and future risk through
‘building back better’ and ‘green’ investments. This offers opportunities
for ensuring that resilience and risk reduction are adequately resourced in
recovery and stabilization plans. Risk-informed development should also
be a core element of our contribution to the humanitarian-development-
peace collaboration in crises and fragile situations by embedding risk
considerations into the context analysis, planning and monitoring of joint
humanitarian-development-peace action.

Aboodi Vesakaran
7.
The three pillars
of UNDP’s risk-
informed approach

UNDP-Burkina-Faso-2020
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 25

The UNDP approach to advance risk-informed development is organized

in three pillars of support:

COUNTRY PILLAR PARTNERS PILLAR INTERNAL PILLAR

Policy and programme UN System collaboration Risk-informing UNDP
support and partnerships

Implementing the approach will require an organization-wide effort across

a broad cross-section of UNDP bureaux, teams and practice areas (see
figure above).
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 26

7.1. Country pillar :

policy and programme support
The opportunities to embed ‘risk’ at the heart of development at country level
are varied and context specific. The most obvious times are when countries
embark on a new development planning cycle at national, sectoral or
subnational level; during constitutional or legal reviews; or the budget-making
processes. However, in addition to these conventional opportunities, UNDP
can pull a much wider range of levers for risk-informing development. These
are presented in the form of five strategic entry points (see box).

The five strategic entry points to support risk-informed development.

Knowledge and evidence

Driving the risk-informed process through evidence, risk awareness and
understanding the links between risk and development. Entry points
include risk assessment, awareness and education, and ME.

Policy coherence
Fostering policy coherence, complementarities, co-benefits and no-regrets
solutions that address multidimensional and systematic risk; managing policy
trade-offs between competing policy objectives; and supporting long-term
collective goal setting and prioritization through futures analysis and scenario-
building. Entry points include leadership and advocacy; legislation and
regulation; policies, strategies and plans; and standards.

Risk-informed organizations and implementation

Strengthening capacities in risk governance; adaptive planning; coordination;
application of procedures and tools in support of risk-informed development;
and pursuing portfolio approaches that foster integrated programming.

People-centred and stakeholder-driven policymaking

and implementation
Ensuring no one is left behind and that the most vulnerable and at-risk
populations have agency in the risk-informed development process and benefit
directly from it; and understanding the political economy analysis influence
development decisions and investments that impact risk and resilience.

Sustainable financing for risk-informed development

Supporting financing solutions that blend public, private, domestic and
international resources; accelerating allocations to the local level; and
increasing access to pooled and global funds. Entry points include budgeting
and expenditure analysis; public and private sector resource mobilization; risk
financing and insurance; and risk-informing investments.
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 27

The selection or the combination of entry

points that determine a UNDP support
package will depend on the country
context and the prevailing opportunities
in the political economy.

The answer to how the approach will ‘land’ in any

particular context and what concrete results it will achieve,
must be established specifically for each country or
geography. Rather than predetermining activities to risk-
inform development, smaller and targeted experimental
interventions can help to stimulate momentum before
escalating to replication and broader scale. This also
resonates with the innovation principles of ‘agile
development’ and adaptive management.

UNDP can assist countries to agree on a roadmap to

advance the risk-informed development paradigm
across different SDGs, development sectors and types
of risks by identifying the most strategic mix among the
five entry points in terms of their ability to accelerate
risk-informed development in a specific context. Such a
roadmap could focus on:

⊲ Strengthening advocacy and buy-in for risk-

informed development;

⊲ Conducting an initial diagnostic review of the

current state of risk-informed development in
the country;

⊲ Identifying the practical measures for the

strategic entry points; or monitoring progress
and impact of the path taken.

The aim is to support countries on their quest toward

achieving sustainable and more resilient development
and the risk-informed approach is the vehicle or means to
UNDP-Angola-2019

that end (see the following table for an exemplary theory

of change).
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 28

Exemplary Theory of Change for risk-informed development

Entry Points Outputs Outcome Impact

Generated, maintained and
Knowledge
applied multidimensional risk
& Evidence
information and knowledge
Adopted and implemented
coherent policy frameworkds
Policy coherence
that reduce multidimensional and Strengthened
systemic risk Resilient
the governance
& sustainable
Risk-informed Strengthened adaptive and of systemic risk
development
organization integrated risk governance and Embedded the
Nations and
& implementation organizational capacities full range of risks
communities
(to and from
are resilient and
development) in
Risk-informed benefit from
Implemented people-centered the development
organization sustainable
and stakeholder driven solutions process at all
& implementation develoment
scales

Sustainable Leveraged necessary financing

financing for for risk-informed development
risk-informed investments that foster integrated
development solutions across the range of risks

Across the spectrum of GPN practice areas, UNDP has many products, tools or
services at its disposal that can support a country’s journey on its path towards
risk-informed development and resilience. Whilst several of these are readily
available for application, others would need to be adapted or developed from
scratch to ensure a multi-risk management approach. Importantly, our support
is not about offering a solution, but about accompanying countries on their
path to build resilience into their sustainable development efforts by enabling
them to assimilate tools and identify pathways to address their own problems
and challenges related to systemic and multidimensional risk.

