climate change statistics in Asia and the Pacific Progress in Asia- - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Gender, disasters and climate change statistics in Asia and the Pacific

Expert meeting on statistics on gender and the environment, 2-4 September 2019, Bangkok

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

Both issues covered in global goals Data from a gender perspective largely missing

Strong demand for a gender angle in disasters and climate change statistics and analysis

Disaster statistics Climate change statistics

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
• f 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?

EXPOSURE

• All participants identified

“population at risk” as a priority

• Specific health facilities

relevant to gender

• Early warning

systems/prevention

• Livelihoods

41.7 41.7 58.3 100 20 40 60 80 100 120 Total square kilometres of agricultural land in disaster-prone areas, by sex of land user Proportion of population exposed to risk protected by warning systems, by sex Number of health facilities located in disaster-prone areas, by type Total number of population in disaster prone-areas, disaggregated by sex, age, location, disability status, wealth and ethnicity Percentage of preference Exposure indicators

Preference % on Exposure indicators

Which indicators were given preference?

VULNERABILITY

• Again, priority given to

measuring geographical exposure

• Poverty, time use, asset
• wnership as key

measures of vulnerability

• Violence

41.7 41.7 41.7 66.7 75 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Proportion of adults (15 years and older) with an account at a bank or other financial institution or with a mobile-money-… Proportion of women and girls aged 15 years and older subjected to sexual violence by persons other than an… Proportion of time spent on unpaid domestic and care work, by sex (*) Proportion of population living below the national poverty line, by sex and age (*) Total number of people in disaster prone- areas, disaggregated simultaneously by sex, wealth and location PERCENTAGE OF PREFERENCE Vulnerability indicators

Preference % on vulnerability indicators

Which indicators were given preference?

COPING CAPACITY

• High importance given to

decision making

• Both on environmental

issues, but also on other issues

• Besides, understanding

disaster risk

66.7 66.7 75 83.3 20 40 60 80 100 Proportion of people that reported being able to access, use and understand relevant disaster risk information, by sex (**) Proportion of managerial positions in ministries providing social protection (e.g. health, education, labour, etc) held by women Proportion of managerial positions in environment-related ministries (e.g. disaster management, ministry of environment, ministry of agriculture,… Proportion seats held by women in local government (*) Percentage of preference Coping capacity indicators

Preference % on Coping capacity indicators

Which indicators were given preference?

MATERIAL IMPACT

• Dwellings, schools and

productive assets

• Land coming out as a

relevant issue throughout (but not always on top 4)

58.3 66.7 75 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Total square km of Agricultural land affected by disasters, by sex of land user Total number of users of health and educational facilities damaged by disasters, by sex (**) Total number of people whose damaged dwelling were attributed to disasters, by sex (**) Percentage of preference Direct material impact and economic loss indicators

Preference % Direct material impact and economic loss indicators

Which indicators were given preference?

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

• Balanced variety of issues
• Water
• Forests
• Biodiversity
• Land

58.3 58.3 75 75 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Total number of hectares used for pastures and natural grassland affected by disaster, by sex of user Total biodiversity loss as a result of disasters, by specie type (where relevant) Total number of hectares of wild forest tree cover affected by disaster Total number of liters of water (in rivers, aquifers, lakes or marine environments) affected by disaster Percentage of preference Direct impact on environment inidcators

Preference % on Direct impact on environment indicators

Which indicators were given preference?

HUMAN IMPACT

• Covers deaths, missing,

ill, jobs, etc.

• Most indicators directly

from SENDAI

50 50 58.3 58.3 66.7 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Number of deaths attributed to disasters, per 100,000 population, by sex (**) Proportion of population who lost their jobs or livelihoods as a result of disasters, by sex Number of deaths and missing persons attributed to disasters, per 100,000 population, by sex (* & **) Number of people directly affected by disasters, per 100,000 population, by sex (compound of ill, damaged dwelling,… Number of missing persons attributed to disasters, per 100,000 population, by sex (**) Percentage of preference Direct impact on Human indicators

Preference % on Human indicators

Which indicators were given preference?

INDIRECT IMPACT

• Mortality and livelihoods

indicators prioritized

• Most are SDG indicators
• Income indicator similar

to SENDAI indicator on livelihoods affected by disaster

41.7 50 66.7 83.3 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Mortality rate attributed to unintentional poisoning, by sex (*) Mortality rate attributed to unsafe water, unsafe sanitation and lack of hygiene (exposure to unsafe Water, Sanitation and Hygiene for All (WASH) services) (*) Mortality rate attributed to household and ambient air pollution, by sex (*) Proportion of population whose income decreased as a result of disasters, by sex Percentage of preference Indirect impact indicators

Preference % Indirect impact indicators

Which indicators were given preference?

DRIVERS

• Drivers category reflects

broader CC issues

• Consumption coming out

as highly relevant

• Biodiversity and

vegetation loss indicators lack a direct gender angle but are highly relevant

50 50 50 58.3 66.7 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Mean annual loss of land covered by natural vegetation Total CO2 emissions per capita Annual rate of biodiversity loss Total ODA allocated to national disaster risk reduction related activities where gender equality was a primary objective… Total energy consumption of households, by sex of members Percentage of preference Drivers of disaster indicators

Preference % on Drivers of disaster indicators

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 volunteering

for the Task Team (almost all respondents)

• Volunteers will also be

provided with an update

• f the outcomes of this

expert meeting

91.7% (YES) Indonesia Cambodia Vietnam Republic of Uzbekistan Vanuatu Iran Bangladesh Kyrgyz Republic Vietnam

8.3% (NO)

Countries willing to volunteer

Yes No

Timeline of f next xt steps:

towards b better data on gender, cli limate change and DRR

April

Regional Meeting – sharing experiences and gather inputs on priority issues

April

Agree on key areas and indicators Feedback on possible indicators (online)

September

Volunteers/Task team to provide additional guidance

(mix of gender, climate change and DRR experts)

May – December 2019

• Draft guidelines and

circulate for inputs

• Conduct additional

assessments in select countries

2020

• Present guidelines to

wider EGM and through them to Committee

• Design action plan/s
• Capacity building work
• n enabling

environment, data production and use