Recovery, Renewal, Resilience

TMB Issue 37 detailed some investment initiatives adopted in France, Sweden, Finland and Chile to stimulate a green recovery. This lesson brings together further examples of how countries are implementing green recovery and renewal plans which aim to cut emissions in the aftermath of COVID-19. Consider:

• Italy has deployed a stimulus support package targeting the agricultural sector, designing “integrated projects” which include green community initiatives and awareness campaigns around environmental challenges
• Ireland committed to “raising the energy rating of 500,000 homes by 2030” in 2020. A new green recovery stimulus package includes a “retrofit skills training initiative” and additional funding targeted at the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland to expand the initiative. This is expected to create an additional 3,200 “quality, sustainable jobs”
• Spain has included funding for “housing renovation and urban regeneration” which aims to improve the “energy performance of buildings”, as part of their Recovery and Resilience plan, which has been submitted to the EU Commission
• South Korea has designed an initiative “green transformation of living infrastructure” which aims to stimulate employment growth and transform “state-run facilities (e.g. community health clinics, public housing, childcare facilities) to zero-emissions”. The plan is to replace “fossil-fuel based utility systems with efficient, green systems, and implement 100 new IT-based systems to help resolve environmental issues, including low-carbon vehicle manufacturing and air quality improvement”

Throughout the pandemic, many health systems across the world have come within days of being overwhelmed with COVID-19 patients, and others have been unable to prevent their systems from being overwhelmed. Pakistan have adopted “health stewardship” as an approach to ensure public health is a “joint function of national and provincial governments, where service delivery relies on mixed health systems”. The response in Singh district, which has the highest rate of COVID-19 cases in Pakistan, was underpinned by public-private partnerships with local government. This provides insights into how public-private engagement can be accelerated during the crisis and how “existing policy windows can be used for longer-term planning for pandemics and Universal Health Coverage”. Consider that:

• Stewarding partnerships enabled rapid acceleration of testing through private laboratories, supported surge capacity to be met in local private hospitals and increased “critical care training of public sector hospitals” through partnerships with private hospitals
• “Health stewardship” can enable advisory relationships with the private sector to create a joint operational response and strategic communications during crisis
• Procurement (e.g. of PPE) and supply chain management can be enhanced through “digitalised data-sharing of cases and hospital capacity across private and public providers”
• Stewardship relationships may be transactional (e.g. limited to purchasing arrangements) but can also include “wide-ranging formal agreements for co-production”, providing an opportunity to reform public and private health partnerships
• Devolved operations have proven to offer a flexible and effective response where there is rapid “data sharing for national-provincial coordination, and well-informed local governments who can mobilize inclusive and co-produced responses”

Finland’s ‘Sustainable Growth Program: Recovery Plan’ sets out the reforms and public investment projects that aim to boost “competitiveness, investment, skills development and research, and innovation”. The overall objectives of the programme are:

• “Decrease greenhouse gas emissions;
• Productivity growth;
• Raising the employment rate;
• Faster accessibility to care;
• Progress in equality”

This recovery plan has recently been submitted to the EU Commission for review. The plan is not yet approved, however, this lesson offers an insight into Finland’s Recovery and Resilience priorities. The programme is built around four key pillars:

• “A green transition to support structural adjustment of the economy and underpin a carbon-neutral welfare society;
• Digitalisation and a digital economy to strengthen productivity and increase access to services;
• Raising the employment rate and skill levels to accelerate sustainable growth;
• Access to health and social services will be improved and their cost-effectiveness enhanced”

COVID-19’s prolonged nature, and the intensity of measures taken to respond to it, have brought major disruptions with lasting consequences. Our relationship to mortality and death has been redefined, not least by disruption to traditional rituals that enable societies to cope with and overcome major trauma. A recent webinar, organised as part of the Manchester Webinar Series, considered how we might collectively remember the COVID-19 pandemic. Our speakers reviewed lessons from the past on building resilience through coproduced commemoration and discussed key considerations for policy makers and communities in planning to recognise and remember the huge losses caused by COVID-19. Consider the key lessons offered by our speakers:

• There is no one way to remember. Unlike most disasters, each individual’s experience of COVID-19 is a personal one and commemoration activities will require careful consideration around ways to bring people together to collectively to remember while also recognising the uniqueness of everyone’s experience
• The co-production of activities can provide a way to ensure commemoration is inclusive of all of those who would like to be involved, to create a collaborative and bottom-up as well as top-down delivery of remembrance, and enable communities to take ownership of their remembrance
• Consideration for who will lead and be involved in these conversation will be really important, to mediate, and to support communities to find ways to compromise on differing views and perspectives on commemoration
• The timing of commemoration is a challenge, considering that COVID-19 is now a long-term chronic problem and we are not at the end of the disaster. The pandemic has seen commemoration since the beginning, demonstrating how communities can begin to create spaces of remembrance even while the crisis persists. Some examples of these commemoration activities can be found in TMB Issue 34 and Issue 29
• Memorials can be political, and grand gestures such as monuments can fade, or be contested. This reinforces the need for co-produced commemoration, enabling the voices of those who will benefit most from commemoration activities to be heard and actively participate
• Education is a good form of remembering, through storytellers or creating spaces (online or in local newspapers) where people can share their individual experiences of the pandemic. Recording those memories now will enable authentic materials to support education in years to come
• Think about how those who have lower agency in communities will remember (e.g. children who have lost grandparents). Commemoration could be done by creating spaces in schools/community youth groups for teachers/youth volunteers to support children

The UN-HABITAT City Resilience Global Programme (CRGP) define urban resilience as the “measurable ability of any urban system, with its inhabitants, to maintain continuity through all shocks and stresses, while positively adapting and transforming towards sustainability”. This gives rise to the following ‘Urban Resilience Principles’ to consider:

‘Dynamic nature of urban resilience’

• Recognise that resilience is a fluid condition and requires that systems “evolve, transform and adapt to current and future conditions”. Resilience building activities require “context-specific” and adaptable plans and activities which account for the complex and “dynamic nature of risk and resilience”

‘Systemic approach to cities’

• Acknowledge that urban areas consist of “interconnected systems through complex networks” and even small adaptions can impact the entire network of systems. A wide-ranging and comprehensive approach is required to account for the interdependencies that exist within urban systems and are exposed to disruption during crisis

‘Promoting participation in planning and governance’

• Co-production of resilience planning and governance can enhance the “prosperity” of stakeholders (e.g. city residents), increase a sense of local ownership and achieve more effective implementation of resilience building plans and activities

‘Multi-stakeholder engagement’

• “Continuity of governance, economic activity and other city functions” is critical to a resilient system. Facilitating collaborative communication and working between all interested stakeholders such as “public entities, the private sector, civil society, academic institutions and the city community”, is essential

‘Strive towards the Sustainable Development Goals’ (SDGs)

• Underpinning resilience building plans and initiatives with SDGs can ensure that human rights are “fulfilled, respected, and protected”

Use of public transport can “reduce carbon emissions, improve air quality and public health”. The Local Government Association (LGA) UK note that COVID-19 has exacerbated pre-existing challenges in the decline of the bus industry and recommend that recovery should employ “council’s and central government’s funding, infrastructure and traffic powers to work in partnership with public transport providers”. A study by the LGA aimed to understand local authority (LA) recovery priorities for local transport provision, what can accelerate these priorities, what challenges have prevented these priorities from being successfully implemented previously and what reforms are required for recovery and renewal. Consider the themes for recovery identified by local councils in this study:

‘Deliver Local Authority responsibilities effectively’

• Increase the capabilities of LAs to provide school transport, “socially necessary bus services” and to account for the needs of communities e.g. elderly populations:
  • Increase LAs agency on how local funds are spent to improve their ability to address their responsibilities and context specific challenges posed by some operating environments (e.g. rural areas)

‘Make bus services more accessible for commuters’

• Affordable, practical and convenient services are viewed as a new way to “connect new communities, reduce car dependency and congestions, lower carbon emission and fight climate change, improve air quality and health, and tackle social inequalities”. Examples of best practice include:
  • More efficient services which reduce travel times and operating costs, renewed branding and increased marketing
  • Integrate service networks with other networks such as rail/tram/cycle lanes, and integrate tickets and payment to improve ease of travel across various networks

‘New Approaches to Transport Delivery’

• New challenges caused by the pandemic, pre-existing problems and specific contextual issues (E.g. rural area networks) require innovative solutions, for example:
  • “Demand Responsive Transport (DRT)” can support improvements to connect rural and isolated networks and communities, create “flexibility for school transport and be used as model for community led transport schemes” (See Rural and Demand-Led Transport)
  • “Total Transport and Mobility as a Service (MaaS)” can support integration of transport network modes, tickets and payments and sectoral transport (e.g. health, education, tourism)

‘Link Public Transport and Development’

• Co-ordinate “land use planning and local public transport planning to build demand, reduce car reliance and ensure people have equitable access to jobs, healthcare and other services”, by:
  • Designing “liveable neighbourhoods” that reduce people’s need for non-local travel (increasing local services e.g. through hubs)

‘Contribute to tackling climate change’

• Address negative impacts of transport on the environment by improving bus fleets - replacing older vehicles with low and zero emission vehicles e.g. Coventry All Electric Bus

These themes in this report relate to six case study areas in the UK, with feedback sessions with wider local authorities suggesting that these themes are shared, but their scale and implementation may vary depending on the local context.