Overview of UNDP
products, tools and
services that support risk-
informed development:

The following provides an overview of UNDP products, tools and

services that support risk-informed development under each
strategic entry point, noting that they could fit under several entry
points and that this may not be an exhaustive list. Implementing
these tools and services contributes to the achievement of the
outputs stated in the above theory of change. Some indicative
country examples will be featured to give an insight in the type
of country-level engagement whilst noting that truly multi-risk-
informed support is still emerging.
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 29

KNOWLEDGE EVIDENCE FOR RISK-

INFORMED DEVELOPMENT
Assessment analysis:

⊲ Applying, adapting and linking the range of assessment methodologies

in the toolbox of risk and development practitioners with the aim to foster
a data ecosystem in support of risk-informed development:

● Assessments of systemic, multidimensional and compound risks

● Analysis of multidimensional vulnerability
● Comparison and integration of the results of conflict, climate,
disaster, health and environmental assessments and agreement on
priority risks
● Expansion of National Risk Atlases to reflect a wider range of
risks beyond natural hazard risks
● Damage and loss accounting systems to quantify, capture
and report as a contribution to understanding systemic and
multidimensional risk
● Government-managed risk information data platforms or risk
registers
● Integrated human impact analysis and post-disaster needs
assessments (PDNAs)

⊲ Understanding how risk is generated, understanding social norms,

practice and societal behaviours and providing the evidence base for
risk-informed decisions of the public and private sectors.
28. MIDIMAR, 2018.
29. [Link]
presscenter/articles/2021/risk-and-vulnerability-atlas-
⊲ Projecting loss and damage trends into the future for a series of
[Link] scenarios and policy choices.

National Risk Atlases:

The Rwanda National Risk Atlas provides a comprehensive assessment of existing
risks at the national and local levels across the country’s 30 districts.28 The Atlas
features sex-disaggregated data on population exposure to risks related to
earthquakes, landslides, storms and droughts. Since its launch in 2015, the Risk
Atlas helped update the national and district land use master plans, the Rwanda
Building Code and district development plans. In Uganda, the National Risk and
Vulnerability Atlas was launched in early 2021. It provides data on various risks
that the country is facing, indicating the vulnerability of various communities and
offering recommendations to enhance the resilience of these communities to risk
in all its dimensions.29 An extension of the Risk Atlases to other forms of risk could
be further explored.
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 30

Multidimensional Vulnerability Analysis in Small Island Development States:30

UNDP constructed a multidimensional vulnerability index (MVI) to account for both
long-term structural vulnerabilities as well as the recent weaknesses uncovered by
the COVID-19 pandemic. Using 11 indicators for 128 countries (including 34 SIDS),
the MVI demonstrates that all but five SIDS are far more vulnerable than their
income level would suggest. This shows that vulnerability measurement needs to
move beyond a narrow focus on economic or environmental vulnerability with a
multidimensional approach to assessing countries’ structural vulnerabilities to a
variety of shocks.

Damage and Loss Accounting Systems:

The quantification, capture and reporting of damage and losses has become a
premier issue at the nexus of systemic and multidimensional risk. These are
important evidence for disaster reduction and recovery, pandemic response,
in climate change and sustainable development. UNDP has been supporting
30 countries to-date. Loss and damage data sit at the crux of a set of practical
applications, research and evidence-based policy and budgeting. All accounting
systems are owned and operated by governments in these countries. An excellent
example is Indonesia’s inaRISK Platform, which started with the loss and damage
database and has multiple uses.

Awareness education:

⊲ Fostering ownership, understanding and application of comprehensive

and systemic risk information by decision-makers and stakeholders from
humanitarian, development and peacebuilding backgrounds.

⊲ Facilitating dialogues across sectors and disciplines on the key

systemic risk scenarios in country, the challenges and underlying causes
and factors.

⊲ Facilitating agreement on policy, technical and professional and

standards across key risk management practices.

⊲ Integrating the new risk-informed paradigm in primary, secondary and

tertiary education systems and graduate programmes.

⊲ Supporting public education and awareness programmes on the two-

way relationship between risk and development.

Research local knowledge:

⊲ Supporting innovative, interdisciplinary and applied research

(technical, scientific, local, indigenous knowledge) in support of the new
risk-informed paradigm.

30. [Link]
⊲ Linking data rigor with risk perception and risk reimagination involving
multidimensional-vulnerability-index local populations, academia and think-tanks.
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 31

⊲ Fostering experimentation and learning.

⊲ Organizing regional and cross-regional lessons-learned dialogues
and knowledge products.

The UNDP Morocco Accelerator Lab – tapping into 350 minds across six time
zones for COVID-19:31

The collective #HackTogether experience surfaced 26 viable ideas to aid in the

fight against COVID-19. It brought together developers and design thinkers in a safe
creative space and fostered the connections needed to start projects that matter.
Following #HackTogether, teams were prompted to continue onwards to gain user
validations for their ideas. With the help of the organizing team and a line-up of highly
skilled facilitators, some teams are following through with their projects with linkages
to funding and workable prototypes in order to turn the excitement of the event into
successful start-ups that contribute to COVID-19 response.

Monitoring, evaluation compliance:

⊲ Supporting impact monitoring of the new risk-informed development

paradigm through diagnostics and results frameworks related to
development, prosperity and well-being.

⊲ Drawing up dashboards of relevant indicators (building on existing

31. [Link] measurements related to SDGs, Sendai, vulnerability and resilience).
minds-across-6-time-zones-for-covid-19-heres-what-
we-re-sensing-8651ecc56052
32. [Link]
⊲ Conducting regular diagnostic reviews of entry points and roadmaps
sites/16/2019/04/[Link] for risk-informed development.

