An Anticipatory Action approach seeks to identify multiple windows of opportunity for action throughout the duration of predictable shocks, such as drought. It links early warning information with flexible financing to trigger actions that reduce the impact on the most vulnerable. A robust, context-specific trigger mechanism is at the heart of this approach, as it produces early warning triggers for the activation of anticipatory actions to protect diverse livelihood groups at the right time and with as little uncertainty as possible. Drawing on the experience of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and its partners in implementing Anticipatory Action, this guidance document outlines five steps for establishing an Anticipatory Action trigger mechanism for drought.
Hazards may occur suddenly (sudden-onset) or develop over time (slow-onset) and threaten people’s lives and livelihoods and all the pillars of sustainable development. Since 2016, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) has supported extensive country-level work on Anticipatory Action for several slow-onset hazards such as drought, cold waves, pests and diseases, Rift Valley fever and the secondary consequences of COVID-19. This paper summarizes FAO's conceptual and programmatic approach for anticipating and mitigating the impact of slow-onset hazards on the most vulnerable people depending on agriculture for their livelihoods and food security. Drawing on FAO’s experiences in implementing Anticipatory Action and the technical expertise built over decades, it recommends a phased approach to Anticipatory Action for slow-onset hazards as it reduces uncertainties associated with early warning information, improves the targeting of Anticipatory Action interventions and helps adapt the selection of Anticipatory Action options to the evolving hazard context.
Climate change and extreme weather events are heightening levels of acute food insecurity and food crises around the world. As the world emerges from the COVID-19 pandemic and deals with other drivers of food security, poverty and inequality, the international community is calling for a climate-resilient and sustainable recovery. Supporting the shift away from disaster response toward preventative and anticipatory action is fundamental to address the growing challenges faced by agriculture and food systems. Climate services highlight the role of science and technology in providing innovative solutions for risk reduction, effective resilience policies and adaptation planning. Underpinned by robust science and agrometeorological data, climate services and digital advisories bring tailored climate information to agricultural producers and value chain actors. But despite increasing evidence of the benefits of climate services, there are still major gaps in their development worldwide. This global assessment points to a significant gap in investment in climate services for the last mile – the small-scale farmers and most marginalized communities. Bridging this gap and scaling climate services is essential if actionable information is to be communicated in an equitable and effective manner to users, making sure no one is left behind. The report presents the latest data on the state of climate services for agricultural users with surveys from 36 countries across all FAO regions. The report’s findings have major implications for institutional frameworks to effectively target investments in resilience, preparedness and recovery. Case studies highlight additional challenges, opportunities and lessons learned from specific interventions across the climate services provision framework. Despite many challenges, climate services have demonstrable benefits to agriculture and food security by navigating agricultural producers around unpredictable and changing weather patterns. The report presents a blueprint for targeted investments to ensure that finance is effectively allocated not only to enhance the production of climate services, but also their provision, engagement and application by agricultural communities.
As the quality of climate risk information and scientific forecasting has continued to improve, the imperative to act in advance of an imminent shock in order to protect people, assets and livelihoods has also gained notable attention and increasing investment. Recognizing this opportunity, some governments, and development and humanitarian partners are trying to gain a better understanding of the potential of social protection to deliver support ahead of a forecasted shock, including exploring options to systematically integrate anticipatory action approaches within existing national social protection systems. As such, this document discusses the conceptual and practical linkages between these two topics alongside presenting four country case studies, thereby contributing to the literature on how social protection and anticipatory action can protect agricultural livelihoods.
The Evaluation of FAO’s contribution to the humanitarian–development–peace (HDP) nexus revisits and brings together in a coherent narrative the many approaches of conflict management and peace-sustaining work carried out over the years on natural resources management and rights-based frameworks. At the same time, it analyses the body of work developed through emergency activities, in crisis and conflict contexts – shaped by the ever-stronger recognition of the need to focus on longer-term resilience. The evaluation recognizes that the heart of FAO’s work in prioritizing and implementing an HDP approach has been at country level and has pieced together a number of examples from across countries to inform the narrative and provide lessons. The main overarching message from the evaluation is that FAO is ideally placed to invest in a major corporate effort to mainstream and adopt HDP nexus ways of working as part of its organizational DNA.
