Sendai Framework

Sendai Framework The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 is an international accord adopted at the Third United Nations World Conference in Sendai, Miyagi that succeeded the Hyogo Framework for Action. It establishes priorities and measurable targets for reducing disaster risk across nations, subnational authorities, and civil society actors including United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, World Bank Group, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, and regional bodies such as the African Union, European Union, and Association of Southeast Asian Nations. The Framework builds on prior agreements like the Sendai, Miyagi conference outcomes and aligns with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Paris Agreement, and the Aichi Biodiversity Targets.

Background and development

The Framework emerged from the Third United Nations World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction convened by United Nations General Assembly and chaired by the Government of Japan in Sendai, Miyagi in March 2015, following implementation review of the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005–2015 and consultations involving United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, national delegations from Japan, United States, China, India, and Brazil, as well as non-state actors like International Committee of the Red Cross and World Meteorological Organization. Negotiations referenced antecedent instruments including the Yokohama Strategy, the Kobe Earthquake response studies, and lessons from disasters such as the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami, Hurricane Katrina, and the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami. Drafting sessions engaged experts from institutions including National Aeronautics and Space Administration, European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts, United Nations Development Programme, and universities such as University of Tokyo and London School of Economics.

Objectives and priorities

The Framework sets four priority areas: understanding disaster risk, strengthening disaster risk governance, investing in disaster risk reduction for resilience, and enhancing disaster preparedness for effective response and "Build Back Better" in recovery. These priorities guide integration with sectoral plans from actors including World Health Organization, United Nations Children's Fund, International Labour Organization, and Food and Agriculture Organization. Central measurable objectives include substantial reduction of global disaster mortality, reduction of affected persons, and decreased economic loss relative to Gross domestic product targets advanced by organizations like the International Monetary Fund and World Bank Group. The Framework explicitly addresses hazards monitored by organizations such as United States Geological Survey, European Space Agency, and Joint Research Centre (European Commission).

Framework structure and commitments

Structurally, the Framework defines seven global targets and outlines priorities for action across national, subnational, and local levels, engaging stakeholders including National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, indigenous organizations, private sector entities like World Economic Forum participants, and philanthropic actors such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. It commits signatories to integrate disaster risk reduction into laws and plans of states including Australia, Philippines, Mexico, Nepal, and New Zealand', while coordinating with regional mechanisms like the Caribbean Disaster Emergency Management Agency and Asian Disaster Reduction Center. Financial commitments involve mobilization from development banks such as the Asian Development Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank, and bilateral agencies including United States Agency for International Development and Japan International Cooperation Agency. Technical commitments draw on standards and tools from International Organization for Standardization, Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery, and the Sendai Cooperation Mechanism-style partnerships.

Implementation and monitoring

Implementation is overseen by the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction through national reporting mechanisms, voluntary national reviews, and the global review process linked to the United Nations General Assembly and the High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development. Monitoring uses indicators developed in consultation with technical partners such as United Nations Statistics Division, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, and scientific bodies like Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and International Science Council. Countries submit national progress reports and risk assessments coordinated with frameworks like the Sustainable Development Goals reporting and the Paris Agreement nationally determined contributions. Capacity-building programs operate through partnerships with United Nations Development Programme, Civil Defence and Emergency Management agencies, academic consortia including International Research Institute for Climate and Society, and regional training centers such as the Asian Disaster Preparedness Center.

Impact and criticism

The Framework catalyzed mainstreaming of disaster risk reduction across sectors and influenced national laws in states including Nepal, Philippines, Japan, Kenya, and Colombia while guiding investments by multilateral development banks and private insurers like Munich Re and Swiss Re. Its emphasis on "Build Back Better" informed post-disaster reconstruction in responses to events such as the 2015 Nepal earthquake and 2010 Chile earthquake recovery programs. Criticisms include uneven implementation across low-income countries, limited binding financial commitments from developed states including United States and European Union members, and challenges integrating risk metrics with economic statistics maintained by institutions like the International Monetary Fund and World Bank Group. Scholars affiliated with Harvard University, University of Oxford, and University of Manchester have noted gaps in accountability, disparities in data quality reported to the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, and insufficient linkage with humanitarian instruments such as the International Humanitarian Law discourse. Debates continue in forums like the United Nations General Assembly, World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction follow-ups, and policy platforms including the Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction about strengthening finance, governance, and science–policy interfaces.

Category:International agreements