The ME Framework of the Lebanon Crisis Response Strategy:32

The strategy is accompanied by a joint plan between the Government of Lebanon
and its international and national partners, including UNDP, and aims to respond to the
country’s challenges related to the influx of Syrian refugees. The plan is pursued in a
holistic and comprehensive manner through multi-year planning towards longer-term
development. It aims to achieve four strategic objectives that are addressed through
interventions across 10 sectors and seven cross-cutting issues are mainstreamed across
sectors. An inter-sector ME framework for 2017-2020 provides a multi-year framework
for measuring progress against the LCRP’s expected impacts, ensuring transparency
and facilitating strategic and programmatic adjustments. The inter-sector framework
provides clarity on impact measurement and the causal linkages from sector outcomes
to impact. These causal relationships are further detailed in each sector strategy and
can guide subsequent independent evaluations of the overall response by partners.
The ME is coordinated and managed at all three levels of the LCRP institutional and
coordination architecture.
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 32

RISK-INFORMED POLICY
Policy coherence:

⊲ Fostering coherence and complementarities of legislative frameworks,

strategies, policy and plans that explicitly incentivize risk-informed
development.

⊲ Implementing co-benefits and no-regrets solutions that address

multidimensional and systemic risks.

Dominica’s National Resilience Development Strategy (NRDS) 2030:33

This strategy is a national multisectoral policy document that outlines the priorities that
government will pursue for sustainable economic growth in the face of global realities.
It explicitly incorporates the notion of systemic risk and the idea that climate change will
affect many different economic sectors. It also recognizes that the country’s social and
economic systems will play an important role in determining their resilience. Addressing
climate change impacts in isolation is therefore considered unlikely to achieve the
desired development outcomes for the country.34

Visioning and trade-offs:

33. [Link]
national-development-strategies/the-national-
resilience-development-strategy-dominica-2030
⊲ Supporting long-term collective goal-setting in support of the new
34. [Link] risk-informed paradigm and prioritization through foresight, futures and
construction-systemic-risk-towards-actionable- scenario analysis.
framework-risk-governance
35. [Link] ⊲ Organizing consultations to manage the trade-offs between seemingly
incompatible policy objectives related to economic benefits, risk management/
resilience and alignment with the SDGs.

Reviving the Aral Sea Region:35

The Aral Sea used to be the source of life and livelihoods to millions of people. But
due to mismanaged irrigation, large-scale cotton production and rising temperatures,
the lake has shrunken to only 10 percent of its original size since the 1960s. This
has caused major challenges: fishing ports and farming lands are dry, drinking water
is scarce and dust and salt from the exposed seabed have increased the region’s
mortality rate. UNDP is working to revive the region – economically, socially and
environmentally – to improve the lives of millions. UNDP is supporting Uzbekistan to
turn the region into a ‘zone of environmental innovations and technology’ and uncover
key barriers to systemic change – to ensure that people have sustainable livelihoods,
good health, clean water and fresh air. A multidisciplinary team that includes innovation,
technology and policy specialists is helping the government design a roadmap to
operationalize the zone, which will be followed by implementation of a portfolio of
integrated interventions.
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 33

Leadership:

⊲ Boosting national and local leadership and advocacy for a multi-risk

approach to risk-informed development.

RISK-INFORMED ORGANIZATIONS
IMPLEMENTATION
Capacity development:

⊲ Strengthening anticipatory and risk governance capacities (e.g.,

foresight, futures, scenario analysis and stress testing), including through
capacity assessment and diagnostics.

⊲ Strengthening mechanisms for accountability and compliance with

the new risk-informed development paradigm.

⊲ Developing learning and training packages on the new risk-informed

paradigm that features case studies.

The CADRI Capacity Diagnostics:36

The Capacity for Disaster Reduction Initiative (CADRI) is a global partnership
composed of 20 humanitarian and development organizations, including UNDP,
that is pooling its members’ resources, knowledge and practices and leveraging
their comparative advantages. CADRI provides countries with a one-stop shop
mechanism to mobilize expertise in risk reduction in various areas ranging
from agriculture to environment, education, cultural heritage, human mobility,
infrastructure, health, nutrition, and water and sanitation. The capacity diagnostics
process deploys multidisciplinary expertise in a government-led and multi-
stakeholder process enabling an in-depth assessment of national, local as well
as sector-specific capacities in five areas of interest (governance, implementation
capacity, financing, knowledge, and technology equipment), which are weighed
against each other as entry points for investment in disaster risk reduction and
climate change adaptation interventions.

Programmes projects:

⊲ Supporting development planning and sector departments as they

apply and implement risk-informed policy and plans through their
development programmes and projects in a systems approach.

⊲ Fostering portfolio approaches through a strategic mix of short-/

medium-/long-term interventions that cut across different risk
management practices to address systemic risk.

⊲ Facilitating sustained and catalytic investments in support of

transformational changes at systems and behavioural level towards risk-
informed development.
36. [Link]
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 34

The Bangladesh National Resilience Programme:

UNDP in Bangladesh works to improve national-level capacities for risk-informed,
gender-responsive and disability-inclusive development planning. In 2020, the
programme developed a framework and tools for Disaster Impact Assessment
(DIA) agreed by the National Planning Commission to promote risk-informed public
investment. In 2021, persons with disabilities were empowered to participate in the
local Disaster Management Councils (DMCs) and, as a result, their risk exposure
could be reduced. In 2021, 1,723 members of the disaster management council,
CPP and FPP volunteers and 76 journalists were qualified on gender integration
in disaster risk management and resilience-building. The programme provided
skills and grants to about 2,700 disaster-vulnerable women and engaged them
effectively in DRR and CCA actions. Overall, the national resilience programme has
helped improve the capacity of selected public institutions to make risk-informed,
gender-responsive disaster and recovery management decisions for recurrent and
mega disasters.