The Mobilising Volunteers Effectively (MoVE) project, led by Universities of Sheffield, Hull and Leeds, aims to understand the ways in which communities have mobilised in response to COVID. The project has released a number of reports which set out the findings from the first phase of the project. The ‘Resilience of the Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS) across Yorkshire and the Humber’ (May 2021) report highlights the challenges created for VCS organisations due to a “rise in demand, diminished donations and restricted opportunities to trade and raise funds”. The emergence of multi-agency partnership working (e.g. between local governments, VCS organisations, mutual aid/ informal community groups and businesses) has supported local response capabilities throughout the pandemic, highlighting a need for a more strategic approach to strengthen the partnerships, relationships and capabilities of communities to collectively prepare for future shocks and build resilience. The findings are informed by 407 VCS organisations responses to a ‘Resilience Survey’. Consider the key recommendations set out in this report:

• Ensure volunteers and those involved in VCS organisations are included in community mental health and wellbeing support in the aftermath of the pandemic
• Support small local VCS organisations, who may lack sufficient infrastructure to secure grant funding, with guidance on grant application. This could also be supported by simplifying the grant application process
• The provision of practical support (e.g. fundraising support) and increasing volunteer recruitment, retention and training support, e.g. through partnerships, for example:
  • Sandwell council partner with local VCS organisations to provide free e-learning to volunteers covering topics such as “child protection, fire safety, information sharing” and more
  • A community-run Red Cross Cardiac First Response volunteer group in Ireland, partner with the local fire brigade and other local authority organisations to provide emergency response training to volunteers and support activities to raise vital funds for ambulances and medical equipment
• Targeted financial support through government subsidy for VCS organisations who are providing services for “children and younger people” as they were found to be “least financially viable over time”. The report recommends that the “art, culture and heritage and community development” VCS organisations should then be prioritised and targeted for financial support

TMB Issue 8 describes how recovery and renewal requires broader strategic partnership working nationally, regionally and locally. The relationships that have been developed through the pandemic can underpin recovery and renewal initiatives, enabling national and local action through multi-departmental and cross-organisational working. Key to these partnerships is recognising that partners have power and place-based relationships that will be crucial to the success of recovery and renewal activities.

This week’s briefing launches our searchable database of international lessons on Recovery and Renewal, and we also take the opportunity to share some brief details our activities and progress so far in the Recovery, Renewal, Resilience (RRR) project.

To read this briefing in full, follow the source link below to TMB Issue 40.

Featuring a recent blog written by Abbie Winton, Alliance Manchester Business School

A recent TMB (Issue 33) discussed the gendered economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and presented the recommendations set out in the report produce by the Women and Equalities Committee entitled ‘Unequal impact? Coronavirus and the gendered economic impact’. This previous lesson explored how recovery strategies can address impacts, mitigate the reinforcement of inequalities and how renewal initiatives can transform the position of women in the labour market.

The ability to rapidly transition between jobs can support an individual or household to recover from an economic shock, such as the shock delivered by the pandemic. Occupational segregation refers to the unequal distribution of people across and within certain occupations, based on characteristics such as gender or ethnic background[1]. The pandemic has had disproportionate impacts on women’s experience of work, particularly BAME women, as they are more likely to work in low-paying and informal segregated roles, making them more vulnerable to the economic impacts of the pandemic. Therefore, gender, racial and ethnic inequalities are at risk of being reinforced, exacerbated or created[2].

This week we spotlight a recent think piece written by Abbie Winton, Alliance Manchester Business School[3], which focuses on gender and food retailing. Recognising how gender segregation is embedded in food retail roles, Abbie looks at how this can change e.g. through improving transport links to enable women to access jobs that are currently located in “hard-to-reach” areas:

Gender and food retailing[4]

Supermarket shopping of old has, perhaps, changed forever with demand for online food retailing soaring during the pandemic, growing 25.5% in 2020 compared to the 8.5% previously anticipated[5]. For most food retailers, trading online has long lacked appeal due to the low margins which it offers[6]. However, the pandemic restrictions prompted retailers to expand their dotcom (online) offering almost overnight to both meet demand and stay competitive during a time when customers were restricted in their ability to do their shopping in-store.

To meet the excess demand all of the major retailers took on additional workers, and today new roles are being created in large numbers in distribution and logistics against a backdrop of slowly dwindling numbers of workers serving on the shop floor. However, also characterising these changes are the historical patterns of gender segregation that persist within the sector, despite men moving into retail roles in recent years. Therefore, we need to be asking not just what the food retail sector is likely to look like post-pandemic, but who is likely to remain working in it.

Segregation of food retail work

The move online and growing use of self-checkouts in-store have in part helped facilitate a reduction in the need for checkout staff. These jobs have long been disproportionately filled by women who needed the ‘flexibility’ to manage work alongside caring responsibilities[7].

In contrast, there has already been an expansion of new roles in warehousing, logistics and fulfilment which have traditionally been filled by men and demand hours less likely to suit the needs of the household. For example, an analysis of recent ONS (2021) data shows that 67% of employees working on supermarket shop floors are women, a large proportion of whom are over the age of 45. This figure increases to 70% if you look at checkout and cashier roles specifically.

Female employees from Black, Asian and minority ethnic backgrounds (as defined by the ONS) are five times more likely than white male employees to be working in checkout roles. In contrast to this, the gendering of employees working in the wholesale of food production (including the supply of these goods to supermarkets) is vastly male-dominated (men continue to hold 78% of these roles). These figures show the embeddedness of gender, and racial, segregation in these roles.

Considerations for the future

Although there have been some reductions in the occupational segmentation of retail roles in recent years, changing demands mean the future of work in food retail is likely to reflect the pre-existing patterns of segregation within the sector.

To avoid exacerbating these inequalities, measures are needed to ensure women and minority groups are equipped to enter into new roles in logistics and distribution. To avoid exacerbating these gender inequalities, measures are needed to ensure women are equipped to enter into logistics and distribution; for example, employee-led flexible working arrangements. To approve accessibility to these roles, policy changes will be required, in order to prevent women and minority groups being disproportionately impacted by job loss and remove current barriers (e.g. the burden of caring responsibilities) that prevent women and minority groups from transitioning into new roles.

Research has also shown that women are more likely to rely on public transport to get to work[8] and thus tend to take jobs that are closer to home and schools. However, distribution centres tend to be located in harder-to-reach areas, making these jobs less accessible to women. Therefore, provisions would have to be made to improve transportation routes to these areas both in terms of accessibility and safety.

Secondly, the ‘pick rates’ (the rate of items ‘picked’ by an employee/hours of work[9]) which dictate dotcom work can often be challenging for disabled and older workers to sustain. Reasonable adjustments will be required where necessary to accommodate these groups. Thirdly, employee-led flexible working arrangements and parental leave could allow for an easier transition into this type of work. Therefore, policymakers and businesses should ensure that the jobs which remain do not reinforce the existing inequalities which are endemic to service work and which have been further exacerbated by the current crisis.

This blog is a short extract from an article within ‘On Digital Inequalities’, produced by Policy@Manchester[10].

Wider points for gender-equal recovery and renewal

We conclude this case study by considering the wider points for gender equality in economic recovery. Three key policy areas have been identified in a recent statement from the London School of Economics and Political Science, the International Monetary Fund, EU Central Bank, the World Trade Organisation, the United Nations and the EU Commission, to ensure that “economic recovery prioritises women and girls, underpins an inclusive future, and ensures the world is prepared to withstand the next crisis”[11]. Consider:

• How recovery stimulus, employment, and social protection programmes will “get directly into the hands of women”
• How to develop more effective public policy, e.g. approaches to close the gender data gaps as a priority and new mechanisms to “improve monitoring, evaluation and data systems”
• How to reduce the “burden of unpaid care work and support better childcare to strengthen women’s labour force participation”[12]

[1] https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100244561

[2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7205621/

[3] https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/portal/abbie.winton.html

[4] https://www.alliancembs.manchester.ac.uk/original-thinking-applied/original-thinkers/gender-and-food-retailing/

[5] https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/may/05/uk-online-grocery-sales-lockdown-internet-coronavirus

[6] https://www.ft.com/content/b985249c-1ca1-41a8-96b5-0adcc889d57d

[7] https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/a3299

[8] https://wbg.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/TRANSPORT-2019-1.pdf

[9] https://www.hcrlaw.com/blog/warehouse-pick-rates-and-disability/

[10] https://www.policy.manchester.ac.uk/publications/on-digital-inequalities/

[11] https://www.lse.ac.uk/News/News-Assets/PDFs/2021/Statement-on-Gender-Equality-2021.pdf

[12] Ibid.

