Strengthening the Disaster Risk Reduction
Framework and the Fire Protection
System at the National Level
(MySMIS 134464/SIPOCA code 866)

ROMANIA
Reimbursable Advisory Services Agreement on Disaster Risk Reduction
Strategy for Romania (P172203)

Output 5
Report on capacity development activities to enhance
knowledge and strengthen Disaster Risk Reduction skills

June 2023

Project co-financed from the European Social Fund through the Operational Programme
for Administrative Capacity 2014–2020

www.poca.ro
Disclaimer
This document is the product of work performed by World Bank staff and experts. The findings,
interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this document do not necessarily reflect the views of
the Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent. The World Bank does
not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations,
and other information shown in any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of the
World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such
boundaries. The document does not necessarily represent the position of the European Union or
Romania.

Copyright Statement
The material in this publication is copyrighted. Copying and/or transmitting portions of this work
without permission may be a violation of applicable laws. For permission to photocopy or reprint any
part of this work, please send a request with the complete information to either (a) the General
Inspectorate for Emergency Situations (Dimitrie Pompeiu Boulevard, No. 10A, Sector 2, Bucharest,
Romania) or (b) the World Bank Group Romania (Vasile Lascăr Street, No 31, Et 6, Sector 2, Bucharest,
Romania).

Acknowledgments
This report was prepared under the guidance and supervision of Christoph Pusch (Practice Manager,
Urban, Disaster Risk Management, Resilience and Land, Europe and Central Asia) and Anna Akhalkatsi
(Country Manager). Drafting of the report was coordinated by Zuzana Stanton-Geddes (Senior Disaster
Risk Management Specialist), Alexandra Calin (Disaster Risk Management Specialist), and Anda
Georgiana Anica (Disaster Risk Management Expert) with inputs from Matei Teodor Sumbasacu
(Disaster Risk Management Expert), Monika Meltzer and Rebecca Bicksler, and peer review comments
from Alanna Simpson (Lead Disaster Risk Management Specialist).

The team would like to express its gratitude for the cooperation and guidance of the representatives
of the General Inspectorate for Emergency Situations of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and all the
stakeholders who participated in the training activities and contributed to the preparation of the
report.

This report was delivered in June 2023 under the provisions of the Reimbursable Advisory Services
Agreement on Disaster Risk Reduction Strategy for Romania (P172203) signed between the General
Inspectorate for Emergency Situations and the International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development on June 30, 2020. It corresponds to Output 5 under the abovementioned agreement.
CONTENTS
Background ............................................................................................................................................. 5
Executive Summary................................................................................................................................. 7
Overview of capacity building activities ................................................................................................. 9
Central-level authorities ..................................................................................................................... 9
Local-level authorities ....................................................................................................................... 11
County Inspectorates for Emergency Situations .............................................................................. 12
CSOs, Academia and the private sector ............................................................................................ 13
Lessons identifIed And Recommendations........................................................................................... 15
Identified capacity development gaps and challenges ..................................................................... 15
Development of the training programmes and sessions .................................................................. 19
ANNEX 1. List of participating stakeholders ......................................................................................... 21
ANNEX 2. Materials for the central-level authorities session ............................................................... 26
ANNEX 3. Materials for the local-level authorities session .................................................................. 29
ANNEX 4. Materials for the county inspectorates for Emergency Situations Session .......................... 33
ANNEX 5. Mentimeter questions and results for each audience ......................................................... 36
ANNEX 6. Technical recommendations for the communication of the strategy.................................. 44
Summary ........................................................................................................................................... 44

List of Boxes
Box 1. NDRRS Communication guidelines and recommendations ....................................................... 18

List of Tables
Table 1. Central-level authorities participants’ list ............................................................................... 21
Table 2. Local level participants’ list ..................................................................................................... 21
Table 3. CSOs, academia, and the private sector participants’ list ....................................................... 25
Table 4. Objectives and Strategic Directions of Actions for Communication ....................................... 49

List of Figures
Figure 1. Mentimeter results from the training for central-level authorities – Question 1 ................. 36
Figure 2. Mentimeter results from the training for central-level authorities – Question 2 ................. 36
Figure 3. Mentimeter results from the training for central-level authorities – Question 3 ................. 37
Figure 4. Mentimeter results from the training for central-level authorities – Question 4 ................. 37
Figure 5. Mentimeter results from the training for local-level authorities – Question 1 ..................... 38
Figure 6. Mentimeter results from the training for local-level authorities – Question 2 ..................... 38
Figure 7. Mentimeter results from the training for local-level authorities – Question 3 ..................... 39
Figure 8. Mentimeter results from the training for local-level authorities – Question 4 ..................... 39
Figure 9. Mentimeter results from the training for CIES – Question 1 ................................................. 40
Figure 10. Mentimeter results from the training for CIES – Question 2 ............................................... 40
Figure 11. Mentimeter results from the training for CIES – Question 3 ............................................... 41
Figure 12. Mentimeter results from the training for CIES – Question 4 ............................................... 41
Figure 13. Mentimeter results from the training for CSOs, Academia and private sector – Question 1
.............................................................................................................................................................. 42

3
Figure 14. Mentimeter results from the training for CSOs, Academia and private sector – Question 2
.............................................................................................................................................................. 43
Figure 15. Process of building awareness: From informed to empowered .......................................... 44
Figure 16. Disaster risk communication and awareness raising - Information ecosystem................... 45
Figure 17. Target Audiences and goals/objectives ............................................................................... 47
Figure 18. Timeline and methods ......................................................................................................... 48

Acronyms and Abbreviations
CIES County Inspectorates for Emergency Situations
CSO Civil Society Organization
DRM Disaster Risk Management
DRR Disaster Risk Reduction
EU European Union
IBRD International Bank for Reconstruction and Development
GD Government Decision
GIES General Inspectorate of Emergency Situations
GoR Government of Romania
MDPWA Ministry of Development, Public Works and Administration
MoIA Ministry of Internal Affairs
NDRRS National Disaster Risk Reduction Strategy
NSRRS National Seismic Risk Reduction Strategy
RAS Reimbursable Advisory Services
SFDRR Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction
TAG Technical Advisory Group

4
BACKGROUND
This report is part of the Reimbursable Advisory Services (RAS) Agreement titled “Disaster Risk
Reduction Strategy for Romania.”1 This agreement between the General Inspectorate for Emergency
Situations (GIES), the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MoIA), the Government of Romania (GoR), and the
World Bank became effective on June 30, 2020, and was amended and extended on June 20, 2022.
The RAS focuses on two broad areas of activities: (a) the development of the National Disaster Risk
Reduction (DRR) Strategy (NDRRS) and (b) capacity development of stakeholders with responsibilities
in implementing the NDRRS.

This report corresponds to Output 5 produced under RAS Agreement Activity 2(a) and 2(b), under
which the World Bank supports the GIES by developing training materials related to DRR and
organizing a number of capacity development activities to enhance knowledge and strengthen DRR
skills among key stakeholders with responsibilities in NDRRS implementation, and by preparing a
summary report of these activities.

The report provides an overview of the capacity development activities organized between March
and April 2023 for key stakeholders in Romania. These activities focused on the implementation of
the draft NDRRS and included an introductory component on DRR. Additionally, the report offers
recommendations on how to further support and promote the implementation of the NDRRS once it
is adopted by the GoR.

A report with recommendations on the proposed draft NDRRS and the accompanying draft action
plan (RAS Output 4) was developed by the World Bank and approved by GIES in August 2022. The
proposed NDRRS aims to establish a framework for the various actions being undertaken and planned
by stakeholders involved in disaster risk management (DRM) with formal or informal roles. It outlines
the key directions of actions and expected results up to 2035, aligning with the Sendai Framework for
Disaster Risk Reduction 2015 – 2030 (SFDRR) and international best practices for national DRR
strategies, bringing together information regarding multiple hazards, thematic areas, economic
sectors, as well as different types of stakeholders. The development of the NDRRS outline followed
the Government Decision No. 379/2022, on the approval of the methodology for developing,
implementing, monitoring, evaluating and updating government strategies. The draft action plan
complements the draft NDRRS and provides additional information for the period 2023 - 2026.