Coordination responsibilities:

⊲ Supporting engagement of public institutions working on development

planning, finance, sectors and risk management, including local-level
governance systems, in the new risk-informed paradigm.

⊲ Fostering thematic platforms on key themes related to risk-informed

development at regional, national or local level to drive innovation and
learning.
⊲ Forging regional and subregional RID approaches that are adapted to
specific geographies and challenges.

Procedures tools:
⊲ Assisting the formulation of checklists, guidelines, standards, tools or
methodologies that support the implementation of RID objectives or results.

PEOPLE-CENTERED STAKEHOLDER-
DRIVEN RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT
Leaving no one behind:

⊲ Ensuring the most vulnerable and at-risk populations have agency in

the risk-informed process and benefit directly from it.

⊲ Understanding disproportionate risks and vulnerabilities of different

population groups, including through the LNOB assessment framework,
the gender and planet analysis tool, or gender markers.

⊲ Analysis and strengthening employment policies for the most

vulnerable.
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 35

Vulnerability mappings and analyses: UNDP, under the regional DX4Resilience

project, 37 has conducted vulnerability mappings and analyses in Nepal, the
Philippines and Sri Lanka that strengthened the governments’ understanding of who
the most vulnerable are, where they are located, the disaster risks they face and
which priority needs need addressing to increase their preparedness to disasters.
The findings from the Philippines, for example, provided strong evidence on the
ways in which women are vulnerable to disasters. 38 This greater understanding
enables the governments’ evidence-based decision-making processes to support
vulnerable groups and will support the achievement of the LNOB agenda. UNDP, in
partnership with the Japan Bosai Platform (JBP), an association of the DRR-related
Japanese private sector, will use the findings from the vulnerability mappings and
analyses to identify potential digital solutions that build upon the governments’
efforts for inclusive multi-hazard early warning systems.

Political economy analysis:

⊲ Understanding interests and motives of stakeholder groups that
influence development decisions and investments that impact on risk
levels, including gender-differentiated interests.

⊲ Agreeing on acceptable levels of risk that a society is willing to accept

in a consultative process.

Shock-responsive social protection:

⊲ Designing risk-informed social protection programmes to address the
risk of vulnerable groups to intersecting hazard threats, including through
better identification and targeting of vulnerable groups, anticipatory
action to reduce the impact of crises events, preventing negative coping
strategies, and resilience-building.

Multi-stakeholder engagement:
⊲ Facilitating civic dialogues to generate RID ownership through SDG
Platforms, Country Support Platforms, Accelerator or Future Labs to
trigger transformational change beyond traditional outcomes and new
approaches that fit the complexity of today’s development challenges.

⊲ Ensuring the engagement of all RID protagonists that, through their

behaviour and decisions, influence societal risk, including government,
civil society, partnerships, networks (South-South, North-North),
academia, media and private sector (corporations, for-profit business,
business associations and networks, SMEs).

⊲ Employing a whole-of-society approach through the active participation

of key stakeholder groups, including women, children, youth, persons with
disabilities, people living with HIV/AIDS, older persons, LGBTI, indigenous
people, refugees and internally displaced persons and migrants.
37. [Link]
home/programmes-and-initiatives/[Link] ⊲ Employing a whole-of-government approach that engages multiple sectors,
38. [Link] planning, finance, parliaments, development coordination mechanisms,
home/blog/2021/[Link]
infrastructures for peace, and multi-sector forums related to DRR/CCA.
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 36

From climate change to systems change in the Pacific:

Through the UNDP Governance for Resilient Development (Gov4Res) project,
UNDP is designing an approach to influence climate and development financing to
achieve more effective outcomes from climate-related investments in the region. It
does this through a systems lens by targeting multiple layers or ‘entry-points’ of a
country system that have the potential to collectively transform an entire system to
address the core drivers of vulnerability to climate change. This requires ‘agility’ to
infiltrate any part of a system from local, national to regional levels (i.e., rural/urban
development actors, national planning and budgetary processes, accountability
mechanisms and large-scale infrastructure investments). At the country level,
this is resulting in more programmatic responses to climate risks for community
development projects in Fiji and Solomon Islands, formulation of new resilience-
financing functions within the Ministry of Finance in Tonga, integration of climate
change and disaster risk criteria into investment appraisal processes in Tuvalu,
risk-informed community-led planning feeding through to national development
in Vanuatu, and the inclusion of climate risk as a parameter for budget scrutiny by
parliamentarians in Tonga.

FOSTERING SUSTAINABLE FINANCING

Assessment analysis:
⊲ Conducting Public Expenditure and Institutional Reviews (PEIR) for
assessing allocations to risk-informed development and understanding public
financial management decisions over RID priorities.

⊲ Conducting cost-benefit analysis of risk-informed investments and achieve

a better understanding of the cost of no action.

⊲ Carry out economic and insurance industry modelling to understand how

risk reduction investment contributes to economic growth and the alleviation
of poverty.