TMB Issue 38 discussed the importance of community involvement in tackling disease outbreaks and presented the recommendations set out by the Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response. This briefing offers examples of good practice in community participation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Consider:

• Tanzania: local government co-produced infection control measures with business leaders based in markets to integrate leaders’ understanding & knowledge of the challenges of implementing such measures
• Nigeria: the “community informer model” was employed by local authorities for COVID “surveillance, tracing and monitoring” – community informers are key trusted individuals in a community (e.g. faith leaders)
• Pakistan: community volunteers “set up quarantine wards, manufactured and provided free protective suits for medics”, and distributed food to vulnerable people
• India: Community volunteers came together to investigate and identify unknown (“hidden”) COVID-19 fatalities. The volunteer group comprised of expert physicians and data analysts who developed comparisons of official health data and other reports. This encouraged a review of the national death audit process and resulted in improvements in the process so that COVID-19 deaths were accurate and transparent
• USA: Volunteers built a public “Testing Site Locator” app which visualized the geographical location of testing centres to support collection of testing centre-related information and dissemination at the national level. This supported people to locate the nearest available testing centres and also the “health system to plan and distribute centres more effectively”

The pandemic, and previous disasters, have evidenced that communities play a crucial role when preparing for, responding to and recovering from, crisis. Communities and civil societies should be “partners early on in the design, planning, implementation, and assessment of preparedness and response efforts on all levels”, particularly at the local level. We have covered community participation and co-production with communities in various briefings, see TMB Issue 38; Issue 34; Issue 33.

As part of our ESRC funded project on Recovery, Renewal, Resilience we committed to writing the international standard on Recovery and Renewal. We took another step to accomplishing this goal last week when an international ballot voted to accept and publish our international standard ‘ISO/TS 22393 - Guidelines for planning Recovery and Renewal’. ISO/TS 22393 provides a framework for how to assess the impacts of COVID-19 on communities, and address these by planning transactional recovery activities and transformational renewal initiatives. This briefing describes the background to our international standard and gives an insight to the content of this guideline.

An ISO standard aims to “give world-class specifications for products, services and systems, to ensure quality, safety and efficiency”[1]. To so this, it collates the latest research findings, expert knowledge, recent experience from experts, and reaches consensus to provide a detailed, informative document that can be applied in different contexts because all the important aspects are considered. An ISO standard often describes best practice and how that can be achieved.

Follow the source link below to TMB Issue 39 to read this briefing in full (p.3-6).

[1] https://www.iso.org/about-us.html

The National Lottery Community Fund ‘Community Research Project’ investigated how people’s attitude toward their communities has changed during the pandemic, and identified the priorities for their communities as they emerge from COVID-19. This report demonstrates the opportunity to foster the community resilience realised during COVID as a Local Resilience Capability (LRC). Additionally, the report echoes that although not everyone will want to contribute to building community resilience, there are people who do and they are looking for ways to do so. Consider that:

• “Tackling loneliness and supporting economic growth” are reported as the most important factors for community wellbeing in the next year. Most respondents felt that the crisis brought out the best in people. This was particularly felt by older generations, with a third of respondents reporting that they now feel more connected to (and supported by) their local community
• “Safe and accessible green spaces” are key priorities for communities going forward, with 40% of respondents reporting to have used local green spaces more than they usually would
• 30% of respondents plan to be more involved in their communities, with the most significant benefits being people’s ability to offer support to others in their community, and having people willing to help close by if needed

COVID-19 has seen cities and local areas rapidly change how public spaces are used. In an effort to improve the daily lives and wellbeing of communities during the pandemic cities have implemented changes that were previously thought to be “radical”. How these temporary measures can transition to permanent design is a key renewal strategy in Sydney which is focusing on the vision of a people-centred city that aims to tackle the various social, health and equity challenges that recovery will bring. Their recent study, based on international best practice and data tracking, explains how to look beyond “basic infrastructure and traffic to create a city that people want to live in, visit, work and spend time in”. Consider the renewal recommendations set out in ‘Sustainable Sydney 2050, towards a more attractive and liveable city’:

Create ‘a city for all’

• Co-produce the planning and design of public spaces with the community and stakeholder groups
• Collect “public life data” and evaluate this data to inform decision-making
• Provide welcome spaces, increase facilities for children, close streets off to traffic at lunch time, expand the use of community buildings and ensure free Wi-Fi across the city – to make public spaces “more attractive for people of all ages, abilities and backgrounds”
• Support “public art and creative expression” to engage communities in the design of the city

Build a ‘green and cool city’

• Reinforce and drive action in “emissions control, waste, water and greening”
• Expand “tree canopies, biodiversity and the use of shade structures and awnings in public spaces”
• Upgrade transport links between the “city, parklands and the harbour” to improve mobility in and around public spaces

Protect the ‘heart’ of the city

• Transform the currently “traffic-dominated streets to people friendly streets”
• Capitalise on the “Metro, train and light rail infrastructure as the most efficient modes of transport for people”
• Increase walking space and pathways across the city
• Improve the connection of cycle networks to other transport networks (Metro/train) to promote cycling

The strategy also includes long-terms plans for four new “green avenues” which are “arterial roadways identified for transformation with reduced traffic, increased tree plantings and space for people”. A key message in the strategy is that partnerships between “all levels of governments, businesses and the community” is key to transforming cities.

Support for SME recovery is critical in the aftermath of COVID-19, as SMEs constitute the backbone of economies across the world and “account for two-thirds of employment globally” (UNCTAD, 2021). COVID-19 has exacerbated existing problems and created new ones for SMEs. The OECD report finds that SMEs are disproportionately represented in sectors of the economy that have been most severely impacted by COVID-19 (e.g. retail, accommodation and food services). “Constrained cash flows and weaker supply chains” contribute to SMEs tending to be more financially fragile and more susceptible to supply chain disruptions. Many more examples of the challenges faced by SMEs can be found both in this OECD report and others (e.g. a recent McKinsey report). The OECD report presents 15 lessons on effective policy design, including:

• Prompt delivery of SME and entrepreneurship policy support. This can be supported by strengthening digital delivery systems at both the national and local levels
• Develop start-up policies to drive innovative start-ups for recovery
• “Ensure support mechanisms are inclusive and accessible for vulnerable segments of the SME population” (e.g., minority and women entrepreneurs)
• Focus on the digitalisation of SMEs and start-ups, e.g. incentivise/provide targeted financial support/grants (local governments can sign-post local entrepreneurs and SMEs to support services e.g. Business in the Community/FSB UK)
• Establish measures to consult with entrepreneurs and owners of SMEs, to understand their needs, their priorities, and co-produce recovery and renewal plans with them

Social innovations in health and care are “inclusive solutions that meet the needs of end users through a multi-stakeholder, community-engaged process to address the healthcare delivery gap”. They concentrate on local community needs and priorities, strive to establish “low-cost solutions” and build upon the pre-existing strengths in a community. This paper produced by the LSHTM demonstrates how social innovation during COVID-19 has mobilised local communities, adapted existing health services at rapid pace and developed partnerships between local government and civil society. Consider the following international examples of social innovations in health during the pandemic:

• Peru mobilised communities by adapting their ‘Mamás Del Río’ programme which “selects and trains local people as community health workers”. This project adapted during COVID to both ensure the “continuity of maternal and neonatal health services” while also educating and training local people on COVID-19 prevention
• Malawi’s existing free hotline created by local people to provide health advice was scaled up nationally during the pandemic. The government then capitalised on the capabilities of this local service to “triage people with COVID-19 symptoms, identify and refer people at risk of domestic violence, provide health information to the public and gain a greater understanding of local needs”
• The Philippine’s multi-sectoral partnership brings together the “strengths and resources from the private sector, academia, local government and communities”. COVID-19 response was strengthened by these partnerships which enabled rapid deployment of a “hunger management campaign, the establishment of a call centre to manage returning resident’s and a role out of local testing teams”

Social innovation initiatives have proven a “powerful means of mobilising communities to respond to emergencies that can complement and extend government and private sector responses, and in turn build more resilient communities”.