The capacity development activities and, implicitly, the summary report also draw on the findings
of the previous outputs of the RAS Agreement. These outputs are as follows:
• Output 1. Report on the review of the legal, regulatory and institutional framework governing
DRR in Romania. This report helped identify challenges and goals in the field of DRR, existing
programs and actions, as well as corresponding monitoring, implementation, and financing
arrangements.

• Output 2. Study on DRR strategies in other selected EU Member States. This Output
summarized good practice related to DRR strategies within the European Union (EU) and a

1 As part of the project ‘’Strengthening the disaster risk reduction framework and fire protection system at national level’’/
‘’Consolidarea cadrului de reducere a riscului de dezastre și a sistemului de apărare împotriva incendiilor la nivel național’’
(MySMIS 134464/cod SIPOCA 866), co-financed by the European Social Fund through the Programme Operational
Administrative Capacity.

5
selection of non-EU countries. It also included a set of recommendations to consider for the
development of the NDRRS.

• Output 3. Report on the exchange with the selected EU Member States. This activity facilitated
in-depth discussions and collaboration with civil protection from the EU and New Zealand.
The purpose of these exchanges was to gather insights and expertise that would inform the
development of the NDRRS and contribute to capacity development efforts related to the
Strategy’s implementation.

For Output 5, the immediate audience of the report is the GIES under the MoIA, given its leading
role in coordinating implementation efforts related to the NDRRS. However, it is expected that the
findings will also be informative to a broader range of stakeholders with formal or informal roles
related to DRM, including the participants in the capacity building activities.

Between March and April 2023, a series of four training sessions were organized each specifically
designed for a particular target group: (i) central-level authorities, (ii) local-level authorities, (iii)
County Inspectorates for Emergency Situations (CIES), and (iv) civil society organizations (CSOs)2,
academia and the private sector. The selection of these target groups was made based on
consultations with GIES and based on the outcomes of RAS Output 4. The training sessions were
organized either online or in hybrid format (both online and in-person), depending on the audience
type, location and number of participants. These arrangements were determined in advance in
consultation with GIES.

The main objectives of these training sessions were as follows: (i) to enhance participants’ knowledge
of DRR, (ii) to contribute to creating an enabling environment for the implementation of the NDRRS,
(iii) to inform key stakeholders responsible for the implementation of the Strategy, on the key
provisions of the NDRRS and build their capacity in terms of making use of the mechanisms described,
and (iv) to raise awareness about the NDRRS and demonstrate how stakeholders across all levels can
contribute to achieving its objectives.

To facilitate the summary presentation of the capacity building activities, this report is structured
according to the target audiences that attended the trainings.

2
According to the European Union, a civil society organisation is an organisational structure whose members serve the
general interest through a democratic process and which plays the role of mediator between public authorities and
citizens.

6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Increasing disaster resilience is a complex process that requires knowledge and capacity across
different levels and fields. Given that DRR is cross-sectoral in nature, the implementation of the
NDRRS and corresponding Action Plan requires coordination amongst a wide range of stakeholders.
Ensuring an integrated approach to capacity building for stakeholders across different levels and key
sectors plays an essential role in addressing human capacity constraints in the field of DRR and
supporting the implementation of the NDRRS in a sustainable manner.

A total of four training sessions were organized between March and April 2023, as part of Output 5
of the RAS Agreement. The main objectives of the training sessions were: i) to enhance participants’
knowledge of DRR, (ii) to contribute to creating an enabling environment for the implementation of
the NDRRS, (iii) to inform key stakeholders responsible for the implementation of the Strategy, on the
key provisions of the NDRRS and build their capacity in terms of making use of the mechanisms
described, and (iv) to raise awareness about the NDRRS and demonstrate how stakeholders across all
levels can contribute to achieving its objectives.

The training sessions were addressed to four different groups of stakeholders: (i) central-level
authorities, (ii) local-level authorities, (iii) CIES, and (iv) CSOs, academia and the private sector. These
target groups were selected in agreement with GIES and based on RAS Output 4. The training sessions
were organized either online or in hybrid format (both online and in-person), depending on the
audience type, location and number of participants, as priorly agreed with GIES.

Given that each of the training sessions differed in terms of the target audience, specific content
was prepared for each of the sessions. Each of the sessions also included an interactive component,
depending on the audience and format of the event. Activities included fictional administration
scenarios (or so-called serious games), live polling and structured discussions, while multiple methods
were used to engage with the audience, capture participants’ opinions, and build on the findings that
surfaced in this way.

A total of 365 participants attended the training sessions, representatives of central level authorities,
local level authorities (City Halls), County Inspectorates for Emergency Situations, CSOs, academic and
research institutions and private entities from across the country. The full list of stakeholders that
attended the trainings can be found in Annex 1.

Based on the organized training activities, several lessons were identified, and conclusions were
drawn. These findings form the basis for key recommendations regarding the implementation of the
draft NDRRS and its corresponding Action Plan.
• A comprehensive capacity development plan in the field of DRM could be developed. This
plan would define a program of activities across different levels and
institutions/organizations, aiming to strengthen the overall capacities of the DRM system in
Romania.
• A range of instruments/activities could be developed to contribute to capacity building in the
field of DRR, based on the capacity gaps assessed. Tailored training programs, including online
and modular courses, training of trainers, blended exercises and more, can be implemented
in a systematic manner nationwide.

7
• Enhancing access to DRR-related information is essential for capacity building efforts. This
can be achieved by improving existing websites/platforms to catalogue research areas and
programs, as well as any updates to the legislative framework related to DRR. These measures
will facilitate the exchange of scientific information and ensure stakeholders are informed of
any relevant legislative updates.
• Strengthening coordination mechanisms in the field of DRM is critical in bridging the capacity
gaps across national, county and local levels. Establishing local or county platforms for DRR,
similar to the National Disaster Risk Reduction Platform (NPDRR), can accelerate capacity
building efforts at county, local, and rural community levels, and serve as hubs for knowledge-
activities.
• The NDRRS itself can serve as a communication and dissemination tool. It can raise
awareness of DRR as a cross-sectoral effort that requires a whole-of-society approach. Beyond
supporting stakeholders, this would also enable them to better disseminate information to
the general public and promote a participatory approach to DRR activities.
• Scaling up dedicated and continuous communication and public engagement efforts is
necessary to build a resilient community in case of disasters. Activities could include: (i)
creating a ‘public awareness toolkit’ to guide risk communication and awareness raising
activities at all levels, (ii) establishing common/standardized terms of reference for risk
communication, based on harmonized DRR messages, (iii) providing trainings and workshops
on risk communication to all relevant stakeholders, (iv) setting-up a risk communication
working group within the NPDRR, and (v) developing an overarching communication
strategy/plan related to DRR.3 A set of more extensive, detailed technical recommendations
that can inform stakeholders in developing a communications strategy related to DRR/the
NDRRS and/or broader communication and awareness activities are in Annex 6.

3
World Bank. 2022. Report with recommendations on the proposed draft national DRR strategy and proposed draft action
plan. Output 4 of the Reimbursable Advisory Services Agreement on Disaster Risk Reduction Strategy for Romania (P172203).
March 2022.

