Expert meeting on statistics on gender and the environment, 2-4 September 2019, Bangkok Gender, disasters and climate change statistics in Asia and the Pacific
Progress in Asia- Pacific to date • Regional meeting on Gender Statistics on Climate Change and Disaster Risk Reduction (22 April 2019, Bangkok, Thailand) • Co-organized between ESCAP & UN Women, back-to- back with Expert Group Meeting on Disaster Statistics • Brought together more than 50 participants from around 20 countries • Representatives from national statistical offices, national disaster management agencies, ministries of environment, national women’s machineries, and development organizations
Strong demand for a gender angle in disasters and climate change statistics and analysis Climate Disaster change statistics statistics Both issues covered in global goals Data from a gender perspective largely missing
Dis isaster and clim climate ch change statistics fr from a gender perspective in in Asia ia and th the Paci cific Identify priority areas and indicators • Regional meeting provided inputs in terms of priority areas and related indicators • Global frameworks (SDGs, Sendai, UNFCCC) • Suggested list circulated for feedback • Structured around DSRF as this is a regional product • Additional area on drivers to capture CC
Which indicators were given preference? Preference % on Exposure indicators EXPOSURE Total number of population in disaster prone-areas, disaggregated by sex, age, • All participants identified 100 location, disability status, wealth and ethnicity “population at risk” as a priority Number of health facilities located in Exposure indicators 58.3 disaster-prone areas, by type • Specific health facilities relevant to gender Proportion of population exposed to risk 41.7 • Early warning protected by warning systems, by sex systems/prevention Total square kilometres of agricultural • Livelihoods land in disaster-prone areas, by sex of 41.7 land user 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Percentage of preference
Which indicators were given preference? Preference % on vulnerability indicators VULNERABILITY Total number of people in disaster prone- areas, disaggregated simultaneously by sex, 75 • Again, priority given to wealth and location measuring geographical Proportion of population living below the 66.7 Vulnerability indicators national poverty line, by sex and age (*) exposure • Poverty, time use, asset Proportion of time spent on unpaid 41.7 domestic and care work, by sex (*) ownership as key Proportion of women and girls aged 15 measures of vulnerability years and older subjected to sexual 41.7 violence by persons other than an… • Violence Proportion of adults (15 years and older) with an account at a bank or other financial 41.7 institution or with a mobile-money-… 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 PERCENTAGE OF PREFERENCE
Which indicators were given preference? Preference % on Coping capacity indicators COPING CAPACITY Proportion seats held by women in local • High importance given to 83.3 government (*) decision making Coping capacity indicators Proportion of managerial positions in environment-related ministries (e.g. • Both on environmental 75 disaster management, ministry of environment, ministry of agriculture,… issues, but also on other Proportion of managerial positions in issues ministries providing social protection 66.7 (e.g. health, education, labour, etc) held by women • Besides, understanding Proportion of people that reported disaster risk being able to access, use and 66.7 understand relevant disaster risk information, by sex (**) 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percentage of preference
Which indicators were given preference? Preference % Direct material impact and economic loss indicators MATERIAL IMPACT Direct material impact and economic loss indicators • Dwellings, schools and Total number of people whose damaged dwelling were attributed to disasters, by 75 productive assets sex (**) • Land coming out as a Total number of users of health and relevant issue throughout educational facilities damaged by disasters, 66.7 (but not always on top 4) by sex (**) Total square km of Agricultural land 58.3 affected by disasters, by sex of land user 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Percentage of preference
Which indicators were given preference? Preference % on Direct impact on environment indicators ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Total number of liters of water (in rivers, aquifers, lakes or marine environments) 75 • Balanced variety of issues Direct impact on environment inidcators affected by disaster • Water Total number of hectares of wild forest • Forests 75 tree cover affected by disaster • Biodiversity Total biodiversity loss as a result of • Land disasters, by specie type (where 58.3 relevant) Total number of hectares used for pastures and natural grassland affected 58.3 by disaster, by sex of user 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Percentage of preference
Which indicators were given preference? Preference % on Human indicators HUMAN IMPACT Number of missing persons attributed to disasters, per 100,000 population, by sex 66.7 • Covers deaths, missing, (**) Direct impact on Human indicators ill, jobs, etc. Number of people directly affected by disasters, per 100,000 population, by sex 58.3 (compound of ill, damaged dwelling,… • Most indicators directly Number of deaths and missing persons from SENDAI attributed to disasters, per 100,000 58.3 population, by sex (* & **) Proportion of population who lost their jobs or livelihoods as a result of disasters, 50 by sex Number of deaths attributed to disasters, 50 per 100,000 population, by sex (**) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Percentage of preference
Which indicators were given preference? Preference % Indirect impact indicators INDIRECT IMPACT Proportion of population whose income 83.3 • Mortality and livelihoods decreased as a result of disasters, by sex indicators prioritized Indirect impact indicators Mortality rate attributed to household • Most are SDG indicators 66.7 and ambient air pollution, by sex (*) • Income indicator similar Mortality rate attributed to unsafe water, to SENDAI indicator on unsafe sanitation and lack of hygiene 50 (exposure to unsafe Water, Sanitation livelihoods affected by and Hygiene for All (WASH) services) (*) disaster Mortality rate attributed to unintentional 41.7 poisoning, by sex (*) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Percentage of preference
Which indicators were given preference? Preference % on Drivers of disaster indicators DRIVERS Total energy consumption of households, 66.7 • Drivers category reflects by sex of members broader CC issues Total ODA allocated to national disaster Drivers of disaster indicators risk reduction related activities where 58.3 • Consumption coming out gender equality was a primary objective… as highly relevant Annual rate of biodiversity loss 50 • Biodiversity and vegetation loss indicators Total CO2 emissions per capita 50 lack a direct gender angle but are highly relevant Mean annual loss of land covered by 50 natural vegetation 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Percentage of preference
Outcomes of f th the meeting - Consensus on the need to agree on a set of common indicators - Consensus on the need to compile a glossary with metadata - Create a steering committee/Task team to help steer this work - Countries requested support for: - In-depth review of existing data - Workshop to design action plan to fill data gaps on G & DRR-CC - Capacity building to mainstream gender on policy documents that regulate data collection on DRR - CC - Capacity building for NSOs and NDRMOs on how to use statistical tools to produce gender data - Strengthening user-producer coordination - Training to better interpret and use gender data on CC & disasters
What has happened so far? Countries willing to volunteer • Countries volunteering for the Task Team (almost 8.3% (NO) all respondents) • Volunteers will also be 91.7% (YES) Indonesia provided with an update Cambodia of the outcomes of this Vietnam Republic of expert meeting Uzbekistan Vanuatu Iran Bangladesh Kyrgyz Republic Vietnam Yes No
- Present guidelines to wider EGM and through them to Committee Volunteers/Task - Design action plan/s team to provide Regional Meeting – - Capacity building work additional guidance sharing experiences and on enabling gather inputs on priority (mix of gender, climate Timeline of f environment, data change and DRR experts) issues production and use next xt steps: May – December April 2019 towards b better data on gender, April September 2020 cli limate change and DRR Agree on key areas and - Draft guidelines and indicators circulate for inputs Feedback on possible - Conduct additional indicators (online) assessments in select countries
Recommend
More recommend