London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM)

The British Red Cross recently shared a report ‘Communities of Humanitarian Thought: The Case for Change in a Time of Crisis’. The report considers the next steps on the following prominent humanitarian issues: Displacement & Migration; Health Inequalities, and Disasters & Emergencies. The report highlights the need for real change for people experiencing, or at risk of experiencing, crisis across various priorities:

• ‘Eliminate the gaps in health and social care’, by employing a person-centred approach to reduce access barriers and prevent people from “falling through the gaps between services”. The inequalities in health and social care exacerbated by COVID-19 require a more integrated approach, along with investment in care and support at the community level
• ‘Ensure humanitarian needs are met in emergencies’, by clearly defining the statutory responsibilities of national government and emergency response organisations, to ensure that they “fully meet the humanitarian needs of their communities”
• Review social protection infrastructure to learn lessons from the pandemic and best practice across the world, e.g. ‘Cash-based assistance in emergencies’, which has shown to deliver a more “dignified response” and enables people to rapidly access the resources they need during crisis
• ‘Provide safe and legal routes for people seeking asylum’, by reviewing domestic policy to ensure that the “end-to-end experience of a person in the asylum system is efficient, fair and humane”. The Sovereign Borders Bill presents an opportunity to evaluate and take action to improve the entire system
• ‘Uphold international law and principled humanitarian action’, by committing to humanitarian action and support for the most vulnerable communities across the world
• Recognise how young people and civil society drive climate action, e.g. the Youth Advisory Group on Climate Change, which strives to amplify youth voices and engage young people in an open and transparent dialogue on climate action

A current research project, by the Overseas Development Institute, is examining social protection (SP) measures employed during the pandemic in LMICs. The project is producing a series of working papers. One paper examines the inclusion of refugees in government-led SP and the “alignment and integration of cash assistance to refugees and government social protection”. The paper evaluates the effectiveness of social protection responses across four countries in terms of: “Timeliness; coverage adequacy; and level adequacy (value of benefit)”. It also offers the emerging lessons from the study and initial policy recommendations. Consider:

Lessons on the drivers of effective government social protection response

• The maturity of SP systems and pre-existing local and state capacities directly impacted how effectively SP programmes met the needs of refugees during COVID
• Targeting criteria that evaluates eligibility based on risk of vulnerability could be more effective, timely and suitable during a crisis rather than traditional criteria such as length of residency or status
• Benefit levels of government systems are unlikely to be sufficient for refugees’ needs, as these are typically higher than those of nationals and require very careful consideration. The main challenge identified when setting benefit levels which include refugees during the pandemic is that governments are “faced with two competing objectives: (1) preventing social tension and unfairness between population groups” (by varying benefit levels between refugees and nationals); and (2) “ensuring that everyone can meet their basic needs”

Policy recommendations for protecting refugees during a crisis

• Conduct a national socio-economic survey, to include data on refugees’ needs, to develop an overview of the needs of the population across the country. This can enable more effective social protection programme design that effectively meets the needs of everyone
• A review of registration processes can highlight barriers to access for refugees (e.g. in terms of the documents required to register for programmes). Where this is not possible, governments can “draw on international/national/local humanitarian actors’ databases of refugee populations” to swiftly target them with support during crisis
• Hosting governments could consider “integrating refugees into social insurance” (e.g. those with work permits) which may reduce political or public opposition as those receiving benefits will be contributing to national insurance
• Careful consideration of benefit levels and trade-offs between “politically greater acceptability but possibly lower effectiveness” in terms of meeting refugees needs is essential

Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)

We discussed co-production in TMB Issue 33 and detailed three barriers to co-production during COVID: Pace, Distance and Complexity. The Centre for Loneliness Studies recently developed a toolkit for co-production organised around a cycle of: "Co-commissioning; Co-design; Co-delivery and Co-evaluation/co-governance". This toolkit supports those who want to begin a journey of co-production. It is based on research on co-production with older people who experienced isolation and loneliness. The principles are transferable and useful to anyone thinking about how to do co-production. Consider:

• That co-production can apply to a broad range of contexts (e.g. co-producing service delivery for a city/region/on a national level or co-producing care delivery for an individual). Depending on the context, those involved should agree on what co-production means based on their context. This can be done by:
  • Define what co-production means e.g. to your organisation/to the group of people delivering a service/to those using a service
  • Agree a statement about what co-production means, to manage expectations and provide clarity on the direction of co-production activities
• Understand individual and group co-production values. This can help to direct work and activities and influence decision-making
• Empower each person involved by working "with people rather than for them"
• Promote equality, e.g. use the term 'stakeholders' to describe all of those involved in co-production to position all participants on an equal footing
• Seek to understand and make use of the skills, knowledge and experience of all stakeholders
• Ensure a diverse group of stakeholders are involved in co-production by considering:
  • Which stakeholders should be involved? (including those who represent current and potential future users of services)
  • What skills, experience, knowledge and resources are required to support co-production? (e.g. conduct an asset mapping exercise to understand needs)
  • How best to ensure a wide variety of stakeholders are included?
  • What resources might stakeholders require to keep them engaged?
• How to fairly share power and influence for co-production, e.g. hold regular deliberation meetings so that all stakeholders are heard, use voting systems, and feedback questionnaires
• Following each phase of the cycle:
  • Reflect on the experiences of each stakeholder and achievements of the group
  • Explore what worked well, the challenges that presented and how learning can be applied in future cycles of co-production
  • Identify any skills, knowledge, experience or strengths the group and co-production process could gain from and how to bring those into the process in the future

The Sendai Framework Voluntary Commitment (VC) initiative calls for enhancing governance, including local governance, for disaster response, rehabilitation and reconstruction. A recent commitment on the Sendai VC ‘Strengthening inclusive Resilience to Disasters, boosting sustainable Development’, by the Province of Potenza (PPZ), Italy, is focused on re-assessing, monitoring and reviewing the level of resilience of its 100 Municipalities Network. Consider the following objectives and actions in the PPZ commitment:

• Encourage communication between local governments by maximizing on the ‘Making Cities Resilient (MCR) Campaign’
• “Share on the development and implementation of comprehensive urban disaster risk reduction plans”
• Showcase the value that the Human Security approach adds when implementing the Sendai Framework for disaster risk reduction at local levels
• Highlight local activities that are working to identify and implement innovative measures for disaster risk reduction and are striving to achieve SDGs
• Identify and introduce creative approaches to cooperation on different topics at local levels
• Implement the project using the new Resilience Scorecard through a “city-to-city peer review, based on a multi-stakeholder and holistic approach to disaster risk reduction”
• Collect data for a review and evaluation process of the Sendai Framework at the local level through strategic alignment to local indicators
• Share learning based on cities’ disaster risk assessments, and design a Resilience strategy
• This project is said to have achieved an “inclusive approach to strong community involvement” and developed “a governance-accountability system as a powerful mean for creating the conditions that contribute to change towards resilience”.

You can contact the team working on this project to find out more here

This case study extracts some key points from the UK's National Audit Office report 'Initial learning from the government's response to the COVID-19 pandemic'. Read this case study in full (p.13-14) in TMB Issue 38 by following the source link below.

The city of Napier, New Zealand conducted a wellbeing survey to understand how the community was feeling about the pandemic, its impacts, their concerns and expectations for the future. This survey was then used to inform planning for recovery, renewal and other Council programmes. The Napier Recovery Plan identifies five key initiatives which can address issues for recovery and opportunities for renewal:

• “Support and Celebrate Napier” by launching a “We are Team Napier” campaign which focuses on promoting innovation and achievement in the local economy and within communities, e.g. “Environmental restoration of green spaces” comprising of a community-led partnership with the Council, land agencies and other relevant stakeholders
• Investment in local infrastructure and community facilities, e.g. “3 Waters projects supporting the renewal of Napier’s water supply and strategic water services”, to ensure everyone in the community has access to safe drinking water
• Establish a coordinated approach to housing and accommodation to ensure everyone has access to safe housing, e.g. “Continue partnerships established during Alert Level 4 to provide emergency accommodation” and establish “public-private partnerships to repurpose city centre visitor accommodation for transition and/or permanent residential accommodation”
• Introduce a targeted ‘Jump Start Innovation Fund’ to promote innovation in business and not-for-profit sector. Other initiatives include: Appointing business support liaisons to assist and advise on Napier Council regulations and initiating a “redeployment scheme” for SMEs
• A focus on advancing sustainability within the tourism sector, e.g. establishing a partnership with the Art Deco heritage trust to drive domestic tourism

The pressures placed on the global food system during COVID-19 activated various policy responses across the world to manage supply and demand. Sub-Saharan African countries rely heavily on food imports. This means that international agricultural policy responses to the pandemic in markets on which Africa relies, directly affect the region’s food markets. Potential impacts include “commodity price volatility the availability of supplies and farmers’ planting decisions”. Consider how to address the impacts of COVID and build food system resilience for the future with regard to countries that rely on food imports:

• Design more “holistic policy interventions” which tackle bottlenecks in the vast span of “value chain actors” e.g. suppliers and transporters, traders and retailers, to advance resilience of the entire supply chain
• Invest in market infrastructure, e.g. cold storage systems, to strengthen supply chains of perishable goods
• Establish and increase social protections for particularly vulnerable groups e.g. “urban poor, informal workers and resource-poor smallholder farmers"
• Advance regional and local trade agreements that enable greater food market integration – with the aim of developing resilient domestic and regional food systems, lowering the reliance on importing, and increasing local domestic economic growth

The focus of this week's Manchester Briefing (Issue 38) is the role of the individual in relation to crises and the benefits of public involvement in emergency planning. We discuss how recovery reinstates preparedness, while renewal enhances resilience and consider how Local Resilience Capability can be understood, sustained and enhanced by local government.