Public Expenditure and Institutional Reviews (PEIRs):

UNDP has globally supported the application of the Climate PEIR diagnostic
tool. Building on this experience of the analysis conducted on more than 30
countries, UNDP partnered with the Asian Development Bank to adapt the
methodology to also assess disaster risk management-related policy, institutional
and public expenditure in South-East Asia (Lao, Thailand and Vietnam) as a
basis to recommend integrating of disaster risk reduction concerns into budget
reforms. The same approach was used in Africa, where the Climate PEIR was
adapted to DRR in countries such as Mauritius, Malawi and Kenya.  
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 37

Resource mobilization:
⊲ Supporting long-term RID financing solutions that blend public, private,
domestic and international resources.

⊲ Strengthening the allocation of financial resources to local-level

stakeholders and communities.

⊲ Supporting the access to pooled and global funds (e.g., SDF fund, PB Fund,
Climate Funds).

⊲ Fostering public-private partnerships to foster RID.39

⊲ Exploring opportunities taxation to finance resilience-building.

Risk-Informed investment and financial policy:

⊲ Fostering the active engagement of ministries of finance, budgeting,

planning and development, NDMAs, regulatory bodies and physical and
social planning departments to increase the integration of intersecting
risks into all public financial policy.

⊲ Supporting risk-informed Integrated National Financing Frameworks (INFF)

to ensure that financing strategy and priorities consider risk reduction.

⊲ Integrating risk into investment decision-making at all levels and developing

and implementing a common approach to accurately assess, and price risks
to incentivize resilient investments.

⊲ Addressing the issue of de-risking financial flows and investments in

humanitarian and fragile contexts.40

Integrated National Financing Frameworks:

UNDP has provided technical leadership in supporting Ministries of Finance to
develop Integrated National Financing Frameworks in more than 70 countries (60
funded through the Joint SDG Fund), working together with Resident Coordinator
Offices, UN Country Teams and over 17 agencies. UNDP’s support for INFFs
has provided a vehicle for the delivery of integrated GPN support, for example
in promoting financing for gender equality and in taking forward UNDP’s climate
promise with a framework for financing NDCs. Other risks could also be integrated.
UNDP has established the INFF Dashboard to track the operationalization of INFFs
at the national and cross-country levels.

Insurance and risk financing:

⊲ Increasing utilization of sovereign risk finance and inclusive insurance
39. For example, the creation of an SDG investor to strip and transfer away levels of risk from vulnerable countries and
map focusing only on the disaster risk reduction and
recovery space to attract investments from the private communities.41
sector.
40. [Link]
de-risking-humanitarian-action
41. For example, the UNDP Insurance and Risk Finance
work to match development of risk-finance solutions
for vulnerable countries with investments in long-term
governance of risk finance and insurance.
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 38

7.2 Partners pillar:

UN system collaboration
& partnerships
UNDP as an integrator

Data Analysis :
Collate, analyse and translate risk data to inform
development decisions

Policy Programme Support :

Support countries reframe questions diagnose the
Transformational complex challenge of risk-informing development through
multiple entry points
change for
risk-informed
development
Innovation Learning :
Applying flexible, context-specific and agile approaches to
hamess transformational change

Finance :
Accessing development finance in addition to financing for
dedicated risk management pratices

Due to the comprehensiveness of the risk-informed approach, UNDP will

need to pursue this agenda in close collaboration with other UN System
organizations and partners that are contributing to this field. Whilst most of
them pursue a sector-specific approach, UNDP is in the unique position to
push the risk-informed agenda across sectors by working with ministries and
departments of national, physical and social planning and finance, as well as
National Disaster Management Authorities.42

Strategic partnerships will make UNDP’s risk-informed approach more

impactful and knowledge-based and allow us to address the complexities
of present-day development in a joined-up approach. UNDP’s role is
that of an ‘integrator’ to help provide the right enabling environment for
communities, countries and partners to work together towards achieving
the transformational change required to genuinely risk-inform development
42. In many countries, NDMAs are not only limited to (see above figure).
managing natural hazard risks, but also technological
and biological risks.
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 39

Below is an overview of the most critical partners that UNDP is advising to

deepen its collaboration with and the reasons why.

Partnerships with government:

⊲ Ensuring the ownership of the risk-informed approach at national,
subnational and local levels.

Partnerships with UN System entities:

⊲ Supporting UN Teams at country level with applying a resilience
lens in the UN Sustainable Development Cooperation Frameworks.
The UN Common Guidance on Helping Build Resilient Societies, which
is grounded in a systems approach, provides practical insights on how
this can be practically achieved. UNDP could take the lead in providing
facilitation and hands-on technical support for the application of specific
tools in support of resilience-building, including developing and rolling out
the upcoming learning package in support of the UN Resilience Guidance.

⊲ Collaborating with individual UN agencies to jointly drive progress

in risk-informed development in specific sectors or thematic areas, i.e.,
with UNDRR on the priorities lined out in the UNDP-UNDRR Statement of
Intent; with UN Women to explore gender-responsive and risk-informed
development; with OCHA and other humanitarian partners on anticipatory
actions and risk-informing the HDP nexus; with UNICEF on risk-informed
and child-rights-focused planning and programming; with IOM IDM and
UNHCR on curbing displacement, migration and the reintegration of
internally displaced persons; and other agencies.

