task 2.1. presentation dwf - know4drr
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Task 2.1. presentation dwf - KNOW4DRR](https://reader035.vdocuments.pub/reader035/viewer/2022071804/55d4ecfabb61eb9a438b45cc/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
KNOW-‐4-‐DRR " Enabling knowledge for disaster risk reduc=on in
integra=on to climate
change adapta=on « Kick-‐ of mee=ng 11th – 12th June
Task 2.1. Mapping innova=ve exchange of knowledge to support DRR
John Norton/DWF
![Page 2: Task 2.1. presentation dwf - KNOW4DRR](https://reader035.vdocuments.pub/reader035/viewer/2022071804/55d4ecfabb61eb9a438b45cc/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
• This task will consider eight case studies to which the project partners have par=cipated in the recent past.
• If need be we can add to these and we will welcome sugges=ons about cases that might contribute to the study and its results.
• The cases provide examples of successful and unsuccessful process of decision making.
• We will assess how knowledge has been available to different actors in the stakeholder ‘chain’ in each case. Did this enable different stakeholders to act and contribute to disaster risk reduc=on or to climate change adapta=on. If not, why not?
• The assump=on put forward in the project proposal is that too oUen knowledge is fragmented and stuck in different compartments. We shall be considering if this was the case and what the consequences were. How could this have been avoided.
![Page 3: Task 2.1. presentation dwf - KNOW4DRR](https://reader035.vdocuments.pub/reader035/viewer/2022071804/55d4ecfabb61eb9a438b45cc/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Yesterday, we discussed two broad areas per=nent to the mapping the exchange or flow of knowledge that contributes to DRR. • The importance and some of the difficul=es of transforming
informa=on into knowledge that can lead to ac=on by key stakeholders.
• The poten=al consequences that stakeholder do not all share the same priori=es and perspec=ves.
![Page 4: Task 2.1. presentation dwf - KNOW4DRR](https://reader035.vdocuments.pub/reader035/viewer/2022071804/55d4ecfabb61eb9a438b45cc/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Some considera=ons • There are gaps between knowledge (informa=on) held be different
actors for DRR and CCA; • The knowledge route does not necessarily imply a two way flow of
informa=on. • The local stakeholders view and experience might not be really
taken into considera=on; • That approaches/and related knowledge held by one stakeholder
group may not be available or even useful to other stakeholder groups.
• That knowledge and the ability to act on it may be actually blocked by a variety of internal or external factors, which might include vested interest, poli=cs, lack of money, other priori=es, and so on.
These are some of the issues that underlie the suggested approach to the mapping process
![Page 5: Task 2.1. presentation dwf - KNOW4DRR](https://reader035.vdocuments.pub/reader035/viewer/2022071804/55d4ecfabb61eb9a438b45cc/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Which priority?
![Page 6: Task 2.1. presentation dwf - KNOW4DRR](https://reader035.vdocuments.pub/reader035/viewer/2022071804/55d4ecfabb61eb9a438b45cc/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
• We propose to draU and share with you a mapping process that considers: – the DRR/CCA issues that each case has been trying to address; – the actors/stakeholders involved and their role; – the links and flow between different stakeholder groups in the
informa=on & knowledge sharing process; – the type of knowledge and informa=on that has been developed/
made available; – how it has been communicated, by whom, and how this has been
received by other stakeholders and made use of in the decision and ac=on process; was it useful and used?
– the degree to which knowledge and the ability to act on it has contributed or not to reduce risk and the reasons for this.
– the possibili=es that other processes could have changed the outcome. How?
![Page 7: Task 2.1. presentation dwf - KNOW4DRR](https://reader035.vdocuments.pub/reader035/viewer/2022071804/55d4ecfabb61eb9a438b45cc/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
• In prac=cal terms it is suggested that the assessment of the cases will involve • (a) the project partners, • (b) the external stakeholders who par=cipated or were involved in the
case studies. • On a case by case basis we will together consider how this consulta=on could
happen.
• I suggest that for each case, we have at least three mapping assessments: • one by the partner who provided the case study, • one by another partner, • and one by DWF. • We will then share these results with all of you for sugges=ons and
commentary.
What do you think?
![Page 8: Task 2.1. presentation dwf - KNOW4DRR](https://reader035.vdocuments.pub/reader035/viewer/2022071804/55d4ecfabb61eb9a438b45cc/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
• The output for this task will be a Document on decision making processes and the flow or not of knowledge to those who need to act on it.