Follow the source link below to read this briefing in full (p.3-6).

Before the pandemic, the Philippines saw a prolonged period of economic growth and job expansion, with employment increasing, and large numbers of people moving from precarious jobs to more secure employment. COVID-19 reversed these gains, as it did in many other countries that experienced positive labour market growth and expansion. The Asian Development Blog offers five global best practices to address lower employment rates which are predicted to persist even after economies begins to grow again (known as "hysteresis in employment after an acute shock"). Consider the early global policy lessons that have supported people to make labour market transitions:

• Evidence shows that wage subsidies have been the most successful mechanism for protecting employment
• Hiring subsidies should replace wage subsidies, to support the reallocation of displaced workers into secure employment
• Skills funding schemes (e.g. Kickstart UK) are helping to upskill the workforce (e.g. Skillnet Ireland provides local or sectoral networks of at least 30 employers with annual matching grants to fund their short-term training of workers)
• Establish apprenticeship councils to guide and peer review changes to "industry-led apprenticeship programs". The changes suggested include:
  • Introducing "progressive salary scales"
  • Extend apprenticeship programmes from "6 months to 2-4 years"
  • Expand apprenticeship programmes into new industries and "service occupations such as legal, finance and communications"
• Provide unemployment insurance to give income stability and help people transition to new employment. For example:
  • Malaysia has a "national pooled insurance fund" which employers and employees make monthly contributions. The government funds "financing gap" which workers qualify for if they are made involuntarily unemployed
  • In Chile, employers and employees contribute monthly to "an account in the name of the employee". This is supplemented by the Solidarity Unemployment Fund, which supports employees if they diminish their personal savings accounts. The Chilean scheme doesn't "create contingent fiscal liabilities".

Working from home became the new normal for various sectors during the pandemic. However, this “pandemic-style” of working from home may not translate smoothly to post-pandemic working. A recent McKinsey survey of 100 executives across various industries and locations found that 90% of organisations intend to adopt a hybrid model of working (a combination of remote and on-site working). However, many organisations have only just begun to consider how this new approach will be integrated into organisational practice, resulting in employees feeling uncertain and anxious. Consider:

• Be transparent and open from the start with employees. If still in the planning stage, communicate the uncertainty of plans for remodelling current working practices
• Be clear on the current expectations of employees considering that their personal circumstances may have changed during the pandemic, and they may not be able to make a swift return to the office (e.g. consider a phased-in approach)
• Support and encourage “small moments of engagement”, which can include coaching, mentoring and co-working
• Reimagine the leadership process in your organisation. Train managers on “remote leadership” and re-evaluate current performance metrics so these represent how employees might succeed when working from home
• Develop new codes of practice (e.g. for online meetings) so that employees don’t always feel they must be available and don’t have to go from one meeting to the next, relentlessly
• Establish new ways of monitoring and evaluating employee attendance and productivity, so that employees don’t feel they need to be constantly logged into their computers to prove they are working. Focus on the work output, and assess if employees have the tools and skills to succeed, before assessing how many hours they spent logged in
• Pilot a hybrid approach that suits your organisational context and is tailored to the needs of specific teams and roles (e.g. evaluate what roles require on-site working)
• Develop new ways of monitoring employee wellbeing

There has recently been a new spotlight shone on the impact that communities have had on their local response. A key message from the UK’s Integrated Review was the need to build whole-of-society resilience through enhancing capabilities in local resilience (see a recent TMB case study). TMB has often highlighted the renewal of community resilience through building a Local Resilience Capability (TMB Issue 30, as well as Briefing A in this current issue). Communities are being seen in a new light in local resilience.

This has been further identified in a paper by the Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response, titled ‘Centering communities in pandemic preparedness and response’. This paper emphasizes the importance of community involvement in tackling disease outbreaks and advises of the need to:

• Establish partnerships to work with communities to design, plan, implement and monitor local and national pandemic preparedness and response, for example:
  • In Sur, Oman, the city government developed an intervention of response in partnership with civil society (e.g. community sports clubs, the Omani Women Association, youth groups and voluntary organisations). These groups supported activities to “arrange, maintain, and supervise” pandemic response activities
• Improve community engagement through “clear structures and sustained funding”, recognising that continuous effort is needed (not just a one-off effort during crisis). This can help to develop trust between communities and official service providers
• Recognise that risk communication is key to community engagement, and one part of local resilience capabilities: two-way, bi-directional and co-produced communications are essential to understand needs, communicate responsibilities, and gain feedback (see TMB 37 ‘Risk communications as part of the Local Resilience Capability’)
• Community resilience requires a “sustainable framework for community empowerment and recovery”, including:
  • “Invest in civic mindedness” to establish a culture of social connectedness and empower communities to take responsibility through co-production to understand risk preparedness, response and recovery
  • Establish partnerships between governments and community-based groups/voluntary organisations/businesses to integrate communities into the planning and leadership of interventions that enhance their local resilience
  • “Invest in social and economic wellbeing, and in physical and psychological health” to ensure access to health services

A 2019 report ‘Lifelines: The Resilient Infrastructure Opportunity’, published by the World Bank and the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR), highlighted the net benefits of investing in resilient infrastructure in developing countries (which could save “$4.2 Trillion”). Accelerating resilient infrastructure has recently dominated discussions about recovery from COVID-19 across the world and how this can improve health, education and livelihoods. The report included five recommendations for advancing resilient infrastructure:

• ‘Get the basics right’, through regulation and procurement law to improve management and governance to build resilient infrastructure
• ‘Build institutions for resilience’, to tackle wider “political economy” issues. Identify critical infrastructure assets to inform how resources are allocated
• ‘Create regulations and incentives for resilience’, to account for disruptions to infrastructure and encourage service providers to go further than just meeting their obligatory standards
• ‘Improve decision making’, through improved data, tools and skills (e.g. “digital elevation models” which are crucial to informing investment decisions in urban areas)
• ‘Provide financing that is targeted and timely’, focused on preparedness and prevention to improve resilience and reduce the likelihood of needing to spend billions to recover and renew from the impacts of an emergency

A recent webinar, organised by the World Bank and Resilient Cities Network, builds on this report and discusses resilient infrastructure: what it is, how it can be identified and how cities can advance resilient infrastructure so that it achieve multiple goals. You can watch this webinar here.

CarbonBrief have developed an interactive grid where you can explore and track the progress of how different countries across the world are implementing green recovery and renewal plans which aim to cut emissions in the aftermath of COVID-19. Below, we offer some examples of diverse initiatives from across the world:

• France allocated funding to “promote and support environmental performance” in their food and agricultural sector, e.g. funding to support farmers to adapt their farming systems to lower their impact on the environment. France have also allocated funding to create over 1,000 “eco-responsible restaurants in rural communities”, along with investment in “energy efficiency of public and private buildings, social housing, insulation and low-carbon heating”
• Sweden allocated investment to raise the “energy performance of Sweden’s housing stock and to support improvements in rental properties”
• Finland plan to “phase out oil heating in both households and public buildings” and allocated funding to the “wood constriction programme which promotes the use of timber by enhancing industry expertise, developing legislation and building regulations, and providing factual information”
• Chile have committed to plant trees on 24,000 hectares of land and invest in better fire management as part of its “mitigation and adaptation commitments related to forests and biodiversity”. Chile will also have invested in modernisation and irrigation projects for farmers, as part of the COVID-19 budget response

Tauranga, in New Zealand, centred their 2018 city plans around four themes:

• "Improving the ability to move around the city
• Resilience and safety
• Increasing environmental standards
• Land supply (for housing and employment) and urban form"

These themes have been carried forward and underpin the council's 2021 recovery from COVID-19 plan. Tauranga's economic recovery projects and activities focus on:

