Emergency Response Preparedness Approach

The IASC adopted the ERP approach in 2015 as the agreed method to ensure readiness to respond to potential crises that require coordinated action from the humanitarian community in support of national responses. The aim is to increase the speed, volume, predictability and effectiveness of aid delivered after the onset of a crisis.

The ERP provides an internationally agreed framework that allows country teams to analyse and monitor risks, take actions to enhance preparedness, and flag gaps in capacity to the regional and global levels so that the right support can be mobilized. Heightened readiness will increase the volume and speed of aid in the crucial first weeks of an emergency. It can also increase the value for money of humanitarian action by ensuring that scarce resources are directed towards the most urgent needs and reach people in time.

At the global level, IASC members have endorsed the ERP and are committed to being adequately prepared to respond to emergencies. This accountability covers their specific agency roles and their cluster lead roles, where these exist.

In countries where IASC humanitarian coordination structures are in place, the HC, working with the HCT and country-level clusters/sectors, should lead the ERP process. S/he is also responsible for ensuring that the response-readiness efforts of relevant organizations are inclusive and coordinated.

In countries where IASC humanitarian coordination structures are not in place, the HC or UN RC should work with the UNCT and national a thorities to implement the ERP. The HC or UN RC should encourage the input and participation of IFRC and NGOs, including women’s and youth-led organizations active in country, to ensure that their humanitarian capacities and expertise are recognized and that they can contribute fully. In-country coordination mechanisms may need to be expanded for this purpose.

In refugee situations, UNHCR, in accordance with its responsibilities, will lead the refugee preparedness and response in close coordination with WHO, the UN RC/HC and UNCT/HCT, Governments and other actors. In countries covered by refugee and migrant response plans, the existing inter-agency platform will continue. The Joint UNHCR-OCHA Note on Mixed Settings74 remains applicable, as it lays out the respective roles and responsibilities of the UN RC and/or UN RC/HC and the UNHCR Representative, as well as the practical interaction of the IASC’s and UNHCR’s refugee coordination arrangements, to ensure that coordination is streamlined, complementary and mutually reinforcing.

> See section B.6 for more on Refugee Response and Mixed Settings.

74 Joint UNHCR-OCHA Note on Mixed Settings, OCHA/UNHCR, 24 April 2014.

The ERP in practice

The ERP approach is designed to ensure that the humanitarian community in each country has a shared and up-to-date understanding of risks, and a joint plan for enhancing preparedness. The ERP approach is intended to be:

• Realistic. It must consider existing capacities and constraints.
• Practical. It should focus on needs and operational capacity: what we have, how to bridge gaps and how to reach people with assistance.
• Flexible. Country teams should prioritize preparedness actions considering the risks they face and the capacity and resources available to them.
• Coordinated. All cluster/sector responses should be in alignment and complementary with existing national policies.75
• Localized. Closely linked to existing local capacities and resources.76

75 Including health policies on the COVID-19 response.

76 Taking into consideration limited movement and interaction given the nature of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The ERP approach has four main components:

• Risk analysis and monitoring
  

• Identifying and prioritizing humanitarian interventions
  

• Review of existing response capacities
  

• Filling identified preparedness gaps by using the Minimum and Advanced Preparedness Actions — a set of activities that every country team should review and implement, where needed, to implement the required level of response readiness.
  

As the ERP approach was designed with a focus on outcomes rather than process, its implementation will differ in each country. The approach is implemented when the following are achieved:

• Risk analysis is conducted and the risks identified are monitored regularly.
• Key actions to enhance preparedness/response readiness are identified, and prioritized actions are implemented.
• Gaps that cannot be addressed through in-country capacity are communicated to the regional and global levels.

The role of national Governments in the ERP

The responsibility to be ready to respond to humanitarian emergencies rests primarily with national Governments. The ERP is intended to complement national preparedness efforts and guide the work of humanitarian organizations to respond when national capacity is lacking. National institutions and local organizations, including women’s groups, should be included in the ERP process as much as possible.

Links with the Humanitarian Programme Cycle and Humanitarian-Development Collaboration

The ERP approach is an important component of the HPC. The analysis and monitoring of risks should be part of the inter-agency HNO and related response plans. That said, the ERP approach is first and foremost an operational tool to ensure that country teams have concrete systems in place to respond to needs quickly as they arise.

> See section B.3 for details on the Humanitarian Programme Cycle.

Humanitarian response readiness provides a key operational link between humanitarian and development partners at the country level. This link is twofold: faster and more effective response reduces human suffering, protects hard-won development gains and enhances resilience; and the ERP focuses on risk and provides an important platform for humanitarian and development partners to engage in the analysis not only of the humanitarian response readiness requirements, but also the long-term prevention-and-mitigation activities for addressing the identified risks. In countries that do not have a HRP, the ERP approach is one of the main platforms for enhancing collaboration with development actors.

Resources

• Interim ERP Guidance, 2020
• ERP Guidelines, 2015

Index for Risk Management (INFORM)

INFORM is a global, open-source risk assessment tool for humanitarian crises and disasters. It is a collaboration of partners led by the IASC Reference Group on Risk, Early Warning and Preparedness, and the European Commission. INFORM develops methodologies and tools for use at the global level and supports their application at the subnational level. The INFORM model is based on risk concepts published in scientific literature, and it envisages three dimensions of risk: hazards and exposure, vulnerability and lack of coping capacity.

INFORM has developed a suite of quantitative, analytical products to support decision-making at different stages of the disaster management cycle – specifically prevention, preparedness and response.

