This presentation outlines the main findings of 'Learning from disaster'. This ALNAP study explores how national disaster management authorities and other state actors learn and improve their humanitarian response activities with a view to identifying current practice, challenges that impeded learning and improvement and ways in which collaboration with others has assisted in overcoming these.

1. Learning from disaster
Andy Featherstone
27 March, IFRC, Geneva

2. Purpose of the study
To explore the ways NDMAs and other state actors
learn about and improve their humanitarian
response activities with a view to identifying:
• Current practices
• Challenges that exist
• How collaboration has helped overcome these
challenges

3. Approach
• The research builds
on ALNAP’s ongoing
engagement with NDMAs
• Participation of 5 NDMAs and input from
representatives of international organisations
and regional institutions
• Extensive web-based literature review with a
focus on NDMA websites

4. Context
• Engagement of international organisations is
dependent on the states willingness and
capacity to respond
• The international humanitarian system has a
poor track record of engaging with the state but
efforts are being taken to address this
• The state has responsibility
to respond to humanitarian
crises

5. Cycle of Learning

6. Generating knowledge
NDMA approaches
• After action reviews and evaluations ,
formal and informal reflections and
simulations
Areas of collaboration
 After action reviews, simulations
 Evaluation

7. NDMA approaches
• Capacity assessments and online knowledge
repositories
Areas of collaboration
 Capacity assessment, knowledge repositories
Organising
knowledge

8. Sharing knowledge
NDMA approaches
• Staff capacity development,
peer learning, Disaster
Management Institutes,
guidelines, codes of conduct
and minimum standards
Areas of collaboration
 Staff capacity development,
peer learning

9. Enablers & inhibitors
of learning
Inhibitors
• Lack of resources
• Competition for influence
• Prioritisation of short-term planning horizons
Enablers
• Continuity of support
• Shared agendas and trust
• ‘windows of opportunity’ and profile

10. Recommendations for NDMAs
• Strengthen capacity for and
uptake of after action reviews
and evaluation
• Use the post-disaster window
of opportunity to for legislative
change
• Use learning outputs to
increase NDMA profile within
government
• Engage in peer support with
other NDMAs

11. Recommendations for others
• Strengthen links between NDMAs and the
international humanitarian system
• Promote joint humanitarian evaluation
• Establish long-term strategic partnerships that
develop capacity and enhance visibility
• Learn from holistic, multi-stakeholder
approaches to institutional strengthening of
NDMAs

12. Q& A session
• Political difficulty of learning process for governments.
We need to find a way to learn without political risk
(from OXFAM)
• Role of regional organisations, in particular ASEAN in
learning and training? (Swiss mission)
• Any study to understand difficult relationship between
governments and international actors? (Intersos)
• New obligation to conduct 9 to 12 months evaluation
for any disaster above level 3 (from IASC Secretariat)
• Let’s learn together rather than point out each other to
learn (SCHR)
• Any tool to quantify results of evaluation? (Libya
mission)

13. Thank you