• Fostering innovation, through training and courses in partnership with the University of Waikato which aims to harness and drive new opportunities for employment in Tauranga and the Western Bay
• Working with those driving the "Groundswell Festival of Innovation" to highlight local innovation and the "YiA Innovation Awards" to encourage young people towards innovative problem solving and critical thinking
• Seeking "shovel ready" infrastructure projects to generate jobs through projects which will benefit the Tauranga community socially, economically and environmentally
• Targeted investment in projects which will support small and medium-sized enterprises to recover, specifically those in the construction industry

The ‘Going for Growth 2021: Shaping a Vibrant Recovery’ (OECD) report argues that structural policies can deliver a “stronger, more resilient, equitable and sustainable COVID-19 recovery”. Key to building resilience will be policies that transform environmental policies to drive the ‘Green Transition’. A challenge which lies ahead will be public perception and acceptability of environmental policies, specifically those which are market-focused (e.g. carbon tax). These have the potential to raise public concerns on the implications of such policies for employment security and cost of living - due to their impact on certain sectors (e.g. mining). The report offers strategies that can build public support of environmental policies. To illustrate the report uses the change to carbon pricing as an example:

• A phased-in and transparent approach (e.g. gradual raising prices) to give households sufficient time to adapt to the change as necessary
• “Revenue recycling”, which can fund universal transfer payments, reduce taxes, and provide targeted support for communities and households impacted by the change
• Communication with the public and education campaigns on the change, which promote the benefits of carbon pricing and counter misinformation
• Policy naming and branding which does not imply taxation (e.g. “Levy”), to mitigate the development of mistrust of the change amongst the public

Local people and organisations are vital to delivering change, however, many face barriers and lack the resources to undertake resilience building activities. In the USA, Community Development Financial Institutions work to promote economic revitalization and community development in low-income communities through ‘values driven, locally informed and locally targeted investments’. Consider:

• That investment in community resilience can mitigate the impacts of shocks and stresses caused by crises and accelerate recovery from crisis
• When investing in community resilience, it is important to consider the life span of projects to ensure all communities have the opportunity to achieve their resilience goals
• That all people and communities should have equal access to the ability to build resilience and some may require additional or targeted support
• Engagement of all stakeholders is critical, to ensure that investment will benefit all people in the community

The Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response recently issued a report calling on the international community to employ a package of reforms to transform the global pandemic preparedness and response system to prevent a future pandemic. The report finds that the current system is unfit to prevent another novel and highly infectious disease from developing into a pandemic. The report recommends a transformational reform of the existing pandemic prevention, preparedness and response system, including:

• Form a “Global Health Threats Council” to ensure political commitment to pandemic preparedness, prevention and response. In the Council:
  • Assign responsibility to key actors through “peer recognition and scrutiny”
  • Establish a ‘Pandemic Framework Convention’ in all countries within the next six months
• Introduce an international surveillance system to:
  • Enable the WHO to share information about outbreaks of concern, and
  • Rapidly deploy experts to investigate such outbreaks
• Immediate investment in national preparedness by:
  • Reviewing current preparedness plans
  • Allocating the required financing and resources to ensure readiness for another health event
• Make The Access to COVID-19 Tools Accelerator (ACT-A) a global platform to transform the current market model to one targeted at delivering global public goods (vaccines, diagnostics, supplies)
• Establish a funding model for the WHO to increase its agency and financing
• Develop an “International Pandemic Financing Facility” to:
  • Fund ongoing preparedness
  • Enable immediate finance support for response if a pandemic is declared
• Adopt a political declaration which commits to transformative reform of global pandemic preparedness and response

We demonstrate that in order to establish community resilience as a permanent local resilience capability, we are required to sustain what has already been created by communities, local government, small business, neighbours, individuals, social enterprises, the voluntary sector, and so many more hidden networks.

Read this case study in full by following the source link to TMB Issue 37 (p.13-14).

Risk communications as part of the Local Resilience Capability is our focus in this briefing. We explore the communication of risk before and during emergencies, and identify how two-way communications are central to local resilience capabilities. Follow the source link below to TMB Issue 37 (p.3-6).

Public health has taken centre stage throughout the pandemic. Pre-existing fragilities have been exposed, but opportunities for reform and renewal have also presented. The White Paper ‘Integration and innovation: working together to improve health and social care for all’, recently presented legislative proposals for a health and care Bill in the UK. A recent briefing by the NHS recognises an opportunity for change, which lies in reform of “how population health is prioritised and resourced in the future”, to not only recover from the pandemic, but to renew systems so that they prepare for (and protect against) future public health risks by building resilience.

The White Paper is a complex and intricate document which is hard to summarise. Discussions of it with a health professional may help to illuminate its main implications for civil resilience. We identify a few lessons from it, but there are others that you may find. We focus on the challenges that lie ahead as part of a restructure of public health functions. Some challenges include:

• How to retain existing expertise:
  • Taking into consideration that responsibilities will change hands, such as those for health improvement functions, those which Public Health England are currently responsible
  • Continuing to fulfil local and national leadership responsibilities
  • Investment to “make up significant shortfalls over recent years”
  • Ensure effectiveness in health improvement functions moving forward
• The sustainability of public health services given budgetary pressures:
  • “Robust and long-term investments in public health services”
  • Acknowledging the critical role they play in building resilience to crises is crucial
• The potentially reduced agency and disempowerment of local government and local partners:
  • By considering that they are positioned most effectively to tailor services and communications to the needs and priorities of the communities they serve
  • Strategic partnership working between NHS organisations, local government and the voluntary sector is essential to promote empowered and flexible working at the local level
• Ensuring that local authorities are involved in resource discussions to locally distribute health improvement responsibilities
• Improving the commissioning arrangements for public health services to address the vulnerabilities exposed by funding cuts and resource shortages

This week (1-7th June 2021) marks Volunteers Week in the UK, an opportunity to celebrate and thank volunteers and recognise their significant contributions to communities. Volunteers make an immense difference to their communities and have played a key role throughout the pandemic. There are many ways to celebrate and show appreciation for the work of volunteers, consider:

• Say thank you by recognising their impact in local communities, by:
  • A thank you email or through social media (you can use the hashtag #VolunteersWeek to join the online community celebrating volunteers this week)
  • Community funded gift baskets which could include vouchers or discounts from local businesses
• Collect stories from volunteers and those that they supported during the pandemic and share them through local newspapers, local radio, social media etc.
• Setting up virtual online gathering of local volunteers and:
  • Distribute awards to volunteers to recognise their efforts
  • Create a space for volunteers to share their experiences of volunteering during the pandemic. This type of event can also introduce local volunteers to each other and create an greater sense of being part of a local volunteer communit
• Create public displays of recognition (e.g. a park bench dedicated to local volunteers)
• Encourage community involvement e.g. “The Big Lunch” which is being held on Sunday 6th June
• Allocate a day to celebrate volunteers annually e.g. "Power of Youth Day" which celebrates the contributions of young people to communities

New Zealand has developed a trade recovery strategy to protect jobs, increase employment and drive economic recovery. The strategy is shaped by three key priorities:

'Retooling support for exporters':

• Provide intensive support to exporters through tailored mechanisms to build capabilities and "connect with overseas markets and global partners"
• Strengthen online tools and services for exporters, e.g. "make trade barrier portals more user-friendly for exporters facing challenges offshore"
• Expand tools and services to SMEs through 'NZTE's Regional Business Partner network'

Refreshing key trade relationships:

• Provide current "free trade agreements with greater 'in-market' and 'to-market' support for exporters" - ensuring better support to an increased number of markets
• Intensify the existing trade diversification strategy and leverage New Zealand's reputation as a trusted trade partner
• Further the progress made on free trade agreements, through new negotiations e.g. with the UK
• Expand on the 'Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership'

Reinvigorating international trade architecture:

• Support the World Trade Organisation and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation to protect the multilateral rules-based system, develop consensus on policies to support recovery, and "push back against protectionism"
• Similarly, "pursue new 'plurilateral' negotiations, e.g. The Digital Economy Partnership Agreement and the Agreement on Climate Change, Trade and Sustainability"

The complexity of COVID-19 has meant that the risks have often been difficult to predict and understand, thus creating uncertainty and a challenge for those responsible for public risk communications. "When scientific uncertainty appears in public settings, it could reduce the perceived authority of science" (Zehr, p.11). Effective communication of uncertainty is essential, to ensure that individuals and communities are well-informed, are better able to make decisions about their well-being and respond to/mitigate the impacts of risk. Consider:

• Create a visualization of risk, to generate a deeper and more relevant understanding of the facts and insights often concealed in abstract data, e.g.; 'The risk characterisation theatre', a visualisation approach using a seating chart (like those used when booking seats in a theatre) which "visually displays risk by obscuring a share of seats that correspond to the risk" (see example below)
• This approach generates a visual of the likelihood of the risk, and enables a visual communication of rare risks that are often challenging to represent and communicate effectively
• This approach also enables an individual to relate a risk with a level and within a context that they can naturally associate to. By not stating exact figures, this approach tackles the "big issue" of uncertainty in risk
• Other examples of visualizations of risk include; displaying the impact of "long COVID" as places in a bus, e.g. "a figure such as 22% of patients discharged from hospital after COVID-19 reporting hair loss could be depicted as 11 individuals on a bus full of 50 people who have left hospital after receiving care for the virus". This is a scenario that anyone familiar with a bus can easily imagine. The data becomes immediately less abstract.

