Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Room
Browse By Committee or SIG
Browse By Session Type
Browse By Keywords
Browse By Geographic Descriptor
Session Submission Type: Group Panel
1. Participants in this session will be able to articulate the key elements of multi-risk analysis, including conflict analysis, disaster risk analysis, and resilience analysis vis-à-vis education sector assessment/diagnosis
2. Participants will be able to express the rationale for utilizing these risk-focused analyses and for integrating them into education sector assessment/diagnosis.
3. Participants will be able to summarize key lessons from field-based exercises in multi-risk and education analysis.
Increasing equitable access to education in situations affected by conflict and crisis cannot be achieved using a business-as-usual, purely technical approach. These contexts feature the most out of school children and adolescents and the worst MDG and EFA performance, and are uniquely characterized by multiple risks—such as conflict, natural disasters, gang violence, and political instability. Moreover, these risks do not occur in isolation of each other. They interact and combine with other vulnerabilities to influence barriers to education access—such as violence in and around schools—and bottlenecks to education service delivery—including loss of teachers and damaged infrastructure.
Education programs can go further to reach global education goals if they are adapted and tailored to these multiple risk contexts. Designing education programs without understanding contextual risks increases the probability of worsening those risk factors and undermines sustainable outcomes. The first and essential step is to understand these complex contexts better as the starting point for adaptive, flexible and relevant education programs. Traditionally, education staff carry out an education assessment or diagnostic exercise to understand the situation of the education sector and inform strategy, policy and programs.
There have been recent efforts by some bilateral and multilateral agencies to develop multi-risk and education analysis methodologies, and implement these methodologies in the field. These include the Rapid Education and Risk Analysis guide developed by USAID and piloted by implementing partners—Education Development Center in Mali, USAID’s Education in Conflict and Crisis Network in El Salvador and Creative Associates in Afghanistan. UNESCO has developed a conflict analysis and resilience approach to planning which has been used in countries including Uganda, Burkina Faso and South Sudan, to name a few. All of these pilots represent diverse country contexts and management arrangements. This session will learn from the work of these agencies and will identify challenges, opportunities, and lessons for future engagement.
The following key questions will be probed in the panel:
1. What are emerging lessons in implementing integrated risk and education analyses in the field?
2. What have been the most insightful findings from these pilots?
3. What are the implications for strategy and programming to achieve greater equity in education access?
RERA El Salvador Final Report - James Rogan, Exterion/USAID ECCN
RERA in Gao Region (Mali) - Gabriel Montero, Education Development Center (EDC)
RERA Afghanistan - Eileen St. George, Creative Associates International; Omar Qargha, University of Maryland, College Park
Policy Brief on Lessons Learned in Crisis-Sensitive Planning - Leonora Macewen, International Institute for Educational Planning (IIEP) UNESCO