8
OVERVIEW OF CAPACITY BUILDING ACTIVITIES
Between March and April 2023, a total of four training activities were organized as part of Output 5
of the RAS Agreement. The trainings were addressed to four different groups of stakeholders.
Depending on the type of audience and technical arrangements available, the trainings were
organized either online or in hybrid format. A table with the attendance for each of the sessions can
be found in Annex 1.
Each training session followed a two-part structure, consisting of a theoretical component and an
interactive exercise. In the theoretical part, an introduction to Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) was
provided, followed by a comprehensive presentation of the proposed draft National Disaster Risk
Reduction Strategy (NDRRS) and its corresponding Action Plan. This presentation covered various
aspects, including the outline of the strategy, its alignment with existing policies, the envisioned vision,
general principles, objectives, anticipated outcomes, directions of action, proposed timelines,
responsible agencies, and methods for monitoring and evaluation. The presentation also included
sections approaching the topics of sustainable development, equal opportunities from the gender
perspective and alignment with the agendas/priorities at European and international levels.
Moreover, the presentation included a supplementary section on communication, offering a brief
overview of the information ecosystem, primary communication channels, the impact and
measurement of communication, and emphasized the vital role of communication in DRR. Effective
communication is essential for ensuring continuous engagement and outreach to the various
stakeholders involved in DRR activities.
The second part of the training session features interactive activities, with the level of participant
interaction varying depending on the meeting format (that is, online and/or hybrid) and
connectivity options. These activities comprised two interactive administration scenario sessions
designed as serious games, as well as two structured live polling sessions followed by discussions on
the results. To initiate engagement, participants were presented with a set of ice-breaker questions
at the start of each training session. Notably, one of the questions required participants to prioritize
the hazards faced by Romania by ranking them in order of importance. The answers to this question,
provided by all respondents for each session, are presented in the corresponding sections of the
Annexes.
After the completion of the four training sessions, the training materials were shared with the
participants. Additionally, an online feedback form was distributed to gather participants' views on
the informational content of the training and their main needs and anticipated challenges in
implementing the NDRRS once it is approved by the GoR. A total of 48 responses were collected
through the feedback form, providing valuable insights from the participants.

Central-level authorities
The 4-hour training session for central-level authorities was held on March 3, 2023. It was organized
as a hybrid event, with both in-person attendance at the World Bank office in Bucharest, and online
attendance through videoconference. A total of 71 persons attended the training, with participants
from key central-level institutions, including line ministries, such as the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the
Ministry of Development, Public Works and Administration, the Ministry of Culture, and other
authorities, such as the National Administration for Romanian Waters.

9
The session consisted of two main parts. The first part included the presentation focused on the main
features and mechanisms of the NDRRS, relevant to central-level authorities. This part aimed to
provide participants with a comprehensive understanding of the NDRRS and its implications for their
respective institutions.

The second part of the training consisted of an interactive fictional administration scenario, where
participants had the opportunity to immerse themselves in the way of working promoted by the
NDRRS, internalize the key principles and mechanisms in the NDRRS and extract valuable insights from
this active participation. Participants were split into teams of 8-10 players, with each being assigned a
ministry in the fictional country of “Novaria”. For the first phase of the exercise, he teams were tasked
with making decisions regarding government actions within a pre-set, limited budget. The actions
were designed to simulate real-world situations faced by central-level authorities, in order to
maximize the realism involved in the scenario. After the teams chose the list of actions, the second
phase of the exercise involved a multi-hazard scenario – specifically, an earthquake followed by a
potential flood. Similarly to the first phase, the teams needed to select some actions to be undertaken
as response actions, considering a limited budget.

Following the completion of the scenario, a discussion was facilitated to delve into the selected
actions for each team, emphasizing the following points:

• the need for cooperation and collaboration between institutions,
• the significance of data availability and gathering and prioritizing DRR activities,
• the opportunities to integrate DRR with sustainable development and other priorities, and
• the inherent trade-offs and limitations that exist in the DRR context.

The outline and input data for the interactive scenario that has been prepared for this training session
is included in Annex 2.

Feedback from the participants

Approximately 70 percent of the participants from central-level authorities found the training
content to be useful to a large or very large extent.4 In addition to the information provided during
the training, participants expressed the desire for a brief worksheet with the key objectives,
responsibilities, expected results and timelines expected from each institution involved in the NDRRS
implementation. They also expressed their interest to have more opportunities to participate in
practical activities/courses to further enhance their knowledge and skills.

During the training, needs and challenges in implementing the NDRRS were identified by the
representatives of central-level authorities. These included the need for a clear understanding of
institutional roles and responsibilities, addressing human and institutional capacity needs, ensuring
effective inter-institutional collaboration, adopting a unified whole-of-society approach to Disaster
Risk Management (DRM), and overcoming limited availability of risk information and data, particularly
in relation to people with disabilities and infrastructure accessibility.

4
According to the feedback form disseminated among the participants, based on a total of 16 responses received from
representatives of central-level authorities.

10
Local-level authorities
The 4-hour training session for local-level authorities took place on March 23, 2023, in online format.
The training gathered a total of 145 participants from town/city halls nationwide. The participants
were physically grouped in 5 locations throughout Romania, as agreed in advance with GIES, namely:

• Regional center for the coordination and management of emergency response Cluj
• Regional center for the coordination and management of emergency response Craiova
• Regional center for the coordination and management of emergency response Bacău
• County inspectorate for emergency situations Bihor
• County inspectorate for emergency situations Dolj

In each of the 5 locations, staff from the GIES units mentioned above were present to act as facilitators
(or coordinators) They were briefed/prepared in advance with respect to their responsibility as part
of the exercise.

The training session was organized in two main parts. The first part consisted of the presentation of
the main features and mechanisms of the NDRRS, as relevant for local-level authorities. The second
part consisted of an interactive activity, structured as a local governance scenario, with players being
split into teams of 6-10 players, each team representing the platform for DRR in the fictional city of
“Imagineni” (similar to the real national-level Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction in Romania). Each
player was assigned a pre-defined role by ballots – from the Mayor to representatives of the local
community, different key positions in the city hall, or representatives from key institutions at the local
level. This way, different points of view were represented within each team and discussions were
encouraged.

Responses were collected from the participants through Microsoft Forms, with the help of the
coordinators in each location. The coordinators were handed out a concise instruction sheet in order
to ensure proper coordination and coherence between the 5 physical locations where participants
had been grouped. This instruction sheet is included in Annex 3.

The interactive scenario presented a range of actions, tailored for local-level authorities, in order to
increase realism and provide a solid basis for productive discussions. The main objectives of the
scenario were to promote cooperation, collaboration, and structured discussions. Also, the actions
were selected in such a way so as to emphasize the existing synergies between the various facets of
DRR and sustainable development. Trade-offs were also emphasized, with one key message of this
activity being that there is no perfect solution to completely reduce disaster risk but, in fact, there are
many routes a local authority can take in order to reduce their disaster risk and it is the local
administration who should select the most appropriate of them – i.e., the most efficient and effective
route. Other key elements integrated in the interactive scenario focused on the need to increase
capacity at the level of local governments and the importance of communication in DRR, amongst
others.

The actions selected by the participants formed the basis for a subsequent structured discussion on
applying DRM principles at the local level. This discussion emphasized, amongst others:

• Recognizing the importance of communication for raising awareness, understanding the local
community, and gaining support for DRM actions at a local level
• The different sides of local level resilience, with an emphasis on community resilience and
preparedness

11
• Collaboration as a key driver for successful DRM
• Opportunities and trade-offs in DRM and sustainable development at a local level

An example handout for the participants, containing all the data necessary to implement this activity,
has been included in Annex 3. This handout served as a comprehensive guide for the participants,
providing the necessary information to effectively engage in the scenario and subsequent discussions
on applying DRM principles at the local level.

Overall, the interactive scenario and structured discussions aimed to foster knowledge sharing, critical
thinking, and informed decision-making among local-level authorities, promoting effective DRR
practices within their jurisdictions.