You can view a visualization of this concept in the last page of this article here..

Reference: Rifkin, E. and Bouwer, E. (2007) The Illusion of Certainty: Health Benefits and Risks. Boston, MA: Springer US.

Cities are central to addressing climate change and promoting environmental sustainability. Floods, droughts, storms and rising sea levels are impacting infrastructure, livelihoods and human health across the world. In particular, urban activities contribute significantly to "climate change and environmental degradation". The UNOSSC, in partnership with UN Habitat, have launched a call for submissions on cities' innovative experiences on environmental sustainability and climate action through South-South and triangular cooperation. They call for examples of innovative environmental sustainability and climate solutions in cities that fulfil the following criteria:

• Include South-south or triangular cooperation approaches
• Are scalable and replicable
• Involve a local government or municipal authority

This call for submissions offers an opportunity to:

• Feature as a case study in the upcoming joint publication by UNOSSC and UN-Habitat
• Join UNOSSC's cities thematic clusters network which offers an opportunity to share experiences and learn about knowledge-sharing and pilot project opportunities

Submit initiatives/projects by June 5th 2021 (please note that this submission date has now expired).

United Nations Office for South-south Cooperation (UNOSSC)

United Nations Human Settlement Programme (UN-Habitat)

The health and social care system is complex, spanning a broad range of services delivered by both statutory and third sector organisations. COVID-19 has had a significant impact on society and on health and social care services. A recent impact assessment ‘Health and Social Care in Wales COVID-19: Looking Froward’ presents “high level expectations” for NHS and social care recovery. It also identifies the challenges and constraints ahead, and priorities for each part of the system. Social care services are one of the key priorities, recognising the critical role that social care workers (including unpaid carers) have played in frontline responses to COVID. Consider:

• Learn lessons from the pandemic. Assess and identify the “hidden harms” caused by COVID-19 and implement services that can mitigate the longer term impacts of COVID on communities and individuals
• Facilitate opportunities for families to “identify and own solutions to challenges brought about or exacerbated by COVID”, to support families to remain together
• Identify and address the impacts of ‘Long COVID’, work to understand the effect of this on people who receive care and support, including unpaid carers and the social care workforce
• Introduce strategies that tackle the disproportionate impacts of COVID-19 on unpaid carers, focusing particularly on challenges related to “respite and support for carers”
• Recognise that the Local Authority Hardship Fund has been central to the continuity of many critical social care organisations during the pandemic. “Ensure that commissioners of care and support services, in local authorities and health boards, use this financial support in ways that enable them to match the provision of services to changing population need” as the full impacts of the pandemic play out
• Introduce the ‘Real Living Wage’ across the social care sector, to support wellbeing and mental health
• “Build on and improve the collaborative working that has been evident across the health and social care sector throughout the pandemic”

The European Union recently set out Europe's priorities for recovery, which aim to create a "greener, more digital and more resilient Europe". The latest budget will focus on:

• "Research and innovation, via Horizon Europe;
• Fair climate and digital transitions, via the Just Transition Fund and the Digital Europe Programme;
• Preparedness, recovery and resilience, via the Recovery and Resilience Facility, rescEu, and a new health programme, EU4Health;
• Modernising traditional policies such as cohesion and the common agricultural policy, to maximise their contribution to the Union's priorities;
• Fight climate change, with 30% of the EU funds;
• Biodiversity protection and gender equality"

France recently set out the key measures within their recovery plan, complementing the priorities set out by the European Union. France is investing largely in:

• Accelerating the greening of the economy, with investments in "energy performance renovations for buildings, in "green infrastructure" and mobility, to reduce the carbon-intensity of manufacturing processes, and in the development of new green technologies" (hydrogen, biofuels, recycling)
• Economic resilience through "reductions in production taxes, the provision of support for equity capital funding for business, investment in industrial innovation and support for exports"
• A focus on financial support and digital transformation of voluntary sector enterprises and small-medium enterprises

The Rural Lives project examined the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdowns on individuals experiencing financial hardship and vulnerability in rural areas, and the responses to address those impacts. It investigated the contributions of "societal processes, individual circumstances, and various support sources (e.g. markets, state, voluntary/community organisations, and family and friends)". The study finds that lockdowns delivered an acute shock to rural economies and societies, many of which rely heavily on tourism and hospitality, and that the pandemic amplified the impacts of digital exclusion. Pre-COVID, a substantial proportion of rural residents were found to be financially vulnerable. This study suggests that many more will be at risk of financial hardship in the coming months and years as "the full impacts of the pandemic play out and sources of support become more constrained". The study suggests future actions to support people living in rural communities:

• Diversify rural economies and support "good work" to offer people a fair and secure income, e.g. by providing targeted funding and support to help people to establish small businesses that increase the strength of other sectors (outside of those currently relied upon) and provide rural residents with "less precarious employment opportunities"
• Establish business support networks/signpost people to business advisory services to mitigate the negative effects of necessity entrepreneurship (e.g. people may lack confidence and/or knowledge about what is involved in setting up a viable business)
• Define and support the role of rural Voluntary and Community Social Enterprise (VCSE) sector, who have the potential to be a key actor when tackling the rise in rural youth unemployment
• Reinstate and support the expansion of mobile and outreach face-to-face services for the most vulnerable, especially those who may be more isolated due to physical distance from services, lack digital literacy or face mental health challenges
• "Continue partnership working and flexible funding" between service providers and VCSEs so that they can continue to play a joined-up signposting role, connecting rural communities to information, advice and services
• Integrate VCSEs into strategic planning to create effective partnership structures
• Explore the "rural potential for social care provision" review the experience of social care and carers during the pandemic to learn lessons. E.g. "deliver a more personalised and joined-up approach via informal cooperation between health and care workers, learning from more flexible work practices adopted during the pandemic"
• Enable communities to take a more active role in commissioning social care, and enable community groups to deliver care in their communities
• Co-produce service design with communities, pilot integrated ways of working with VCSEs and the community, and take locally-based approaches to service delivery that prioritise local community outcomes and individual needs/priorities
• Consider a combination of "person-based and place-based" social protection and welfare measures at national policy level

A recent study found that the Canadian disaster news media framed young people in five different ways: “1. the vulnerable status of youth; 2. youth as passive bystanders; 3. children as a burden on adults; 4. youth as active agents; and 5. youth as a ‘legitimizing criteria’ in disaster response” (where certain response and recovery resources/actions are prioritized to enable young people to “bounce back” following crisis). The findings of this research highlight a need to shift the narrative and change how young people are framed in emergencies, to recognise their assets and potential roles in disaster risk reduction, emergency response and recovery efforts. Consider:

• Meaningful, inclusive, collaborative and creative strategies to engage young people in all stages of disaster risk and risk management, e.g. Colombia: The school of our dreams where young people create music videos to teach others about the value of protective and protected schools:
  • Enable “Self-driven participation” (youth-owned and led engagement) where young people take ownership and identify risks, and manage the process and outcomes, supported by adults when necessary
  • Establish “Collaborative participation” (adult-owned and youth-led engagement) where adults establish collaboration and invite young people to support the identification of issues. Partnerships are established between adults and young people in a form of “inter-generational collaboration”, a partnership which allows young people to increase their levels of self-directed action over time
• In the Philippines, children are participating in “school-watching programmes” where they gather information about risks that can be addressed by local school authorities. The children create hazard maps which can be shared to educate other students on risk and safety information
• Recognise the role of young people in creating resilience in communities, e.g. Injuv (The National Youth Institute in Chile) who focus on ways in which young people can be involved, activated and mobilised in emergency response during crisis. They have been working to establish and ecosystem of permanent local youth volunteers, and connect young volunteers directly with voluntary organisations through an online volunteer platform (Transform Country Network)
• Utilize the media to amplify the voices and efforts of young people as catalysts for change in their communities, to create a platform through which young people can share their ideas, opinions and concerns

Our Recovery, Renewal, Resilience project has recently been recognised by UNDRR (United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction), joining the global Sendai Framework Voluntary Commitments initiative for disaster risk reduction. This initiative was developed in response to the General Assembly resolution 68/211 (2013) to support the development of partnerships at all levels to implement the Sendai framework. The Sendai Framework VC initiative provides specific encouragement to academic, scientific, and research entities in regards to their contribution to disaster risk reduction. The Voluntary Commitment highlights our projects 'Sendai Priorities for Action' including:

• "Understanding disaster risk;
• Strengthening disaster risk governance to manage disaster risk;
• Investing in disaster risk reduction for resilience;
• Enhancing disaster preparedness for effective response, and to 'Build Back Better'"

The Sendai Framework Voluntary Commitment platform showcases a wide range of work from different organisations and groups across the world, all working to build resilience. The platform serves as a "mechanism to mobilize, monitor and take stock of commitments from multi-stakeholders for the implementation of the Sendai Framework until 2030". You can explore the various projects from across the world or register your own project on the platform here.