• The INFORM Risk Index helps to analyse the generalized risk of a crisis based on structural conditions.
• The INFORM Severity Index objectively measures and compares the severity of humanitarian crises and disasters globally. It can help develop a shared understanding of crisis severity and ensure all affected people get the help they need.
• INFORM Climate Change includes climate and socioeconomic projections. The results are intended to inform policy choices across climate mitigation, climate adaptation, DRR, sustainable development and humanitarian assistance.

Anticipatory Action

Anticipatory action means acting ahead of predicted shocks to mitigate acute humanitarian impacts before they fully unfold. This works best when all core elements are pre-agreed: activities, triggers and decision-making rules based on forecasts and financing.

Data can facilitate the decision to trigger the release of pre-arranged finance for pre-agreed interventions that mitigate the impact of such shocks before they happen. By taking this anticipatory approach – using evidence of risk instead of evidence of suffering – we can better protect and save more lives, make the money go farther and protect hard-won development gains. Above all, an anticipatory approach is more dignified.

Anticipatory action is taken ahead of a high-risk and high-probability shock, and before humanitarian needs manifest themselves, to mitigate the predicted humanitarian impact. An anticipatory action framework combines three components:

• Robust forecasting embedded in a clear decision-making process (the model).
• Pre-agreed action plans that can fundamentally alter the trajectory of the crisis (the delivery).
• Pre-arranged finance (the money).

When the selected forecast exceeds an agreed threshold – e.g. a given probability or indicator of severity – the default decision will be to release pre-arranged finance for the implementation of pre-agreed actions to minimize delay and mitigate the impact of the predicted shock.

Elements of Anticipatory Action

Anticipatory action works best if the activities (the actions), triggers and decision-making rules based on forecasts (the model) are pre-agreed to guarantee the fast release of pre-arranged financing (the money). By using early warning systems and scientific advances in predicting disasters, anticipatory action utilizes the window of opportunity between the moment of prediction and the arrival of a forecasted shock to trigger interventions that prevent or mitigate imminent humanitarian impacts. This calls for more humanitarian action linked to risk and vulnerability instead of a singular focus on needs and suffering.

By getting ahead of looming crises, assistance is timelier, more cost-effective and better quality. This not only saves lives and reduces loss of livelihoods but also preserves hard-won development gains. Going forward, the IASC will work to integrate core dimensions of anticipatory action into the HPC.

Anticipatory action mitigates the humanitarian impacts for people who can be reached before a shock. However, it may not prevent a crisis entirely, as a storm, flood or drought will still occur. Anticipatory action currently works best for climate-related disasters and diseases.

What does anticipatory action look like?

Partnerships in Anticipatory Action

IASC partners are already building anticipatory action initiatives in more than 60 countries. This currently includes the Red Cross and Red Crescent societies, international and national NGOs, and the UN. These efforts are often small scale and agency and sector specific, but collective anticipatory action is gaining traction to achieve greater scale and more intersectoral coverage. Leadership is required to encourage more joint planning, targeting and financing.

Resources

• OCHA Anticipatory Action
• Anticipation Hub, a multi-partner resource page

Anticipatory Financing

Several pooled funding mechanisms fund anticipatory action: the Disaster Relief Emergency Fund (DREF), which can be accessed by Red Cross and Red Crescent societies; the Start Financing Facility, which can be accessed by NGOs that are members of the Start Network; and CERF for UN agencies and their implementing partners.

The CBPFs also promote anticipatory approaches, and some UN agencies, such as FAO and WFP, have dedicated internal funding mechanisms for anticipatory action. Other UN and non-UN organizations fund individual anticipatory action projects through bilateral donor contributions.

In addition, other funding sources are increasingly looking to act in an anticipatory way. This includes development finance (e.g. the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank Early Response Facility) and other humanitarian funds (Education Cannot Wait), but also market-based instruments (African Risk Capacity’s anticipatory insurance policies).

• Anticipatory action works best if triggers, actions and finance are pre-agreed.
• Anticipatory finance is pre-arranged money to be released before the peak impact(s) of a hazard known to be imminent in order to reduce those impacts. It can significantly speed up action once triggered, and it may serve to kick-start fundraising and advocacy for a coming or escalating crisis.
• Advocate for coordinated and pre-arranged anticipatory finance to be complemented with other funding tools at your disposal. Securing UN anticipatory finance may help leverage other funding, including from non-UN humanitarian pooled funds (e.g. DREF or Start Fund) or agencies’ internal funds for anticipatory action.
• Anticipatory finance may help coordinate the layering of different contingency funding, including DRR, climate finance or the World Bank’s Early Response Window.

Resources

• OCHA Anticipatory Action
• Overview - CERF Anticipatory Action, OCHA, 2021
• Global Guidelines -  Country-Based Pooled Funds, OCHA, 2022
• CERF Guidance for Humanitarian/Resident Coordinators, OCHA, 2022

Links with the ERP

The ERP approach and anticipatory action are very much two sides of the same coin. In simple terms, the ERP’s primary focus is identifying the most appropriate response activities for a crisis and ensuring that operational readiness is in place to implement these activities. Anticipatory action uses pre-agreed actions building on the ERP, pre-agreed forecasts and pre-arranged financing to mitigate the humanitarian impacts of an imminent, forecastable yet out-of-the-ordinary shock.

At the country level, the process for developing response readiness and anticipatory action is similar and complementary. Anticipatory action is being included as a standard element of the ERP approach – this has been welcomed by partners and through independent research.