Thumbnail Image

Disaster management cells in geo-isolated ruralities of Northern Albania

XV World Forestry Congress, 2-6 May 2022










Also available in:
No results found.

Related items

Showing items related by metadata.

  • Thumbnail Image
    Book (stand-alone)
    Comparative analysis of livelihood recovery in the post-conflict periods – Karamoja and Northern Uganda 2019
    Also available in:
    No results found.

    This paper examines the parallel but separate trajectories of peace-building, recovery and transformation that have occurred over the past 15 years in northern (Acholi and Lango sub-regions) and northeastern (Karamoja sub-region) Uganda. While keeping in mind the key differences in these areas, we highlight the similarities in the nature of recovery, the continuing challenges and the need for external actors to keep in mind the ongoing tensions and vulnerability that could undermine the tenuous peace. The initial peace processes in both northern Uganda and Karamoja were largely top-down in nature, with little participation from the affected populations. In Karamoja, the Ugandan military started a forced disarmament campaign in 2006. This was the second such effort in five years and was top-down and heavy-handed. Although many observers gave it little chance of success, by 2013 large-scale cattle raids were infrequent, and road ambushes were almost non-existent. Critically, local initiatives eventually emerged in parallel to the top-down disarmament efforts. Prime amongst these were local resolutions adopted in 2013–2014 that created a system of compensation for thefts, enforced by “peace committees.” In northern Uganda, a top-down, politically negotiated peace process between the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) and the Government of Uganda ended two decades of fighting in 2006. The internally displaced person (IDP) camps were disbanded, and thousands of displaced people returned to their rural homes, some because they no other option once assistance in the camps ceased. One of the most important factors in recovery in Karamoja has been the growth of markets. Traders were reluctant to bring wares to the region during the period of insecurity, and hence goods were few and prices high. Today, most trading centres host markets on a weekly basis, and shops have consistent inventories. In northern Uganda, the biggest driver of recovery has been the return of displaced people to their homes and the resumption of farming. By 2011, crop production had resumed its pre-conflict status as the primary livelihood in the region. In both locations, however, engagement in markets is limited, and many people remain economically marginalized. Challenges to recovery and long-term stability are similar across the two locations. Both northern Uganda and Karamoja continue to struggle with food insecurity and malnutrition, despite the massive influx of development funds, improved security and expansion of markets. In northern Uganda, the conflict continues to influence household livelihoods. Households that have a member who experienced war crimes are consistently worse off. These continuing problems with food security and nutrition call into question many assumptions about recovery and development. In particular, the idea that peace will bring a natural bounce in economic and household well-being does not appear to hold up in these cases. Additional structural challenges to recovery in both locations include climate change and environmental degradation, poor governance and corruption, limited opportunities for decent work, livelihood transformation and loss, and conflict over land. These factors reinforce each other and make it extremely difficult for average households to develop sustainable and secure livelihoods. External interventions often fail to take into account the local priorities and realities in these areas. Many programmes are place based or focus on rural areas, but the population is in flux. This is especially true for young people. In addition, while many people are doing much better than they were 15 years ago, others are being pushed out of pastoralism and are struggling to achieve diversified and sustainable livelihoods. Overall, while the recent trajectories of recovery in Karamoja and northern Uganda are remarkably similar, the context, livelihoods and challenges in each location are importantly unique. National actors should not seek to derive combined approaches or policies that lump together these two areas. In both cases, the lived reality, history and experiences of the population should be central to designing appropriate, effective and sustainable responses to the ongoing obstacles to a stable peace and full recovery.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Book (stand-alone)
    Comprehensive analysis of the disaster risk reduction and management system for agriculture in Albania 2018
    Also available in:

    This report aims to highlight the current strengths of the institutional DRR system for agriculture in Albania as well as indicate existing gaps and capacity needs to further enhance it. A comprehensive assessment is conducted, which includes a general overview of the country’s agricultural sector and outlines the most frequent natural hazards that are impacting the sector. It is followed by an analysis of the existing legal, policy and institutional structure and discusses various components of the system, including e.g. the functioning of early warning systems, assessments of disaster risks, post-disaster needs assessments, including damages and losses assessments and the availability of agricultural insurance for farmers. It concludes by providing recommendations for capacity building interventions to strengthen the current system to reduce the adverse impacts of natural hazards, in particular, floods, landslides and droughts, and climate change on agriculture in Albania. This report is prepared for the FAO project ‘Enhancement of Disaster Risk Reduction and Management (DRR/M) capacities and mainstreaming of Climate Change Adaptation (CCA) practices into the Agricultural Sector in the Western Balkans (TCP/RER/3504).
  • Thumbnail Image
    Book (stand-alone)
    Enabling pathways for drought finance in agriculture 2023
    Also available in:
    No results found.

    Although risk-based approaches to disaster management are particularly effective, the rapid start-up of risk financing is hardly conceivable in the case of a drought that has been grossly underfinanced. Even if existing resources are spent more effectively, the gap far exceeds the active finance flows. Creating an enabling environment for the financial sector is the first step to intensifying investments, and it must be done by aligning the interest of the involved actors, including public and private stakeholders, the development and scientific community, and the impacted sectors. This report provides an in-depth analysis of the structural particularities and the status of drought finance. It lines up pathways to stimulate the financial environment by proposing innovative strategies, in other words, enabling pathways. It responds to the pressing concern of what innovative instruments and strategies should be used to make drought finance attractive for all sectors. The goal is to roll out larger-scale programmes to enable drought financing to yield a good return, thus supporting the efforts of the global community to build drought resilience through increased finance flows. By providing pragmatic steps towards the acceleration of drought finance, the publication contributes to several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including SDGs 1, 2, 5, 6, 13, 15 and 17. It is in line with the objectives of the FAO Strategic Framework, namely, it addresses the objective of the Better Production to ensure “resilient and sustainable agrifood systems”, and the objective of the Better Life to promote “inclusive economic growth by reducing inequalities”.

Users also downloaded

Showing related downloaded files

No results found.