Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Does gender sensitive disaster
risk reduction make a difference?A comparative study of the impact of gender sensitive disaster risk reduction in Cyclone Pam in Vanuatu
2017 Australasian Aid Conference
Wednesday 15 & Thursday 16 February 2017
Julie Webb, Megan Chisholm and Charlie Damon
This research was initiated by CARE Australia
Measuring the impact of disaster risk
reduction (DRR) is a major challenge
Donors and practitioners need to show
what effective DRR looks like
DRR suffers from a reverse logic: success
is when it doesn’t happen
Lack of tools and approaches for
monitoring and evaluating DRR
Cyclone Pam learning opportunity
Category 5 Tropical Cyclone Pam hit Vanuatu
on 13th March 2015
80% of population affected
The cyclone directly hit communities that
CARE had been working with since 2013
Did CARE’s work make a difference?
The study context
Tafea Province in southern Vanuatu
Extremely remote, isolated and disaster prone communities
High levels of gender inequality, restricted space for women’s voice
Culturally diverse
CARE’s DRR work in Vanuatu
Used national guidance on DRR
Set up Community Disaster Community Disaster
and Climate Change Committees (CDCCC)
Sustained engagement over several years
Training, equipment, simulations, follow up
Provincial and national support and effort
Gender and social inclusion throughout
Gender and social inclusion• Focus on gender equality and women’s leadership
• Gender balanced community disaster and climate
change committees
• Promoting and encouraging women’s leadership
• Gender equality training: national, provincial and
community leadership
There was early evidence of impact
Anecdotal and qualitative evidence
Communities CARE worked with fared better
This study was commissioned to attain more
robust evidence of such impacts
Methodology
Quasi experimental design
Compares data from ‘treatment’ and ‘control’ groups
CARE programming was the ‘treatment’
◦ Three communities on Erromango and on Aniwa engaged with CARE’s DRR: treatment group
◦ Three communities in Whitesands area of Tanna that had not engaged in DRR with CARE or others in years before: control group
Research questions
How did community actions differ before,
during and after TC Pam?
Were there gender and social inclusion
differences?
Secondary questions looked at damage and
community recovery
Data collection methods
Primary and secondary sources
Interviews with key stakeholders
Participatory activities over a day in
ten villages across three islands in
Tafea Province
DRR Checklist for data analysis
Key tool to compare community
experiences
Based on NDMO guidance and CARE
training on what to do in a TC Alert
Resulted in a score for each group, each
community, and each island
Alert stage for TC action
Included specific actions for the CDCCC, women,
men, youth and the community as a whole
Did CARE’s work make a difference?
Gender and social inclusion in
Aniwa and Erromango communities
Engaged and confident female members
Sharing roles
Respect for women’s roles in disasters
Men and women engaged in focus groups
Positive perceptions of female leadership
Vulnerable people community responsibility
Experiences and perceptions had changed
since engagement with CARE
Gender and social inclusion in Tanna
communities visited
No active community disaster committee
Women quiet in community focus groups
Vulnerable people were cared for by family
Women reported
◦ not participating in community decision making
◦ must follow the chief’s instructions
◦ when women told their husbands that they felt concerned about TC Pam and wanted to act, the men held them back
Women’s voices were not heard in TC Pam
Summary points on study findings
on gender and social inclusion
CARE’s approach contributed to greater
representation of women in community
decision making
There was increased respect for women’s
roles in disasters
Women and men worked together
Social inclusion was transformed from a
household to a community responsibility
Implications for DRR practice
This study shows that DRR did make a
difference
It also shows that how you do DRR is
important
Gender sensitive DRR can
◦ shift attitudes to women’s leadership
◦ increase community cooperation
◦ transform attitudes to vulnerable people and
groups
Does gender sensitive disaster risk reduction make a difference? A comparative study of the impact of gender sensitive disaster risk reduction in Cyclone Pam in Vanuatu
2017 Australasian Aid Conference Wednesday 15 & Thursday 16 February 2017
Julie Webb, Megan Chisholm and Charlie Damon
This research was initiated by CARE AustraliaThe study was funded by the Australian Government through the
Humanitarian Partnership Agreement (HPA).
