Can a Systems Change Approach Improve Disaster Management?
Back in November 2022, I attended the Australasian Aid Conference (AAC2022) where my colleague, Ancilla Bere, and I presented the work of a program I am working on related to the learning and good practice we have accumulated on systems change in disaster management in Indonesia. The presentation assessed some of the methodologies and approaches that we have found to be successful for shifting mindsets around systems thinking, as well as some of the higher profile changes that we have begun to witness.
You can read the full article which was prepared following the conference on DevPolicy here.
Can a systems change approach improve disaster
management?
By Denika Blacklock and Ancilla Bere on Feb 17, 2023 06:00
am
The 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami triggered a shift in thinking in disaster management in Indonesia, from reactive response and recovery towards preparedness, mitigation and risk reduction. It was a major turning point for the Government of Indonesia in addressing disaster risk management. Significant investments in technical capacity to develop institutional, policy and regulatory frameworks were made over the past 15 years, including investments in civil society organisation technical capacity.
However,
many other institutions, both national and subnational, have disaster
management mandates, which has contributed to overlapping roles within the
existing complex policy environment. This has led to varying degrees of siloed
disaster management system organisation and service delivery across the
country. For example, there are more than 12 separate government-led
community-based disaster risk management (CBDRM) programs
which overlap across villages, resulting in inefficient use of funds
and uncoordinated implementation. In addition, the absence of technical
guidelines to support implementation of regulations has prolonged inconsistent
interpretation and technical challenges at the implementation level.
In
light of these systemic challenges, the Australia-Indonesia
Partnership in Disaster Risk Management (AIP-DRM, also known as SIAP
SIAGA) designed a theory of change grounded in systems thinking. The assumption
is that understanding bottlenecks, improving policy and regulatory coherence,
and clarifying the roles and responsibilities of disaster management actors
(both government and non-government) and how they coordinate (horizontal and
vertical) will, over time, improve sectoral planning and budgeting and lead to
more consistent, effective and inclusive implementation of disaster management
services.
In
2020, SIAP SIAGA implemented a political economy analysis, followed by 11
in-depth studies, to understand the challenges to system effectiveness related
to policy coherence, and clarity of roles and coordination mechanisms. Thematic
analysis of the
study results identified seven ‘leverage points’ or ‘change spaces’
where the program felt sustainable improvements to the system could be made.
Program activities in 2021-22 have been driven by an approach that prioritises
facilitation rather than direct capacity support, and relies on routine
reflection and learning with partners to ensure that the program is following
emerging change pathways rather than preset targets.
In
order to facilitate systems change, SIAP SIAGA adopted an adaptive
management approach, which has been essential to adjust to emerging
bottlenecks that result as initial bottlenecks are resolved. The program’s
theory of change underpins all strategic decision making – activities are
planned annually, determined based on potential to contribute to the changes
the program wants to see.
This
process has required substantial patience – both to build trust with
stakeholders, and to adjust mindsets internally as a team, moving from a
target-oriented to a problem-driven approach. This has also required doing away
with the terms ‘monitoring’ and ‘reporting’, and instead focusing on the
concept of collaborative evaluation, using a quarterly reflection process – an
experimental tool combining a most-significant-change approach and longitudinal
study. All reflection focuses on progress towards outcomes, rather than results
at output level.
SIAP
SIAGA has also put significant emphasis on the use of real-time
evaluation and learning, and routine partner reflection workshops.
These processes support continual communication between partners, particularly
as they build trust around the use of common language and issues; and place
partners at the centre of the program’s decision making, as they are the users
of the system that is being improved.
Some
examples of key changes evidenced to date include:
- Clarity of roles and
responsibilities – for example, agreement between the Ministry of Home
Affairs and the National Disaster Management Agency on mandates related to
administrative oversight of disaster management (MoHA) and technical
guidance (NDMA), which has created clarity for subnational governments on
which national institution to direct questions to.
- Policy coherence – dialogue
between national and subnational authorities to clarify policy
requirements for post-disaster rehabilitation and reconstruction has
helped to identify regulatory gaps and recommendations, with the revision
of the national policy on subnational budgeting processes currently
awaiting ministerial approval.
- Coordination – an
inter-ministerial coordination group at the national level has improved
policy-level coordination for CBDRM programming and resources across four
key ministries. This is supported by a CBDRM dashboard and a catalogue
platform of preparedness programs, to reduce duplication and promote
effectiveness of programming at the village level.
Why
is a systems change approach working for SIAP SIAGA? We see two main reasons.
The
approach convenes diverse actors at all levels, to create a common language on
key issues. This facilitates system alignment and determines the extent to
which differences in priorities can be accommodated, and helps understand how
the various parts of the system work together (and at times against each
other). It facilitates partners to seek solutions that work for them, based on
the common objective they have agreed to work towards.
The
approach recognises the complexity of the disaster management system and
existing capacities (policies, regulations, institutions and people) –
assessing the system as a whole rather than specific parts. It highlights the
need to focus on policy coherence and coordination across the sector – rather
than just within institutions – as the next step in Indonesia’s disaster
management journey. Disaster management is as much about public policy as it is
about technical expertise, meaning systems thinking is essential if development
outcomes are to be achieved, particularly as the disaster management sector
grows more complex over time.
A
systems approach is a valuable model for middle-income countries like
Indonesia, where significant resources are already invested, and capacity is in
place. Systems change approaches, supplemented by adaptive management
practices, create space to accommodate the increasing complexity of disaster
management – and broader public policy initiatives, including climate change,
public health and social stability.
About the
author/s
Denika Blacklock
Denika Blacklock is the Head of Knowledge Performance and Learning for the
Australia-Indonesia Partnership in Disaster Risk Management (AIP-DRM, also
known as SIAP SIAGA) program.
Ancilla Bere
Ancilla Bere is the Provincial Coordinator for East Java for the
Australia-Indonesia Partnership in Disaster Risk Management (AIP-DRM, also
known as SIAP SIAGA) program.
Disclosure
The Australia-Indonesia Partnership in Disaster Risk
Management is funded by the Australian government.
The
post Can a systems
change approach improve disaster management? appeared first on Devpolicy Blog
from the Development Policy Centre.
Comments
Post a Comment