Partnerships with research institutions, academia and

think-tanks:
⊲ Generating cutting-edge knowledge and expertise to drive global
advocacy and policy frameworks through a feed-back loop that gives
access to lessons, successes and challenges on the ground. This
would also entail ensuring that a risk language is used that is commonly
understood and can transcend disciplines.

Partnerships with IFIs:

⊲ Encouraging long-term resilience and risk-informed development
through loans, credits and grants to national governments for economic
and socially sustainable development.

⊲ Building on the results of the World Bank’s Risk and Resilience

Assessments (RRAs) that identify the multidimensional risks that affected
a country’s vulnerability to economic, political, government and social
breakdown and violence.

Partnership with the private sector:

⊲ Delivering risk transfer solutions, from the individual and family levels
to the sovereign in collaboration with the insurance industry, including the
utilization of insurance modelling, analysis and scenarios for a range of
government decision-making.
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 40

⊲ Ensuring that risk reduction is considered in significantly more

investment in developing countries and reducing risk to that investment
and in the surrounding environment. Both the Coalition for Climate Resilient
Investment (CCRI) and the Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure
(CDRI) are two global initiatives working in this space.

⊲ Fostering public-private partnerships to help overcome uncertainties

that private sector faces when risk-informing investments and
strengthening the capacity of private sector networks (e.g., platforms,
local chambers) in risk reduction. The Connecting Business Initiative, for
example, is supporting the creation and strengthening of private sector-
led networks for disaster risk reduction.

Partnerships with civil society and non-state actors:

⊲ Advocating with governments to advance and scale up a risk-
informed agenda that is people-centred and reduces the inequalities that
are driving risk to ensure that no one is left behind in the process.

Partnership with donors:

⊲ Raising donor awareness on the requirements for financing that
incentivize integrated approaches that foster risk-informed results
across different risk management practices; support long-term, systemic
processes that foster HDP collaboration.

⊲ Advocating for a blend of financial instruments linked to

transformational changes and fostering co-creation with development
partners.

[Link]
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 41

7.3 Internal pillar:

risk-informing UNDP
The risk-informed development approach is a UNDP-wide effort that
encompasses all practice areas. It is situated at the cross-section of
governance, crisis prevention and resilience, climate action, health, poverty
and many other UNDP practice areas that all have an important role to play and
contribution to make. The approach champions solutions that aim to stop the
development-related processes that can drive risk-generation and reduce the
impact of crisis events. It thus moves beyond mere crisis event management.

Whilst UNDP is still organized in distinct practice areas, there is now a strong
intent supported by the new Strategic Plan to work in an integrated manner
towards solutions to complex local realities. Institutionalizing this new way of
working will require a dedicated effort, although several key elements are
already in place.

An overview of the most promising opportunities for anchoring and

institutionalizing the approach within UNDP is provided as follows:

Risk-informing UNDP programmes and projects:

UNDP already has several organizational standards and policies at its
disposal that intend to integrate risk considerations into the design,
implementation and monitoring of its programmes and projects across a
range of risks. These include:

⊲ The Social and Environmental Standards that underpin our

commitment to mainstream social and environmental sustainability
in our programmes and projects. They aim to maximize social and
environmental opportunities and benefits and avoid adverse impacts
to people and the environment. Although the eight SES do not feature
a comprehensive multi-risk approach, they form an important element
of and contribution to mainstreaming risk into our programmes. The
development of staff capacity on this important tool is still ongoing and
should be accelerated.43

⊲ The Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) Policy covers risks across all
levels of the organization, considering the internal and external contexts.
The UNDP ERM not only prioritizes preventing and managing potential
negative effects but also seeks to maximize positive effects where
possible. It covers institutional risk, programmatic risk and contextual
risk. It presents an integrated approach to risk management, with
horizontal integration across all types of risks and vertical integration
43. [Link] from projects up to corporate level. Monitoring the risk registers and logs
environmental-standards and implementing the recommended mitigation measures provide for a
44. [Link]
AC_Accountability_Enterprise%20Risk%20 proactive risk management approach.44
Management%[Link]
45. UNDP (2012). Implementation Tool for the Human
Rights Due Diligence Policy. Decision-making Process
⊲ The Human Rights Due Diligence Policy supports UNDP to make
in Managing the Risks of Engagement with the Security risk-informed decisions when entering into a programmatic commitment
Sector. with the security sector and ensures risks are assessed and managed at
every stage of its programmatic engagement with the security sector.45
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 42

Infusing UNDP Country Programme Documents (CPDs)

with a risk and resilience lens:
When preparing CPDs, multidisciplinary teams need to work together with
their in-country partners to uncover risk-related challenges with the aim to
identify integrated solutions and move away from those that compartmentalize
different risk management practice areas and objectives.

⊲ A Risk-Informed Development Seal, similar to the gender or climate

seals, could be introduced to ensure CPDs meet agreed risk-informed
standards, focusing on those areas that may not yet be covered by
existing standards.

⊲ A portfolio approach in support of transformational change will help

in shifting from the plethora of disconnected risk-management initiatives
to a more programmatic approach that is able to address systemic and
interconnected issues through a strategic mix of short-/ medium- ans
long-term interventions supported by credible research, analysis and
advocacy.

Strengthening staff capacities:

Evolving the risk-informed paradigm within UNDP requires a dedicated
effort and greater investments in staff capacity to nurture the ability and
skill to connect between different disciplines and move beyond the comfort
zones of their immediate expertise, through:

⊲ Formal and informal training, learning and webinars so that staff can
excel in the application of the approach, and the tools and methodologies
that underpin it.