The INFORMED programme, implemented by FAO from 2015 to 2019, was designed to contribute to “increasing the resilience of livelihoods to threats and crises and contributing to the reduction of food insecurity and malnutrition”. The programme’s increased focused on Early Warning for Early Action (EWEA) was very relevant to fill existing gaps with a comparative advantage for FAO in slow onset and food chain crises contexts. Promoting the use of pre-agreed plans and pre-identified anticipatory actions, the project effectively improved risk analysis and decision making, including through the Global Report on Food Crises, and increased access to appropriate financing instruments, while the EWEA country toolkit initial positive spinoffs remain to be built on.Efforts to support resilience measurement and analyses by applying the resilience index measurement and analysis (RIMA) methodology are relevant given the significant investments in resilience programming and the continuing methodological gaps. However, although RIMA provides a basis for creating evidence on resilience investments, and FAO has been an important pioneer in resilience measurement, a wider system supporting resilience analysis is needed, based on a range of methodologies, responding to the information needs of decision-makers. Also, RIMA baseline lacks sufficient detail to allow articulating the feasibility of possible response options and have a practical impact on planning decisions; it has not demonstrated its added value over pre-existing food security, nutrition and risk indicators to help target interventions, and is not well adapted as an impact evaluation tool.Assessing INFORMED results against its intention to support knowledge production and sharing, to promote the replication of good practices and circular learning, the evaluation questioned the choice of creating a new knowledge management platform versus adopting a collaborative approach building on similar initiatives’ strengths. Poor strategic choices represented a fundamental constraint to reach intended objectives, such as, an insufficient understanding of users explaining the difficulty to trace the uptake and use of knowledge products. Nevertheless, the evaluation recognized the progressive investments in knowledge management and sizeable accomplishments of a relatively small team.The evaluation suggests strengthening capacities for the production and dissemination of forecast, scenario-based early warning as a basis for early action; developing a corporate strategy for partnering to strengthen early warning system capacities at various levels; promoting the use of a toolkit of approaches and investing in a knowledge management function dedicated to capturing and disseminating lessons on the effectiveness of EWEA and resilience interventions.
This report seeks to expand the understanding of anticipatory action in Small Island Developing States, with a focus on the geographic and socio-institutional aspects of independent Pacific Island Countries in the Southwest Pacific Ocean. This report provides a summary of regional and selected national contexts and approaches to the building blocks of anticipatory action in the Pacific Island Countries region. Through a combination of workshops and interviews with government agencies, regional organizations, international NGOs, multilateral groups, and country-based participants, the report provides a synthesized context for anticipatory action in the region. A case study section presents the anticipatory action context for Palau, Solomon Islands and Fiji. The discussion and conclusions point towards the feasibility of advancing anticipatory action and the broad governance that will need to be facilitated to formalize anticipatory actions.
FAO recognizes that those living in rural areas whose livelihoods depend heavily on natural resources, are disproportionately affected by climate risks because of their great likelihood of living in high-risk geographical locations as well as their high vulnerability to, and limited capacity to cope with, climate hazards due to low incomes, lack of savings, weaker social networks, low asset bases and heavy reliance on agriculture and natural resources. Protecting poor and vulnerable small scale producers from the negative impacts of climate risks is an imperative in order to reach FAO’s strategic objectives and achieve Sustainable development goal one and two. Managing Climate risks through social protection sheds light on social protection as an effective investment to safeguard the livelihood of small scale producers and strengthen their essential role in ensuring food security across the globe.
This report presents a perspective on the impacts of flooding in rural areas and how to address them in an integrated way that delivers multiple long-term benefits for people (food, water, and economic security) and nature. The challenges faced by rural communities are illustrated and a strategic approach to flood management is presented. The approach advocated is based on a paradigm of planning that connects the short and long term, seeks to simultaneously manage flood risk to people, their agrifood systems, related livelihoods and the economy, while promoting the positive (and necessary) role floods play in maintaining productive agriculture (and aquaculture) and ecosystem health. In doing so, the approach embeds the concepts of disaster risk reduction (DRR) that are integral to the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, which contributes to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the crucial need to progress at pace towards the Sustainable Development Goals. The report highlights how flood management practice has evolved throughout history largely in response to flood events. This heuristic approach has yielded some important advances in both policy and planning. Central to this has been the shift from a reactive emergency-based response towards a proactive approach aimed at reducing and managing flood risks. There is however more to do. Recognizing that rural areas have received disproportionately less attention, and current approaches to planning and management are less well established in rural areas compared to urban areas (Asian Development Bank, 2018), a small number of recommendations are set to help make more rapid progress towards flood resilience in rural settings.
