A Case Study: Implementation Progress review of the RMI Joint National Action Plan on Climate Adapta

The PIFS would like to thank the Office of the Chief Secretary (OCS) of the RMI for its leadership and guidance throughout the course of the review as well as the many Government agencies and other stakeholder organisations and individuals that were consulted and/or provided information to support its successful conclusion. [...] The Government of RMI requested the support of the Pacific Resilience Program Regional Coordination Unit-Project Management Unit (PREP 5R CU-PMU)1 to undertake a review of the national progress against the JNAP in 2018, at the end of its i ntended implementation period and an important juncture in the evolution of RMI’s climate change response.2 1 The PREP RCU-PMU is hosted within the Pacific Isla. [...] The key findings of the JNAP review and associated recommendations are summarised below: 1) UNDERSTANDING RISK – Why are we doing this? A significant finding of the JNAP review was that the objectives of the plan and the premise for these objectives were based on generalised descriptions of possible risks and lacked consideration of the specific nature of the localised climate change impacts and i. [...] A further key outcome of the review was the recommendation that in some cases, roles, responsibilities and institutional arrangements may need to be revisited and strategically re-organised to better address the complex and multi-sectoral nature of these risks and to enhance the capabilities and oversight required to address them. [...] The investment rationale for building climate and disaster resilience in RMI and the need to prioritise the protection of a highly vulnerable population provides a strong supporting example of the concept of the ‘Triple Dividend of Resilience’ [21] which is the logic for identifying investments that simultaneously help to reduce risks and losses, protect and bolster economic opportunities, and unl.