Feedback from the participants

Approximately 65 percent of the participants from local-level authorities found the training content
to be useful to a large or very large extent5. In addition to the information provided during the
training, participants considered that it would be helpful to regularly receive information on legislative
updates and have more information/details on the exact roles and responsibilities of local-level
authorities in the NDRRS implementation.

Needs and challenges in implementing the NDRRS were identified by the representatives of local-
level authorities, particularly city halls. One crucial need identified is securing financing sources and
ensuring the availability of the necessary budget to execute the proposed activities outlined in the
strategy. Staying informed about new legislative amendments that may impact DRR efforts was
another concern expressed by the participants. They recognized the importance of keeping up with
any changes in laws and regulations that pertain to disaster risk management and mitigation.
Furthermore, the participants acknowledged the need to raise public awareness regarding disaster
risks and preparedness measures. They emphasized the importance of engaging and informing the
general population about potential hazards and educating them on how to be better prepared for
emergencies.

Overall, the feedback and insights provided by the representatives of local-level authorities shed light
on their appreciation for the training content while also highlighting key areas that require attention
and support, including regular updates on legislation, sufficient funding, and robust public awareness
campaigns.

County Inspectorates for Emergency Situations
The 4-hour training session for the representatives of the CIES took place on April 4, 2023, in online
format. In order to encourage collaboration between the participants during the interactive activity,
the representatives from the same CIES gathered in the same room. The training gathered a total of
116 participants, representing the Prevention Inspections and the Intervention Preparedness and
Community Resilience Services of CIES across the country.
The training session was organized in two main parts. The first part of the training session focused
on the DRR introductory component, the presentation of the draft NDRRS and the elements focused

5
According to the feedback form disseminated among the participants, based on a total of 11 responses received from
representatives of local-level authorities (city halls).

12
on the Strategy implementation. The role of CIES and the potential ways in which they could support
the implementation of the NDRRS was also highlighted. The second part of the training focused on an
interactive activity during which participants were provided with a fictional scenario about a city that
is subjected to different hazards and needs to undertake some risk reduction actions. The participants
were asked to rank these actions in terms of their potential impact and required effort to undertake
each of them. Given the potential role of the CIES to assist and support in monitoring the
implementation of the NDRRS, as well as to provide technical guidance to the implementing agencies,
the actions have been chosen in such a way as to pertain to these two major directions. The exercise
was also an opportunity to evaluate the perceptions, at the level of the CIESs, regarding the difficulty
or ease with which some actions could be implemented.
As part of the interactive activity, two open-ended questions were provided to the participants
which encouraged a structured discussion on topics related to the implementation of the NDRRS.
Namely, the questions approached the issues of (i) potential partners in increasing the preparedness
of the population, and (ii) actions that a CIES can take in order to support the implementation of a
DRR strategy at the county level. The scenario and the open-ended questions have been included in
this document as Annex 4.
Feedback from the participants

Approximately 60 percent of the participants from County Inspectorates for Emergency Situations
found the training content to be useful to a large or very large extent.6 In addition to the information
provided during the training, participants considered that it would be helpful to also receive more
information on risk assessments and loss and damage databases, as well as more opportunities to
participate in practical/field exercises. The participants also stressed the importance of organizing
preparedness activities for the general population and disseminating awareness materials in schools.

Also, needs and challenges in implementing the NDRRS were identified by the representatives of
CIESs. Among the main needs and challenges identified are building human capacity, particularly in
the field of civil protection, raising public awareness of disaster risks, ensuring the necessary budget
for the activities implementation and limited access to/availability of loss and damage databases.

CSOs, Academia and the private sector
The 4-hour training session for the representatives of CSOs, academic and research entities and the
private sector was conducted on April 21, 2023 in hybrid format. The session brought together a total
of 33 participants, aiming to enhance their understanding of DRR and their potential roles in
supporting the implementation of the draft NDRRS.
This session was as well organized in two parts. The first part of the training session focused on the
DRR introductory component, the presentation of the draft NDRRS and the Strategy implementation.
The presentation also emphasized the significance of active involvement from CSOs, academia, and
the private sector in the implementation process of the strategy. The session highlighted the potential
contributions and support that each group of stakeholders can offer to ensure the successful
execution of the strategy.

6
According to the feedback form disseminated among the participants, based on a total of 19 responses received from
representatives of CIESs across the country.

13
The second part of the training focused on an interactive activity which was split into two sections: (i)
a quiz-type activity, as part of which participants were shown pictures that included elements of
hazard, vulnerability, exposure or risk and they were asked to recognize which of these elements were
shown in each of the pictures. The purpose of this activity was to ensure a constructive environment
for a discussion and to provide a basic level of knowledge on DRR, and (ii) a group discussion based on
two open-ended questions addressed to the participants. The first question referred to the ways in
which the organization that each of them represented could contribute to the implementation of the
strategy. The second question focused on what the participants consider to be the biggest challenges
in contributing to the Strategy implementation. All these questions were asked through the
Mentimenter platform and the corresponding responses are included in Annex 5.

Feedback from the participants

In view of the diverse audience of the training sessions and the attendance both online and in-person,
the participants engaged in an active way, which enabled a fruitful exchange of knowledge and views
over the topics presented during the training. In addition to the information provided during the
training session, participants underlined the importance of raising awareness of the population with
respect to DRR, across all population groups, with particular attention to be given to the inclusion of
people with disabilities and accommodating their special needs in case of an emergency. They stressed
the significance of accessible communication channels, information materials, and adapted
emergency interventions to ensure inclusivity and effective response measures.

Overall, the training session provided valuable insights and encouraged participants to actively
contribute to the implementation of the NDRRS, while also highlighting the need for inclusive and
accessible approaches in DRR efforts.

14
LESSONS IDENTIFIED AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Following the completion of all training sessions, a set of lessons were drawn with respect to
capacity building needs and challenges faced by key stakeholders in Romania concerning the
implementation of the NDRRS. These conclusions also build on the inputs gathered from the
participants during the trainings and the feedback they provided from participants through an online
form, as well as inputs from previous RAS Outputs following extensive sets of consultations with key
stakeholders.

Identified capacity development gaps and challenges
Capacity Development Gaps and Challenges. Capacity development needs and challenges related to
DRM in Romania span a wide range of areas, including resources, skills, knowledge, organizational
aspects, incentives and so on. These needs often coexist and require simultaneous attention. Capacity-
building programs play a key role in contributing to the creation of an enabling environment for DRR,
which is paramount to advancing progress across all levels and directions of actions. While many
efforts are ongoing, there is a limited level of awareness and training opportunities related to DRR
across different institutional levels and groups of stakeholders. There is scope to support more
formalized DRR trainings and activities that target preparedness and capacity building involving all
members of society.

Institutional Level Capacity Building. At institutional level, investing in DRR capacity building activities
for personnel across all levels represents one of the most important needs identified with respect to
the implementation of the NDRRS. There are various trainings and preparedness programs in place
(for example, mandatory trainings for emergency response teams, training on emergency
preparedness and response available at EU-level, etc.), as well as strategic documents focused on
capacity building (such as the Strategy for the Consolidation and Development of the General
Inspectorate for Emergency Situations 2016–2025, focused on improving the capacity of the GIES to
intervene in emergency situations). However, there is currently no comprehensive capacity building
program related to DRM in Romania. Filling this gap is essential to making sure that all relevant
stakeholders understand their role and responsibilities in contributing to the achievement of NDRRS
objectives and have a common knowledge base related to DRR.