⊲ Learning by doing that draws on the existing staff expertise at country

office level, such as PDAs, governance, DRR/CCA or health focal points,
by proactively binding them together in integrated project design and
implementation. This will ultimately help overcome organizational siloes
and enhance the understanding of how different risk management work
streams complement each other. Certain types of programmes, such as
those in the realm of climate security, human security, risk governance
or urban resilience, would be particularly well-placed as a starting point.

⊲ Providing a dedicated space on risk-informed development as part of

UNDP’s communities of practice. Offering opportunities for UNDP experts
working at all levels and regions and across our existing communities
of practice to exchange their experience and learning on multi-risk-
informed development, will help accelerate the implementation of this
approach. Jointly exploring and documenting national- and subnational-
level solutions and organizing regular dialogues and consultations on
SparkBlue would help keep the approach alive and evolving.

Learning, adapting innovating:

The UNDP journey towards risk-informed development requires learning,
adapting and innovating the approaches, tools and methodologies that
UNDP is already using in support of risk-informed development.

⊲ Expanding the scope of existing UNDP tools and methodologies

to better align with the new risk-informed paradigm and to address
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 43

multidimensional risk or explore how they could be effectively joined up

or linked in support of a more comprehensive and integrated approach.

⊲ Documenting UNDP country-level experiences in implementing the

new risk-informed paradigm in their programmes and operations.

⊲ Proactively equipping UNDP projects and programmes with a RID

learning component.

⊲ Tracking UNDP expenditures and resources in support of the new

RID paradigm.

Enhancing organizational structure cross-team

collaboration:
For multidisciplinary and cross-team collaboration to occur, it is important to
break the existing thematic siloes in the way the GPN is currently organized.
Some ideas to overcome the division in support of a more collaborate and
partnership approach include:

⊲ Setting up multi-risk management units at CO level that are equipped

with the necessary tools and capacities in forecasting, analysis,
implementation, coordination and monitoring. Some COs are already
moving in that direction, such as UNDP Philippines with its Impacts and
Advisory Team.

⊲ Establishing HQ-level task teams or working groups on risk-informed

development to oversee and support the implementation of the
approach. The DRT will serve as the technical anchor of the approach,
and the Strategy Systems Team will ensure organizational compliance.

⊲ Facilitating catalytic funding and resources to foster and demonstrate

the impact of integrated and cross-practice collaboration, which could
then be co-financed by donors and governments alike.

⊲ Strengthening the data ecosystem for risk-informed development.

UNDP-India–2009
 8.
Next steps

UNDP-Bhutan-2017
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 45

UNDP’s risk-informed approach can already build on a solid foundation,

yet it has so far largely focused on a single-risk approach, rather than the
comprehensive, multidimensional and systems approach that this paper
advocates for. Whilst the direction of travel has been laid out, there is still
much to be learned and explored for the approach to seep into the DNA of
UNDP.
In order to ground the approach in UNDP’s operations, several practical
starting points are suggested:

Conduct a series of deep-dive demonstrations in partnership with UNDP

Country Offices and programme countries to offer an opportunity for several
GPN practices to come together in support of a risk-informed approach that
addresses multidimensional and systemic risks.

Identify accelerator labs that focus on anticipatory decision-making for risk-

informed development.

Conduct systemic risk assessments in a select number of countries/

geographies as a collaboration between several GPN risk management
practice areas.

Advance selected tools to embrace a more comprehensive approach in

support of risk-informed development, such as piloting political economy
analysis for risk-informed development; application of the public expenditure
and institutional reviews; risk-informing INFFs; conducting multidimensional
vulnerability analysis.

Map and collate promising experiences, lessons and practices of UNDP

Country Offices that are moving the needle towards a risk-informed approach.

Identify champions within UNDP from different practice areas to provide

leadership and ensure the accountability for the implementation of the new
risk-informed paradigm.

Accompany the formal launch of the approach with an extensive

communications campaign that is strongly backed and supported by the
highest levels of the organization.

Other potential cross-practice initiatives are expected to emerge and gradually

help introduce the approach that has been lined out above throughout UNDP
at country, regional and global levels.
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 46

References:
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2021). Working Group
I contribution to the IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report (AR6).
IRGC (2017). Introduction to the IRGC Risk Governance Framework. EPFL
International Risk Governance Center. Lausanne: EPFL International Risk
Governance Center. Kelman, I. (2020). COVID-19: what is the disaster?
Ministry of Disaster Management and Refugee Affairs (MIDIMAR) (2015).
The National Risk Atlas of Rwanda.
Neumayer, E. Plümper, T. (2007). The gendered nature of natural disasters:
the impact of catastrophic events on the gender gap in life expectancy, 1981–
2002. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 97 (3). pp. 551-
566.
ODI and UNDP (2019). Risk-informed development: from crisis to resilience.
Planitz, A. (2015). Disaster Risk Governance and the Principles of Good
Governance. In Davis, Georgieva, Yanagisawa (eds.) (2015). Disaster Risk
Reduction for Economic Growth and Livelihood. Investing in Resilience and
Development.
United Nations (2013). 2013 Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk
Reduction.
United Nations (2015). 2015 Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk
Reduction.
United Nations (2019). 2019 Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk
Reduction.
United Nations and UNSDG (2021). UN Common Guidance on Helping Build
Resilient Societies.
UNDP (2020). A Way Forward: Governing in Age of Emergence.
UNDP (2021). Risk-Informed Development: A Strategy Tool for Integrating
Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation into Development.
UNDP (Maskrey, A., Jain, G., Lavell, A.) (2021). The Social Construction
of Systemic Risk: Towards an Actionable Framework for Risk Governance.
United Nations Development Programme, Discussion Paper.
Wallemacq, P., House, R. (2018). Economic Losses, Poverty and Disasters
1998-2017. CRED, UNDRR.
World Bank, United Nations (2018). Pathways for Peace: Inclusive Approaches
to Preventing Violent Conflict.
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 47

