Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Resilience has gained significant prominence following the re-examination of the performance of the humanitarian and development aid systems in light of the two major food security crises in East and West Africa over the last two years, coupled with ongoing ‘post-2015’ negotiations on key global disaster risk reduction, climate change and development policy and resourcing. Resilience has largely been communicated by donor and other key actors as a political agenda, devoid of clear technical guidance as to its added value and how it changes programming on the ground. As a result, country staff are either cynical of its value, are confused as to what it means, or use it as another opportunity to attract funding or to justify their narrow institutional mandate. There are relatively few actors who engage with resilience armed with specific technical guidance informed by comprehensive risk and vulnerability analyses. The continued ‘improper’ application of resilience reinforces some views that this is another ‘buzzword’ or ‘fad’, devoid of real meaning for programming, and will mean that the approach will be eventually dropped from policy and programming when ‘the next big thing’ comes along. This study argues that resilience has sufficient technical added-value (distinct from resilience as a political agenda) and outlines how it can be applied to programming, and, in response to challenges on the ground how donors and key partners can incentivise integrating resilience into programming. There are also recommendations for further study to support further integration of resilience into programming.

Development

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Early 2010, the DAC International Network on Conflict and Fragility (INCAF) Task Team on Peacebuilding, Statebuilding and Security commissioned an analysis of the critical impediments to effective donor engagement in the area of security and justice development in conflict-affected and fragile environments. This analysis seeks to inform a change agenda to help make donor support to justice and security more effective. It is intended to serve as the base of a larger piece of work, and builds on the World Bank‘s 2011 World Development Report and the OECD‘s 2011 Policy Guidance on Supporting Statebuilding in Situations of Conflict and Fragility...

Development

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

This paper explores the policy coherence for development (PCD) dimensions of green growth strategies pursued by OECD member states. The coherence challenge is to design OECD green growth policies in order to maximise the positive synergies and minimise the negatives effects on pro-poor growth in developing countries. Coherence issues across three cross-cutting themes, climate change, biodiversity and innovation policy, are considered, before a comprehensive set of PCD issues related to agricultural livelihoods, fisheries livelihoods and the energy and minor sectors in developing countries are discussed. In doing so three PCD case studies, Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), the reform of EU biofuels policy and EU fisheries access, are presented and lessons for the green growth agenda are derived.

Development

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Resilience has gained significant prominence following the re-examination of the performance of the humanitarian and development aid systems in light of the two major food security crises in East and West Africa over the last two years, coupled with ongoing ‘post-2015’ negotiations on key global disaster risk reduction, climate change and development policy and resourcing. Resilience has largely been communicated by donor and other key actors as a political agenda, devoid of clear technical guidance as to its added value and how it changes programming on the ground. As a result, country staff are either cynical of its value, are confused as to what it means, or use it as another opportunity to attract funding or to justify their narrow institutional mandate. There are relatively few actors who engage with resilience armed with specific technical guidance informed by comprehensive risk and vulnerability analyses. The continued ‘improper’ application of resilience reinforces some views that this is another ‘buzzword’ or ‘fad’, devoid of real meaning for programming, and will mean that the approach will be eventually dropped from policy and programming when ‘the next big thing’ comes along. This study argues that resilience has sufficient technical added-value (distinct from resilience as a political agenda) and outlines how it can be applied to programming, and, in response to challenges on the ground how donors and key partners can incentivise integrating resilience into programming. There are also recommendations for further study to support further integration of resilience into programming.

Development

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Early 2010, the DAC International Network on Conflict and Fragility (INCAF) Task Team on Peacebuilding, Statebuilding and Security commissioned an analysis of the critical impediments to effective donor engagement in the area of security and justice development in conflict-affected and fragile environments. This analysis seeks to inform a change agenda to help make donor support to justice and security more effective. It is intended to serve as the base of a larger piece of work, and builds on the World Bank‘s 2011 World Development Report and the OECD‘s 2011 Policy Guidance on Supporting Statebuilding in Situations of Conflict and Fragility...

Development