Information Gaps and Needs. Information gaps and needs pose further challenges to capacity
development in the field of DRR. The accessibility and availability of information on hazard exposure,
vulnerability, and disaster risks vary greatly across the main hazards affecting Romania. There are gaps
in terms of the collection and sharing of information on disaster and climate risks that is freely
accessible to the public, while many of the existing databases in Romania have restricted access and
limited terms of use. In turn, this poses the risk of duplication of efforts and uncoordinated collection
of data7 while the level of understanding of disaster risks varies acutely across the main hazards. Other
key information gaps and needs identified are having regular, up-to-date information on new
amendments to the legislative framework related to DRR, as well as detailed information on the roles
and responsibilities of implementing stakeholders, particularly local authorities.

7
World Bank. 2021. Report on the Review of the Legal, Regulatory, and Institutional Framework Governing DRR in
Romania. Output 1 of the Reimbursable Advisory Services Agreement on Disaster Risk Reduction Strategy for Romania.
April 2021.

15
Disparities in Human, Financial, and Technical Capacity. Human, financial and technical capacity
differ greatly also between the central and local levels, between rural and urban areas and between
municipalities. This may often result in responsibilities that lack the dedicated funding needed for their
fulfilment, potential non-compliance with frameworks, and limitations in services. The need for
technical training and inclusion of specialists within local public administrations remains significant.

Strengthening Risk Communication and Public Awareness. While public risk awareness increased
over time, the adoption of preventive behaviour among the population is still low and many people
do not know how to prepare for disaster situations. There is a need to strengthen DRR risk
communication practices especially at the local level, including risks that may have historically
received limited attention, such as landslides, wildfires, or technological risks, while also continue to
improve communication on the more well-known risks such as earthquake and floods.
Communication and awareness activities also need to be inclusive and accessible to different
population groups, including those with specific vulnerabilities or disabilities.

Comprehensive DRM Communication Plans. Currently, the number and effectiveness of awareness
campaigns at the national level vary greatly across hazards. Such campaigns are usually delivered in a
sporadic manner, most often as a response to a current crisis. There is no comprehensive DRM
communication strategy/plan at national level, while the systematic evaluation of the existing risk
communication activities is missing. In view of these challenges, more financial and human resources,
as well as dedicated capacity building programs, need to be allocated to sustain continuous and
targeted risk communication.

Recommendations
In line with the lessons identified from the organization of the four training activities as part of
Output 5, as well as based on previous RAS Outputs and consultations with key stakeholders, a set
of recommendations were formulated that aim to support and facilitate the implementation of the
NDRRS, following its approval by the GoR.

A capacity development plan in the field of DRM, defining a program of activities across different
levels and for the different institutions/organizations, could contribute to strengthening the overall
capacities of the DRM system in Romania. Such a capacity building plan would need to have clear
objectives, planned activities, results indicators, timeframes and a monitoring and evaluation
framework. It should also cover cross-cutting topics such as gender perspectives, accessibility for
people with disabilities and integration of vulnerable groups. To this aim, it is essential that a
comprehensive assessment of the capacity needs and challenges in the field of DRR across different
institutional levels is undertaken, based on which capacity development activities are to be planned.
Such an assessment could be done through a survey disseminated among all the relevant
stakeholders, based on which a clear set of conclusions and next steps could be drawn. Furthermore,
an action plan with proposed steps to both attract and train a new generation of DRM specialists could
further support tackling capacity building gaps and challenges.

In line with the capacity-development plan, a range of instruments/activities could be developed
contribute to capacity building in the field of DRR, based on the capacity gaps assessed. Tailored
trainings can be implemented in a systematic manner across the country, including online courses,
modular courses, training of trainers and blended exercises, while potentially using regional/zonal
training centers in emergency situations. Other instruments/activities could include knowledge

16
exchanges and sharing of good practices, awareness raising, piloting and promoting information
sharing networks among stakeholders on successful DRR projects, and providing access to repositories
of information and resources related to DRR and/or relevant sectors.

Strengthening coordination mechanisms in the field of DRM is critical in bridging the capacity gaps
across national, county and local levels. Establishing local or county platforms for DRR, similar to the
NPDRR, could help accelerate capacity building at county and local levels, as well as across rural
communities. Such platforms could support knowledge-sharing focusing on best practices, case
studies or examples from other counties/localities facing similar challenges, sharing information about
opportunities for financing of DRM investments at local level and how to access them, and providing
more formalized capacity-building such as trainings and education programs. Capacity building
activities at lower levels should relate to the local context and institutional environment, reflect a
strong understanding of the local vulnerabilities and capacity needs, while building on the existing
local capacities and knowledge. Trainings related to the use of risk information and tools could
particularly help local authorities in the adaptation of general guidelines/templates to the local needs
and realities.

Improving access to DRR-related information and ensuring that stakeholders are informed of any
relevant legislative updates further contributes to capacity building efforts. Researchers,
policymakers, and the general public could benefit from the establishment of an online platform – or
extension/improvement of existing websites/platforms - that catalogues research areas and
programs, as well as any updates to the legislative framework related to DRR, which would facilitate
the exchange of scientific information, reduce duplication of efforts, share lessons learned and
facilitate knowledge sharing. Regular newsletters with key risk information, legislative updates and/or
other news in the field of DRR could also support this aim.

The NDRRS itself can serve as a communication and dissemination tool to raise awareness of DRR
as a cross-sectoral undertaking that uses a whole-of-society approach. Awareness raising of DRR
plays an essential role in capacity building, as it ensures that all key stakeholders have a
comprehensive understanding of DRR and are equipped with the necessary knowledge and tools to
support the implementation of the NDRRS. This would also enable them to better disseminate
information to the general public and promote a participatory approach to DRR activities. Valuable
lessons learnt could be drawn from the campaigns and outreach activities that were already
implemented by different institutions, CSOs and other stakeholders, as these could inform future
awareness efforts. Box 1 presents a set of guidelines and recommendations that could support
stakeholders in communicating the NDRRS and/or in implementing communication and awareness
activities related to DRR.

Dedicated and continuous communication and public engagement efforts should be scaled-up to
build a resilient community in case of disasters. Communication activities should build a shared
understanding of existing and future DRR initiatives while creating opportunities for coordination and
collaboration for the whole of society. There are many opportunities to build on previous and/or
ongoing communication/public awareness activities implemented by different stakeholders.
Communication efforts could be scaled-up by a series of potential actions, such as: (i) creating a ‘public
awareness toolkit’ to guide risk communication and awareness raising activities at all levels, (ii)
creating common/standardized terms of reference for risk communication, based on a harmonized
set of DRR messages, (iii) providing trainings and workshops on risk communication to all relevant

17
stakeholders, (iv) setting-up a risk communication working group within the NPDRR, and (v)
developing an overarching communication strategy/plan related to DRR.8

Box 1. NDRRS Communication guidelines and recommendations
Communicating the NDRRS is the first step towards a long-term investment in communicating disaster
risk and engaging the whole of society in risk reduction. Reaching the population through targeted
communication relies on the efforts of partners who understand the needs and perceptions of the audience.
This requires dedicated investments and support for collaboration and confidence building among different
stakeholders and strengthening of the general knowledge of DRR at all levels.

• Awareness raising. Informing and empowering the public with respect to the risks they are exposed to, as
well as the necessary prevention and preparedness measures, requires a strategic and long-term approach,
with clear targets for behaviour change. Effective risk communication should shift from a one-way, top-
down approach to a two-way, participatory process, where all citizens, even the most vulnerable, are
empowered to be part of the solution by being directly implicated in DRR activities.

• Communication partners. According to the Romanian legislation, a wide range of stakeholders have
responsibilities related to risk communication, which is why collaboration between them is essential to
strengthen risk communication at all levels. Beyond the public institutions, stakeholders such as CSOs,
research institutes/academia, professional bodies and technical institutions, the private sector and the
media, as well as schools and religious institutions, can all contribute to scaling up the state’s effort in risk
communication and awareness raising. Therefore, they should be targeted with tailor-made risk
communication regarding (a) the specific risk that they and their communities face, (b) opportunities for
them to get engaged in DRR, and (c) training opportunities to build DRR capacities.

