Manchester Briefing #31 – Cities for a Resilient Recovery: International Lessons on Recovery from COVID-19
Produced by The University of Manchester, UK (Professor Duncan Shaw, Róisín Jordan, Alan Boyd and Dr. Simos Chari) in partnership with the Resilient Cities Network (Femke Gubbels, Archana Kannan)
Bi-weekly Manchester Briefing #31 – 13 May 2021
This week, we consider how social protection programmes, participatory and inclusive engagement processes, and investments in universal health coverage can play a key role in the response and recovery from COVID-19.
International Lessons
- Improving social protection programmes for sudden shocks (Vietnam)
- Increasing investment in stronger health programs and Universal Health Coverage (UN)
- Incentive programmes for volunteers (Canada)
- Recovery of local tourism and hospitality (Ireland)
- Renewal of high street and town centres (United Kingdom)
- Infrastructure investment for targeted recovery (OECD)
- Participatory approaches to climate adaptation (Tonga)
- Engaging citizens and deliberative processes for recovery (USA, OECD)
Health and Wellbeing: Everyone living and working in the city has access to what they need to survive and thrive
Consider increasing investment in Universal Health Coverage and stronger health systems. A recent UN policy brief identified the significant gap in health coverage as a core reason for COVID-19 having such devastating impacts on people’s lives. Universal health coverages means that all people and communities can access the health services that they need, with three key priorities; ‘equity in access, sufficient quality and no undue financial risk’. Consider:
- Establish universal provision for ‘COVID-19 testing, isolating, contact tracing’ and treatment
- Ensure protection of essential health services during the critical phases of the pandemic (e.g. services for sexual and reproductive health)
- Through international partnerships, ensure future COVID-19 vaccines are a ‘global public good with equitable access for everyone, everywhere’
- Protect and invest in core health systems functions that are critical to protecting and promoting health and well-being, known as ‘Common goods for health’
- Suspend user fees for COVID-19 and other essential health care; reduce financial barriers to service use
- Strengthen local, national and global pandemic preparedness and aim for healthy societies for the future through a whole-of-society approach
Sources: https://tinyurl.com/k6h8evch
Economy and Society: The social & financial systems that enable urban populations to live peacefully, and act collectively
Consider how to improve social protection programmes so that they are disaster-responsive. Social protection (SP) is critical to help poor and vulnerable households to cope with sudden shocks. Recovery from COVID-19 can aim to better understand and reduce the vulnerabilities that are exposed during crises, and to reinstate preparedness for and resilience to future events. Consider reviewing SP programmes to improve their capacity to respond to disasters:
- Assess the institutional capacity for improving disaster-responsive SP by identifying:
– The key actors who are engaged in, or are responsible for, social protection (e.g. national/local government agencies, NGOs, civil society) and other core actors from relevant sectors (e.g. health, education, infrastructure). Define the roles, responsibilities and mandates of key actors
– What the current capacities are (e.g. ‘knowledge and/or experience’ on disaster-responsive SP) and what are the “surge” capacities in staffing (including the ‘re-deployment capacities of government staff from non-affected areas’ and the civil society supports available)
– If the current policy and legislative framework for SP, climate change adaption and disaster risk management recognises the roles of all key actors and whether adjustments are required to advance SP to effectively respond to disasters (In Myanmar, ‘a legal mandate is in place for the restoration of livelihoods to pre-disaster levels’) - Review information systems to ensure accurate data is available that will trigger a social protection response to disasters:
– Identify the characteristics of poverty and vulnerability data that underpin social protection and other programmes that aim to reduce poverty and vulnerability
– Identify the measures and methods used to determine the socio-economic status of households and communities and assess if these generate accurate information on vulnerable households (see TMB Issue 34 ‘vulnerability in the era of COVID-19’)
– Define the characteristics of disasters that you aim to address – e.g. ‘type, expected speed of onset, geographical distribution (e.g. urban/rural differences)’ and numbers of people at risk
– ‘In Vietnam, the “poor list” and “near-poor list”’ are regularly updated at local levels and inform the identification process of SP beneficiaries – this mechanism may also ‘serve as a pre-identified list of households disproportionately vulnerable to disasters’ - Assess pre-existing social protection programme performance during COVID-19. Identify the additional measures and interventions that may have been required as a direct result of the crisis, to understand where gaps may exist and what longer-term adjustments may be required to increase preparedness for future crises
