Enhancing Resilience to Flood- and Drought-Related Risks in Fiji
The overall objective of the project is to replicate successful interventions in Fiji's Ba catchment area and fully integrate climate change considerations in flood/drought risk management by not only generating and producing information, but also through training and dissemination. Mitigation of flood damage remains the highest priority need in the area, particularly in light of projected increases in intensification of rainfall and storm events. Fiji lacks an integrated natural resource management plan that incorporates climate change, agriculture, flood, and drought risk simultaneously. This project utilizes government commitment and support to partner with UNDP on implementation, and largely seeks to build on and compliment existing and past efforts to address land and water resource management. The proposal addresses four priority areas: early warning systems, community-based adaptation, institutional strengthening, and awareness raising.
For updates on UNDP Early Warning Systems and Climate Resilient Development projects, click here.
Fiji is subject to highly destructive cyclones, intense rainfall events, and devastating droughts. The Western Division, which includes the Ba Catchment Area, is particularly hard hit by flood and drought due to its location on a common cyclone path and within Viti Levu’s “rain shadow” (which makes the areas drier than the eastern part of the island on average). These effects will be exacerbated by climate change: as the climate warms, droughts are expected to increase in frequency and severity, rainfall is expected to become more concentrated but more intense (and destructive) rainfall events, cyclones may increase in frequency, and variability will increase as El Nino-related oscillations are likely to become more extreme.
Failure to address the impact of flooding occurs because responsibilities for land and water management in the catchment are fragmented, technical assessment capacity has been unable to identify the impacts of development proposals, and assessment of development occurs on an individual project basis without reference to an integrated flood or catchment plan. Institutions usually have geographical and functional boundaries; often this is coped with by developing larger institutions with wider geographical and functional boundaries. This can create clumsy and inefficient organisations, out of touch with local situations. There is a need to cut across institutional boundaries and to integrate the work of such institutions with local community plans and actions. Under present circumstances, the “legs” of flood management in Ba (the communities) are cut off from the “head” (government technical, resource management, early warning and support services) with neither learning much from the other.
The proposed project will address these barriers and needs in a highly integrated way, combining concerted efforts at the community and household levels in the Ba watershed area (home to approx. 18,000 inhabitants) to increase local resilience to flood and drought risks and hazards through implementation of on-the-ground adaptation measures. The framework for this project strategy includes an integrated and climate-sensitive flood and drought management plan, specifically developed for the Ba watershed area, through community consultation processes, involving national and local authorities and backed by technical expertise and assessments.
The outputs and activities listed on the Expected Key Results and Outputs page are inherently linked and supportive of each other. While the focus is on community-based adaptation measures, the early warning system and the institutional strengthening components are designed to provide the enabling environment that would allow the systematic development and implementation of on-the-ground measures within an integrated watershed development plan, supported by adequate instruments and user-tailored climate information services. The knowledge management component is designed to allow the capturing of good practices and lessons learnt both from the policy processes and community-based adaptation implementation, ensuring that the experience generated will support longer-term adaptation processes and future generation of professionals and practitioners, as part of the project sustainability strategy.
This project was endorsed by the Adaptation Fund Board on June 22, 2011, and currently awaits funding and implementation.
Source: Project Proposal document, 2011-06-06
Key Results and Outputs
Component 1: Climate early warning and information systems
Conduct detailed assessment of existing early warning and forecasting capacities, develop an enhanced flood and drought early warning system and climate information services (Output 1.1), and train appropriate staff and authorities in their implementation (Output 1.2).
Component 2: Community-based adaptation to flood- and drought-related risks and hazards
Develop an integrated and climate-sensitive flood and drought management plan for the Ba area (Output 2.1) and implement relevant ecosystem- and community-based measures for preparedness and protection (Output 2.2). Identify and implement climate-resilient agriculture and forestry techniques (Output 2.3), and enhance water supply capacity of communities through conservation, regulations and incentives (Output 2.4).
Component 3: Institutional strengthening to support climate- and disaster-resilient policy frameworks
In the agriculture, water, forestry, and coastal zone sectors, review and adjust relevant policies, frameworks, and plans (Output 3.1), then train agencies and authorities to implement them (Output 3.2).
Component 4: Awareness raising and knowledge management
Distribute lessons learned and best practices from local to global levels (Output 4.1), including through climate change awareness and education programmes in schools and communities (Output 4.2).
Reports and Publications
Monitoring and Evaluation
Project monitoring and evaluation will be conducted in accordance with established UNDP procedures by the project team with the support of UNDP Staff. The Logical Framework for the project (based on the outlined provided in this concept and to be developed and presented in the full project proposal) will provide performance and impact outcome level indicators along with their corresponding means of verification. These will form the basis on which the project's Monitoring and Evaluation system will be built.
The project's M&E Plan will be presented in the final project proposal (including necessary budgetary resources) submitted for AF Board approval and finalized in the Project's Inception Report following a collective fine-tuning of indicators, means of verification, and the full definition of project staff M&E responsibilities.
In accordance with the programming policies and procedures outlined in the UNDP User Guide, the Programme will be monitored at the national levels through the following:
Within the annual cycle
- On a quarterly basis, a quality assessment shall record progress towards the completion of key results, based on quality criteria and methods captured in the Quality Management table below (to come).
- An Issue Log shall be activated in Atlas and updated by the Programme Manager/National Project Managers to facilitate tracking and response of potential problems or requests for change.
- Based on the initial risk analysis submitted, a risk log shall be activated in Atlas and regularly updated by reviewing the external environment that may affect the project implementation.
- Based on the above information recorded in Atlas, a Project Progress Report (PPR) will be submitted by the Programme Manager to the Project Board and the National Project Managers to the National Project Boards through Project Assurance, using the standard report format available in the Executive Snapshot.
- A Project Lesson-learned log shall be activated and regularly updated to ensure on-going learning and adaptation within the organization, and to facilitate the preparation of the Lessons-learned Report at the end of the project.
- A Monitoring Schedule Plan shall be activated in Atlas and updated to track key management actions/events.
- Annual Review Report: An Annual Review Report shall be prepared by the National level Project Manager and shared with the Project Board. As a minimum requirement, the Annual Review Report will consist of the Atlas standard format for the Quarterly Progress Report (QPR) covering the whole year with updated information for each above element of the QPR as well as a summary of results achieved against pre-defined annual targets at the output level.
- Annual Project Review: Based on the above report, an annual project review will be conducted during the fourth quarter of the year or soon after, to assess the performance of the project and appraise the Annual Work Plan (AWP) for the following year. In the last year, this review will be a final assessment. The national review is driven by the Project Board and may involve other stakeholders as required. It will focus on the extent to which progress is being made towards outputs, and that these remain aligned to appropriate outcome(s). The regional review is driven by the Project Board.
Mid-term and Terminal evaluation report
According to established UNDP practices, the project will undergo an independent mid-term and technical evaluation.