• The National Disaster Risk Reduction Platform (NDRRP) can support and facilitate the collaboration of all
key stakeholders to improve disaster risk communication. Creating a Risk Communication Advisory Group
within the NPDRR could offer guidance and support for awareness raising to all stakeholders, thus
advocating for a unified approach to build awareness and enabling a better collaboration in the future.

• Communication goals and objectives. While DRR is the responsibility of the whole society, each stakeholder
has its own role to play, and these roles should be reflected in the overarching goals and strategic objectives
of the communication plan concerning DRR in general/NDRRS specifically.

• Methods and timelines. Working groups, consultations and focus groups are useful communication tools
for stakeholders who play a role in the design, funding, and implementation of the NDRRS. Timing of the
communication related to specific DRR programs and policies should be carefully considered, in accordance
with different program phases.

• A set of more extensive, detailed technical recommendations that can inform stakeholders in developing a
communications strategy related to DRR/the NDRRS and/or broader communication and awareness
activities are in Annex 6.

Capacity building activities should also cover the use of different funding sources and outreach to
increase financing for DRR, especially at the regional, county and local levels, and for hazards that
have not yet benefitted from major investments. Such activities could include online and/or in-
person courses, access to centralized information on the different funding sources available for DRR,
dedicated sections with key information on the relevant institutions’ websites (e.g., Ministry of

8
World Bank. 2022. Report with recommendations on the proposed draft national DRR strategy and proposed draft action
plan. Output 4 of the Reimbursable Advisory Services Agreement on Disaster Risk Reduction Strategy for Romania (P172203).
March 2022.

18
Investments and European Funds, GIES, City Halls) and so on. Systematic sharing of information about
funding opportunities could support mobilization of greater resources for DRM in coming years and
decades. Furthermore, engaging and supporting CSOs in mobilizing funds for DRR could play a key role
in building their capacity to implement actions at community level.

A continuous improvement of DRR communication tools and awareness activities is needed in order
to ensure accessibility for people with disabilities . Communication activities should be adapted to
the special needs and vulnerabilities of people with disabilities, while making sure that the channels
of communication used are accessible also to them. Capacity building efforts in DRR should also
consider the integration of people with disabilities and how they can contribute themselves to DRR
efforts.

A holistic approach to capacity development could support efforts to build key stakeholders’
competencies in the field of DRR. Such an approach goes beyond training activities and aims to create
an enabling environment to effectively deal with complex processes on the long term, both at
institutional and individual levels. At an institutional level, a holistic approach focuses on the overall
organizational performance and functioning capabilities, as well as the ability of an institution/
organization to adapt to change. At an individual level, it can contribute to the process of awareness
raising and behavior change, encouraging knowledge exchange and strengthening competencies (e.g.,
technical, operational, financial and so on).

Development of the training programmes and sessions
Several lessons can also be extracted on how to further improve and facilitate future training
sessions related to DRR and/or the NDRRS and maximize their impact, based on the organization of
the training sessions related to the implementation of the NDRRS, as part of Output 5.

Icebreaker questions provide a good opportunity to capture the audience’s attention and convey
key basic information. At the beginning of each training session, a series of ice-breaker questions were
presented to the audience, typically a mix of perception questions (i.e., questions with no single
correct answer), and trivia questions, in the form of a live poll. The objective was to convey selected
information as relevant to each type of audience and to gain an initial understanding of the existing
perceptions at the level of each audience, in order to better adapt the way in which the information
was presented accordingly. The participants’ attention level seemingly increased as a result of this
preliminary polling and they generally became visibly more engaged as a result of this activity.

Integrating interactive activities into the training sessions can help the participants become more
engaged and fruitful discussions are encouraged. During the training sessions, participants were
provided with the opportunity to capture lessons and takeaways indirectly, by discussing with each
other and with the facilitators. This was observed to be a much more effective means of conveying
information, as the participants kept their focus and interest for longer periods of time. Also, such an
arrangement encouraged creativity and thinking out of the box, with participants producing potential
issues and solutions in a more practical manner. For example, during the session dedicated to central-
authorities, one participant – who was also a retired army man – presented his own view of organizing
the response activities required by the scenario and added much more realism to the entire
presentation.

19
Recommendations related to future capacity development activities
Future similar sessions of training could be organized in order to integrate, to the extent possible,
an interactive component during which key messages and takeaways could be extracted by the
participants both directly and indirectly – i.e., learning by doing. In order to maximize results, a
consistent planning process needs to be undertaken for these interactive sections. The planning
process should start with the objectives and key messages to be delivered through the activity.
Afterward the best type of activity should be selected, depending on the existing limitations (e.g.,
technology, number of participants, time, etc.). The activity itself then needs to be tailored and
adapted so that the desired key messages are seamlessly integrated.

Although in-person events tend to be more engaging than online events, sometimes it may be difficult
to cover broad areas of the country by organizing in-person events. For these instances, the format
with participants being grouped in selected locations throughout the country, with facilitators for each
location (e.g., CIES offices, regional centers for training, and so on), was proven to work more than
adequately. In this respect, it is important to ensure that the facilitators are coordinated and know
what they need to do in order to maintain engagement levels high.

Based on the participants’ feedback and the lessons learnt following the implementation of the four
trainings sessions, a set of recommendations were formulated, that could improve the effectiveness
of similar training programs in the future: (i) dissemination of short, online forms prior to the
trainings, assessing the participants’ knowledge level and information gaps/needs, in order to adapt
the training content accordingly, (ii) regularity and consistency of training programs, based on clear
guidelines and continuity of capacity building activities; (iii) use of standardized templates for training
materials and presentations, in order to facilitate the learning process by the participants, (iv) use of
presentations designed in a visually attractive manner, with special attention given to the size and
amount of text presented; (v) inclusion of interactive activities that enable the participants to actively
engage in the discussion, interact with each other and share knowledge/experiences, (vi) all
presentations and/or training materials are to be shared with the participants shortly after the
training, and (vii) feedback should be collected from the participants following the training(s),in order
to collect inputs on how similar activities could be improved in the future.

20
ANNEX 1. LIST OF PARTICIPATING STAKEHOLDERS
Central-level authorities

A total of 71 participants attended the training on March 3, 2023, representing 31 central-level
authorities.

Table 1. Central-level authorities participants’ list
1. Nuclear And Radioactive Waste Agency
2. Apele Române National Administration
3. National Meteorological Administration
4. National Authority for the Protection of the Rights of the Child and Adoption
5. National Authority for the Protection of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
6. National Environmental Protection Agency
7. National Sanitary Veterinary and Food Safety Authority
8. Financial Supervisory Authority
9. National Commission for The Control of Nuclear Activities
10. National Environmental Guard
11. National Institute of Statistics
12. National Institute of Public Health
13. National Institute of Heritage
14. Ministry of Youth Family, Family And Equal Opportunities
15. Ministry of Entrepreneurship and Tourism
16. Ministry of Research and Innovation and Digitalization
17. Ministry of Culture
18. Ministry of Economy
19. Ministry of Education
20. Ministry of Energy
21. Ministry of Finance
22. Ministry of Labour and Social Solidarity
23. Ministry of Health
24. Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development
25. Ministry of Foreign Affairs
26. Ministry of Internal Affairs (Department for Emergency Situations, General Directorate for the Relations
with the Prefect's Institutions) and subordinated units (General Inspectorate for Emergency Situations)
27. Ministry of National Defense
28. Ministry of Development, Public Works and Administration
29. Ministry of Environment Water and Forests
30. Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure
31. General Secretariat of the Government

Local-level authorities

A total of 145 participants attended the training on March 23, 2023, representing 128 City Halls from
23 counties across Romania.