Annex 1:
Overview of Relevant Tools (a selection)

Knowledge & evidence base

⊲ Global Risk Assessment Framework (GRAF)
⊲ Conducting a Conflict and Development Analysis Tool
⊲ INFORM subnational models
Financing
⊲ A Methodological Guidebook: Climate Public Expenditure and Institutional Review
(CPEIR)

⊲ Integrated National Financing Frameworks

Policy
⊲ Institutional and Context Analysis - Guidance Note
⊲ Risk-Informed Development: A Strategy Tool for Integrating Disaster Risk Reduction
and Climate Change Adaptation into Development

⊲ Mainstreaming the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development - Reference Guide

for UN Country Teams

⊲ Climate Promise Thematic Brief on Disaster Risk Reduction

Organization
⊲ CADRi Diagnostic Tool
Partnerships
⊲ UN Common Guidance on Helping Build Resilient Societies
⊲ Joint UN Guidance for Conflict Sensitivity, Peacebuilding and Sustained Peace
(forthcoming)

Internal
⊲ Social and Environmental Standards
⊲ Enterprise Risk Management Policy
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 48

Annex 2: Glossary of terms

Climate change adaptation: In human systems, the process of adjustment to

actual or expected climate and its effects, in order to moderate harm or exploit beneficial
opportunities. It seeks to enable populations to cope with, adapt or potentially transform
to future environmental conditions. It is one of the two main approaches to climate
change, the other aiming to reduce the causes of the change, that is, greenhouse gas
emissions, termed climate change mitigation. (IPCC, 2018)

Conflict prevention: Involves diplomatic measures to keep intrastate or interstate

tensions and disputes from escalating into violent conflict. It includes early warning,
information-gathering and a careful analysis of the factors driving the conflict.
([Link]

Disaster risk reduction: Disaster risk reduction is aimed at preventing new and
reducing existing disaster risk and managing residual risk, all of which contribute to
strengthening resilience and therefore to the achievement of sustainable development.
(United Nations, 2016: OIEWG)

Exposure: The situation of people, infrastructure, housing, production capacities

and other tangible human assets located in hazard-prone areas. (United Nations, 2016:
OIEWG)

Hazard: A process, phenomenon or human activity that may cause loss of life, injury or
other health impacts, property damage, social and economic disruption or environmental
degradation. (United Nations, 2016: OIEWG)

Hazardous event: The manifestation of a hazard in a particular place during a

particular period of time. (United Nations, 2016: OIEWG)

Prevention: the process of avoiding risk or reducing the probability and impact of risk.
Recovery: The restoring or improvement of the livelihoods and health, as well as
economic, physical, social, cultural and environmental assets, systems and activities of
a disaster-affected community or society in alignment with the principles of sustainable
development and ‘build back better’ to avoid or reduce future disaster risk. (OIEIWG,
2016)

Resilience: The ability of individuals, households, communities, cities, institutions,

systems and societies to prevent, resist, absorb, adapt, respond and recover positively,
efficiently and effectively when faced with a wide range of risks, while maintaining an
acceptable level of functioning and without compromising long-term prospects for
sustainable development, peace and security, human rights and well-being for all.
(United Nations, 2017)

Risk: The consequence of the interaction between a threat and the characteristics that
make people and places vulnerable and exposed to that threat. (UNDRR, 2015: GAR)

Risk drivers: Processes or conditions, often related to development and inequality,

that influence the level of risk by contributing to exposure and vulnerability or reducing
capacity. (United Nations, 2016: OIEWG)

Risk governance: The actions, processes, traditions and institutions by which

authority is exercised and decisions are taken and implemented. Risk governance
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 49

applies the principles of good governance to the identification, assessment,

management and communication of risks. (IRCG, 2017)

Risk management: The risk management process is a systematic application

of management policies, procedures and practices to the tasks of communication,
consultation, establishing the context, identifying, analysing, evaluating, treating,
monitoring and reviewing risk. (ISO 31000)

Shocks: External short-term deviations from long-term trends that have substantial
negative effects on people’s current state of well-being, level of assets, livelihoods,
safety or ability to withstand future shocks. (Zseleczky and Yosef, 2014)

Systemic Risk: The ripple-effects of direct loss and damage, indirect impacts and
wider effects, such as: the disruption of infrastructure systems and essential services;
failure of economic, financial or social systems; effects on employment and income;
national and family debt profiles and ecosystem collapse. (UNDP, 2021)

Vulnerability: The conditions determined by physical, social, economic and

environmental factors or processes that increase the susceptibility of an individual, a
community, assets or systems to the impacts of hazards. (United Nations, 2016: OIEWG)
 Shutterstock .com
THE UNDP APPROACH TO RISK-INFORMED DEVELOPMENT March 2022 50