Pacific Disaster Resilience Program (Phases 1 and 2)

A more systematic tracking of performance across countries, which could build on new assessment frameworks developed under the Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability (PEFA) program in some areas of DRM, could enhance the innovations introduced by this program, particularly phasing of interventions and a differentiated approach that addresses the challenges of implementing planning, policy, and legal frameworks in fragile and conflict-affected situations (FCAS) and small island developing states (SIDS). In practice, the multiple phases have created a programmatic engagement on DRM (including disaster risk financing), addressing previous evaluation findings. Successive programs have thereby built on previous phases and their post-program partnership frameworks. Furthermore, the program’s combination of reforms to support DRM frameworks with hands-on preparedness for response and process-oriented actions reflects a differentiated approach that is most relevant and appropriate to FCAS and SIDS. Besides enhancing the programmatic design, using learnings and evidence from a more systematic performance monitoring and related new assessment frameworks from PEFA, close coordination between CDF and regular PBL, the latter often focusing on building resilience through enhanced fiscal and budgetary management, could be helpful for a comprehensive risk management approach.