TMB Issue 30 discussed the potential ethical issues associated with varying restrictions on individual liberties based on possession of a vaccine certificate. Digital vaccination passports have generated a complex debate across the world, as understanding of the COVID-19 virus and the effectiveness of current vaccines is still developing and digital vaccine passports are an “evolving science”. Introducing infrastructure that has the potential to create “segregation and risk scoring at an individual level, enables third-party access to health information, brings profound risks to individual rights and concepts of equity in society” [1].

The Ada Lovelace Institute[2] recently released ‘Checkpoints for vaccine passports’ which strives to support governments and developers to work through the important steps to examine the evidence available, understand the design choices and the societal impacts, and assess whether a roll-out of vaccine passports could navigate risks to play a socially beneficial role. Below we replicate content from that report which explains their six vaccine passport system requirements[3]:

Scientific confidence in the impact on public health

As scientific knowledge on the effectiveness of current COVID-19 tests, vaccines and antibodies is still developing, governments and public health experts should:

• “Establish scientific pre-conditions’, to include the level of reduced transmission from vaccination that would be deemed acceptable to permit their use;
• Create a model and test the behavioural impacts of different digital vaccination passport programmes (e.g. in combination with or in place of social distancing);
• Conduct a comparative analysis of different vaccine passport schemes to other public health measures in terms of necessity, benefits, risks and costs;
• Develop and test public communications with regards to what certification should be understood to mean in terms of uncertainty and risk;
• Set out the permitted pathways for calculating what constitutes lower risk individuals, including vaccine type, test types, antibody protection and duration of reduced risk following vaccination, testing and infection;
• Outline public health infrastructure requirements for successful use of a passport scheme, which may include access to vaccine, vaccine rate, access to tests, testing accuracy, or testing turnaround

Clear, specific and delimited purpose

To mitigate the potential risks of vaccine passports (e.g. barriers to employment, stigma and discrimination), the following measures should be considered:

• “Specify the purpose of a vaccine passport and clearly communicate the specific problems it aims to address;
• Conduct a comparison of alternative options and existing infrastructure, policy or practice to evaluate if any new system and its overheads are proportionate for specific use cases (e.g. care home visitations);
• Clearly define where certification will be permitted and set out the scientific evidence on the impact of these systems;
• Clearly define where the use of certification will not be acceptable, and whether any population groups should be exempted (e.g. children, pregnant women or those with health conditions);
• Consult with representatives of workers and employers, and issue clear guidance on the use of vaccine passports in the workplace;
• Establish clear aims, measures to assess success and a model for evaluation”

Ethical consideration and clear legal guidance

Ethics and law relating to the permitted and restricted uses of vaccine passports, and mechanisms to support rights and redress and table illegal use should be considered:

• “Publish and require the publication of, impact assessments – on issues including data protections, equality and human rights;
• Offer clarity on the current legality of any uses, specifically laws regarding employment, equalities, data protection, policing, migration and asylum, and health regulations;
• Create clear and specific laws, and develop guidelines for all potential user groups about the legality of use, mechanisms for enforcement and methods of legal redress for any vaccine passport scheme;
• Support cooperation between relevant regulators that need to work cooperatively and pre-emptively;
• Make any changes via primary legislation, to ensure due process, proper scrutiny and public confidence;
• Develop suitable policy architecture around ay vaccine passport scheme, to mitigate harms identified in impact assessments – which may require employment protection and financial support for those facing barriers to work on the basis of health status”

Sociotechnical system design, including operational infrastructure

Consider how the vaccine passport system design will function in practice and link with other systems:

• “Outline the vision for any role vaccine passports should play in COVID-19 strategies, e.g. whether developing own systems or permitting others to develop and use passports;
• Outline a set of best-practice design principles any technical design should embody – including data minimisation, openness, ethics by design and privacy by design – and conduct small-scale pilots before further deployment;
• Protect against digital discrimination, by creating a non-digital (paper) alternative;
• Be clear about how vaccine passports link or expand existing data systems (in particular health records and identity);
• Clarify broader societal issues relating to the system, including the duration of any planned system, practical expectations of other actors in the system and technological requirements, aims, costs, and the possible impacts of other parts of the public health system or economy informed by public deliberation;
• Incorporate policy measures to mitigate ethical and social risks or harms identified"

Public legitimacy

Public confidence in vaccine passports will be crucial and consideration should be given to local contexts:

• “Undertake rapid and ongoing public deliberations as a complement to, and not a replacement for, existing guidance, legislation and proper consideration of issues;
• Undertake public deliberation with groups who may have particular interest or concerns from such a systems, e.g. those who are unable to have the vaccine, those unable to open businesses due to risk, groups who have experienced discrimination or stigma;
• Engage key actors in the successful delivery of these systems (business owners, border control, public health experts)”

Protection against future risks and mitigation strategies for global harms

Consider the longer-term effects of vaccine passport systems and how they might shape future decisions or be used by future governments:

• “Be up front as to whether any systems are intended to be used long term, and design and consult accordingly;
• Establish clear, published criteria for the success of a system and for ongoing evaluation;
• Ensure legislation includes a time-limited period with sunset clauses or conditions under which use is restricted and any dataset deleted – and structures or guidance to support deletion where data has been integrated into work systems for example;
• Ensure legislation includes purpose limitation, with clear guidance on application and enforcement, and include safeguards outlining uses which would be illegal;
• Work through international bodies like WHO, GAVI and COVAX to seek international agreement on vaccine passports and mechanisms to counteract inequalities and promote vaccine sharing”

References:

[1] https://www.adalovelaceinstitute.org/report/checkpoints-vaccine-passports/

[2] https://www.adalovelaceinstitute.org/

[3] Ibid.

Global distribution of the COVID-19 vaccine is essential to ensure that all lives are protected. As a result of vaccine shortfall, people in many parts of the world may need to wait up to three years to get the vaccine, during which time COVID-19 will continue to mutate and spread. In addition to protecting human life, global distribution of vaccines is required to protect the economy, which could be "deprived of up to 9.2 trillion dollars" if not (International Chamber of Commerce). Low and middle income countries are reliant on the work of COVAX to provide global equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines. However, mobilising the necessary support from donors is a challenge. "Greater public-private sector collaboration is required to ensure rapid and fair distribution". Many private sector companies are looking for ways to support the global vaccination effort but are unsure as to how exactly they can do this. The World Bank advises to consider:

• Aggregate funding to mobilize donors, e.g. introduce a pool fund or matching commitments, which can establish a coordinated approach from public and private donors and increase the number of and size of donations from diverse co-funders
• Establish "concessional financing" to support local businesses to develop and improve their service delivery and supply chains to better meet the needs of local vaccine programmes (e.g. small and medium sized businesses in disadvantaged sectors and locations)
• Introduce "results-based finance to improve accountability and outcomes per dollar spent on the vaccination support, as traditional grant funding is tied to inputs, not achievement of outcomes"

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

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:

Retention and continued engagement of those who have offered their time, knowledge and skills to support response efforts will be crucial to ensure the valuable resources and capabilities are available for recovery and renewal activities. Recognising the enormous efforts of volunteers over the last year is integral to their retention. Consider:

• Recognise and thank volunteers for their efforts through personal letters or less personal approaches such as via social media
• Develop accredited certification programmes to officially recognise volunteer skills and knowledge
• Establish a service awards programme for volunteers based on length of service
• Introduce a tax credit programme for volunteers. E.g. The Search and Rescue Volunteers Tax Credit (SRVTC) represents "federal recognition" of the important role played by search and rescue volunteers in Canada. There are conditions and criteria that are required to be met in order for volunteers to qualify for tax credit (e.g. volunteers who perform in excess of 200 "eligible hours" in a year). Appropriate recruiting, screening and management of volunteers helps to ensure people are not joining for the wrong reasons

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