Table 2. Local level participants’ list
County City Hall
Alba 1. City Hall Blandiana
2. City Hall Șugag
Argeș 3. City Hall Dorobanți
4. City Hall Valea Iașului

21
5. City Hall Peregu Mare
Bacău 6. City Hall Plopana
7. City Hall Parava
Bihor 8. City Hall Boianu Mare
9. City Hall Criștioru de Jos
10. City Hall Curtuișeni
11. City Hall Marghița
12. City Hall Mădăraș
13. City Hall Paleu
14. City Hall Salonta
15. City Hall Sântândrei
16. City Hall Suplacu de Bărcău
17. City Hall Șinteu
18. City Hall Șoimi
19. City Hall Tileagd
20. City Hall Nucet
21. City Hall Vașcău
22. City Hall Drăgești
23. City Hall Săcueni
24. City Hall Cetariu
25. City Hall Diosig
26. City Hall Chișlaz
27. City Hall Spinuș
28. City Hall Tulca
29. City Hall Olcea
30. City Hall Husăsău de Tinca
31. City Hall Hidișelu de Sus
32. City Hall Sălard
33. City Hall Pietroasa
34. City Hall Rieni
35. City Hall Lunca
36. City Hall Batăr
37. City Hall Ceica
38. City Hall Țețchea
39. City Hall Săcădat
40. City Hall Borș
41. City Hall Vadu Crișului
42. City Hall Șimian
43. City Hall Tămașeu
44. City Hall Tarcea
45. City Hall Pocola
46. City Hall Dobrești
47. City Hall Pomezeu
48. City Hall Finiș
49. City Hall Tăuteu
50. City Hall Budureasa,
51. City Hall Câmpan
52. City Hall Tinca
53. City Hall Bratca
54. City Hall Derna
55. City Hall Șuncuiuș
56. City Hall Borod

22
57. City Hall Sannicolau
58. City Hall Oradea
59. City Hall Aleșd
60. City Hall Aștileu
61. City Hall Bulz
62. City Hall Copăcel
63. City Hall Tobaliu
64. City Hall Măgești
65. City Hall Grișu de Cris
66. City Hall Najorid
67. City Hall Popești
68. City Hall Sâniob
Bistrița Năsăud 69. City Hall Șieu – Odorhei

Botoșani 70. City Hall Lunca
71. City Hall Todireni

Brăila 72. City Hall Chisconi

Buzău 73. City Hall Gura Teghii

Călărași 74. City Hall Spanțov

Cluj 75. City Hall Cuzdrioara
City Hall Mociu

Dolj 76. City Hall Bârsa
77. City Hall Galicea Mare
78. City Hall Izvoare
79. City Hall Țuglui
80. City Hall Vela
81. City Hall Goiești
82. City Hall Darnic
83. City Hall Vârvoru de Jos
84. City Hall Maglavit
85. City Hall Afumați
86. City Hall Apele Vii
87. City Hall Băilești
88. City Hall Bistreț
89. City Hall Braloștița
90. City Hall Breasta
91. City Hall Calopar
92. City Hall Cerăț
93. City Hall Cioroioși
94. City Hall Coțofeni din Dos
95. City Hall Coțofenii din Față
96. City Hall Galiciuica
97. City Hall Giubega
98. City Hall Gogoșu
99. City Hall Grecești
100. City Hall Lipovu
101. City Hall Orodel
101. City Hall Seaca de Câmp
102. City Hall Seaca de Pădure

23
103. City Hall Simnicu de Sus
104. City Hall Teasc
105. City Hall Verbița

Gorj 106. City Hall Crușeț

Iași 107. City Hall Brăiești
108. City Hall Coplenița

Mehedinți 109. City Hall Burila Mare
110. City Hall Căzănești

Mureș 111. City Hall Band

Neamț 112. City Hall Tupilați
113. City Hall Valea Ursului
114. City Hall Pâncești
115. City Hall Poienari

Olt 116. City Hall Găneasa

Satu Mare 117. City Hall Odoreu

Sălaj 118. City Hall Crasna
119. City Hall Cuzăplac
120. City Hall Năpradea
121. City Hall Cristolț
122. City Hall Zimbar

Sibiu 123. City Hall Târnava

Suceava 124. City Hall Berchișești

Teleorman 125. City Hall Didești
126. City Hall Dobroiești
127. City Hall Drăgănești de Vede

Vâlcea 128. City Hall Titoiu

County Inspectorates for Emergency Situations

A total of 116 participants attended the training session on April 4, 2023, representatives of County
Inspectorates for Emergency Situations from across all 41 counties.

CSO, academia and the private sector

A total of 33 participants attended the training session on April 21, 2023, including representatives
of 20 CSOs, academic and research institutions and the private sector.

24
Table 3. CSOs, academia, and the private sector participants’ list
Stakeholder group Name
Civil Society Organizations 1. Carousel Association
2. CIVICNET
3. National Disability Council
4. Red Cross
5. Bucharest Community Foundation
6. Habitat for Humanity
7. Save the Children
Academic and research 8. Geography Institute of the Romanian Academy
institutions 9. National Institute of Earth Physics
10. Institute of Sociology of the Romanian Academy
11. National Institute of Research and Development in Forestry "Marin
Drăcea"
12. Institute for Economic Forecasting, the Romanian Academy
13. Polytechnics University of Bucharest
14. "Gheorghe Asachi" Technical University of Iasi
15. National Institute for Research and Development in Construction,
Urbanism and Sustainable Territorial Development Urban- INCERC
16. Technical University of Civil Engineering Bucharest
Private sector/Business 17. Natural Disaster Insurance Pool
environment 18. National Union of Insurance and Reinsurance Companies of Romania
19. Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Romania
20. Oil and Gas Employers' Federation

25
ANNEX 2. MATERIALS FOR THE CENTRAL-LEVEL AUTHORITIES SESSION
Disaster risk reduction interactive scenario outline

Disaster Risk Reduction Game: Building Resilience in Novaria Country

Objective: The objective of the game is to develop a DRR strategy and build resilience in Novaria
country, while improving collaboration among the central government agencies.

Participants: The game is designed for teams of 8-10 members, with each team consisting of
representatives from different several line ministries in Novaria Country such as: Ministry of Interior,
Ministry of Health, Ministry of Development, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Transport and
Infrastructure, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Agriculture and Ministry of Environment. A separate
sheet with roles of each Ministry will be provided (page 4)

Gameplay: The game is played in two rounds.

Round 1: In the first round, each team will be given a limited budget of 10 million Novarian dollars to
develop a disaster risk reduction strategy for the country. They will have to choose from a list of
actions, such as:

• Conducting a hazard and risk assessment (NOV $1.5 mil)
• Developing and implementing early warning systems for all hazards (NOV $2.5 mil)
• Strengthening emergency response capacity (NOV $3.0 mil)
• Investing in disaster-resilient critical infrastructure (NOV $3.0 mil)
• Enhancing public awareness and implementing education campaigns (NOV $1.5 mil)
• Providing disaster insurance for vulnerable communities (NOV $1.5 mil)
• Developing a comprehensive disaster recovery plan (NOV $2.5 mil)

The team can also add new actions which will come with a cost of 1 mil Novarian dollar for each new
action.

Teams will have to prioritize their actions based on their budgets and present their strategy that will
be evaluated based on creativity, feasibility, and cost-effectiveness. The team will have to mention in
which of the four Sendai Priority Area, each action will be included, and to add at least one indicator
per action.