- Review financing mechanisms for SP programmes to identify the strengths and weaknesses of current budget allocation. Allocate additional funding where required to enable SP programmes to rapidly and effectively respond to a variety of disasters (e.g. targeted funding at local levels to areas that are frequently impacted by floods)
Sources: https://tinyurl.com/nyy7y3mf
Consider that recovery and renewal plans for high street and town centre development for local growth should be support by robust evidence. The pandemic has accelerated the change to shopping habits, triggered economic downturn and changed how people live their lives (e.g. working from home). Evidence provided by ‘what works centre for local economic growth’ prompts thinking as to what types of investment and interventions are likely to be most beneficial when designing recovery plans. The report considers that:
- ‘Supply side’ investments (e.g. shop front renovations) should be supported by investments and policies that target increasing consumer demand
- Education and training to improve the skills profile of local communities can positively impact residents average wages, which will increase spending power and demand for local goods and services
- There is little evidence to support thinking that large department stores/supermarkets (‘anchor stores’) are of more value that other shops, meaning that balanced and equal support should be provided to protect business continuity of all shops
- Increased levels of working from home is unlikely to instigate large population shifts away from towns and cities and ‘proposals that are based on the assumption that housing supply and population density will change significantly should provide robust evidence to underpin those assumptions’
- Recovery and renewal proposals/plans which state that ‘physical or cultural regeneration initiatives will also delver economic growth’ should also provide robust evidence as little evidence has shown that investment in new community assets/improved housing quality will deliver local growth
Infrastructure and Environment: The man-made and natural systems that provide critical services, and protect and connect urban assets, enabling the flow of foods, services, and knowledge
Consider targeted infrastructure investment to stimulate recovery. Infrastructure investment has been found to effectively stimulate economic activity. Project prioritization and methods of financing are two key policy and investment questions, noted by the International Transport Forum (OECD). Consider:
- Projects which deliver jobs, stimulate growth in the short- and medium-term should be prioritised
- Those projects that are already in the pipeline with cleared planning and environmental approval should be the focus
- ‘Interventions should be Timely, Targeted and Temporary: the IMF’s TTT principle’
- Local projects should be accurately estimated and the life-span of projects should be effectively forecasted
- Incentives or stimulus packages should be based on aims to drive ‘decarbonization, social equity and resilience’
Sources: https://tinyurl.com/45cj3cer
Consider an inclusive participatory approach for climate change adaption strategies. COVID-19 presents an opportunity to address climate change impacts and improve disaster risk management. Tonga is highly exposed to natural hazards and the effects of climate change. In an effort to develop a ‘resilient Tonga’, an inclusive participatory approach has been employed that is based on strong governance and the development of knowledgeable and proactive communities. A broad range of goals, strategies and projects have been identified within Tonga’s ‘Joint National Action Plan 2 on Climate Change and Disaster Risk Management’ (CCADRM), including:
- The introduction of new policies and projects (e.g. National Forest Policy, Land Use Policy, Tonga Ridge to Reef Project) to improve governance for CCADRM
- Increase information, education and understanding of CCADRM by initiating awareness programmes and the establishment of a climate change data management system
- Improvement of analysis and assessments of vulnerability to climate change impacts and disaster risks through coastal assessment and protection projects (E.g. Lifuka Island vulnerability assessment and adaptation to sea-level rise community project (p69))
- Investment in public infrastructure (e.g. schools and community halls) to increase their ‘structural resilience to climate impacts and the construction of evacuation roads to increase community preparedness and resilience to the risks and impacts of disasters’
- Design and delivery of renewable and energy efficiency projects to increase the technical reliability, economic affordability and environmental reliability of energy. E.g. Outer Island Renewable Energy Project which aims to provide a ‘secure, sustainable and environmentally-sound source of electricity’ to Tonga’s outer islands
- The establishment of collaborative forums to include non-governmental organisations, charities and community committees to enhance partnerships, cooperation and collaboration between national and local government agencies, civil society, NGOs, the private sector and the public
Sources: https://tinyurl.com/m3sau9e6
CONTINUE READING HERE: https://resilientcitiesnetwork.org/urban_resiliences/manchester-briefing-31-cities-for-a-resilient-recovery-international-lessons-on-recovery-from-covid-19/
DOWNLOAD THE FULL PDF OF THE BRIEFING IN THE ATTACHMENT TO READ MORE.