Action type Responsible
Action Indicators Timeline Budget
Sendai Priority areas agencies
1. Understanding disaster risk
2. Strengthening disaster risk governance
to manage disaster risk
3. Investing in disaster risk reduction for
resilience
4. Enhancing disaster preparedness for
effective response and to “Build Back
Better” in recovery, rehabilitation, and
reconstruction

Round 2: Multi-hazard scenario

Scenario. A 7.2 earthquake has struck in Novaria, causing widespread damage to infrastructure and
buildings, and leaving many people injured or displaced. On top of that, a dam near a major city has

26
cracked and threatens to flood surrounding areas. The government has allocated a budget of 10
Novarian dollars for the disaster response effort.

The teams will have to coordinate an emergency response and recovery effort based on the decisions
taken in Round 1. Teams will have to work collaboratively to:

• Conduct rapid damage assessments and search and rescue operations
• Involve volunteers in the recovery effort and ensure their coordination
• Provide emergency medical care and shelter to displaced persons
• Debris removal and road clearing
• Restore critical infrastructure such as roads, bridges, essential buildings, and water supply
systems
• Develop a comprehensive disaster recovery and reconstruction plan

Each action will have a cost associated with it, and teams will have to manage their budgets effectively
to ensure that they can complete all necessary actions within the time frame.

Responsible
Response Action Expected results Timeline Budget
agencies

Scoring and Awards:

Teams will be awarded points based on their performance in both rounds. The team with the highest
overall score will be awarded the "Disaster Resilience Champions" badge. Other badges considered:

Preparedness Pros: Awarded to teams that successfully complete a high number of preparedness
actions within the budget constraints.
Coordination Masters: Awarded to teams that demonstrate effective coordination during the
response phase.
Rapid Responders: Awarded to teams that respond quickly and efficiently to the disasters.
Budget Experts: Awarded to teams that demonstrate effective budget management skills during both
the preparedness and response phases.

Scoring: The teams will be scored based on their effectiveness in DRR actions and their response and
recovery efforts. Points will be awarded based on the following criteria:

• Effectiveness of Disaster Risk Reduction actions (based on prioritization and allocation of
budget) - 20 points
• Effectiveness of coordination and collaboration during response and recovery (based on
allocation of budget and response effectiveness) - 30 points
• Quality of rehabilitation and reconstruction efforts (based on allocation of budget and building
back better strategies) - 20 points
• Effectiveness of public awareness campaigns and drills (based on allocation of budget and
campaign effectiveness) - 10 points
• Overall preparedness for future disasters (based on overall strategy and response
effectiveness) - 20 points

27
Conclusion:

This game is designed to improve collaboration among central government agencies and build a better
understanding of DRR strategies. By working together to develop a comprehensive DRR plan and
effectively responding to an unexpected disaster, teams will gain valuable insights into the challenges
of disaster response and the importance of building resilience in communities.

28
ANNEX 3. MATERIALS FOR THE LOCAL-LEVEL AUTHORITIES SESSION
Instruction sheet for coordinators

Materials to print

1. This document, for each coordinator
2. The seismic risk reduction scenario – 1 copy / participant
3. The role sheet – 1 copy/team, cut into small paper notes according to the number of players
(see no. 3 below)

Scenario coordinators instructions

1. Participants must stand grouped in teams so that they can talk to each other.
2. A team must have between 6 and 10 players
3. A4 paper with the positions list is printed and cut into small paper notes – one position on
each paper note
4. Each team is given a number of paper notes equal to the number of players. Attention, the
paper notes are allocated in the order in which they are printed. For example: if there are
only 7 players at the table, the last 3 paper notes in the list are dropped (local police director,
NGO representative, owners' associations representative)
5. The time allocated to the draw round is 30 min. The time can be extended by 10 minutes, in
case after 30 minutes the teams still need time.
6. Upon expiry of the time, collect the forms from the teams and fill in the online form provided
(QR included below). The form is filled in separately for each team (e.g. for 3 teams, the form
needs to be accessed and filled in three times). It can be easily completed from your mobile
phone. You will have to select all the actions that the team has specified for each time horizon
(short, medium and long term).

For the freely chosen option of each team (if any), you will have to fill it in to the "Other"
option – the last option from each question. Once you finish entering the data for all the
teams, announce this on the Whatsapp coordination channel.

Disaster risk reduction interactive scenario outline and materials for teams

Disaster risk reduction scenario: Increasing disaster resilience in Imagineni
Goal: The aim of the activity is to develop a local action plan to increase the resilience of Imagineni to
potential disasters. At the same time, cooperation at the local level must be improved, but also
cooperation with regional and central levels, as well as the involvement of all members of the local
community in disaster risk reduction.
Participants: The game is designed for teams of 6-10 members, each team is made up of relevant
representatives of the local community – a coordinating committee for disaster risk reduction at the
local level. These representatives mainly include persons from the city hall, but may also include other
civil society entities or other public authorities.

Scenario unfolding: The scenario takes place in two rounds, each round having allocated a time of 15
minutes of team discussions for decision making.

29
Decision-making stage
In the first round, each team will have to develop a short-, medium- and long-term disaster risk
reduction plan for Imagineni. The budget available to finance the entire plan is RON 10 million.
Participants will have to decide on a set of disaster risk reduction (DRR) actions, with the option to
choose from the following proposed actions:

1. Increasing capacity and training at city hall level to integrate risk reduction considerations
for disasters or climate change in local planning processes – training, additional staff in key
departments and implementation of disaster continuity plans (RON 1 million)
2. Establishing an integrated system for collecting data on investments and infrastructure, to
allow monitoring in implementation (RON 0.5mln)
3. Program of hydro-technical works, such as flood protection, to minimize the impact of future
floods (1.5 million RON)
4. Creation of a centralized early warning system for all natural disasters to warn the population
and the main utility providers (RON 1 million)
5. Conducting a hazard, vulnerability, and risk assessment for floods, earthquakes, and
landslides to allow prioritization of actions and interventions (RON 1.5 million)
6. Program for evaluation, consolidation and energy efficiency of schools and high schools (1.5
million RON)
7. Evaluation, consolidation, and energy efficiency of the hospital (1 million RON)
8. Conducting recurrent public awareness campaigns to increase the level of knowledge,
training and involvement of the population in disaster risk reduction measures (0.5 million
RON)
9. Investment program for water drainage and stabilization of areas with potential for
landslides (RON 1.5 million)
10. Program for green roofs for all public buildings (1 million RON)
11. Updating the local legal framework and urban planning documentation to reflect the existing
disaster risk and to integrate prevention measures (e.g.: building bans in floodplains) (0.5
million RON)
12. Program for the evaluation and rehabilitation of heritage buildings in the central area of the
city (1 million RON)
13. Developing a comprehensive plan for more resilient recovery and reconstruction in the event
of a disaster (RON 0.5 million)
14. Program for financing the reduction of seismic risk in private homes (1.5 million RON)
15. Clarification, updating and dissemination of disaster evacuation plans and instructions (RON
0.5 million)

The team can also choose only one additional action of their choice, outside the list of the 15 actions
above, at a cost of RON 1 million.

Teams will need to prioritize their actions according to the budget, phase each action in the
short/medium/long term, and add at least one indicator for each action.

30
For ease of data entry, please also specify the option number in the options table, according to the
list above.

Analysis and presentation
The options of all teams are presented statistically for each interval (short / medium / long term). The
teams must be prepared to briefly present their chosen strategy and options in this round, and these
will be discussed within the timeframe of impact, phased, feasibility and creativity.

TERM Actions Indicators Budget
Short term
(2023 – 2026)
Medium term
(2026 – 2030)
Long term
(2030 – 2035)

General information

Imagineni

The city of Imagineni is said to be one of the most beautiful settlements in Romania. It is located in
the eastern part of the country, at a distance of 50 kilometers from the Black Sea, near the Volbura
River. It is a municipality with a population of about 50,000 inhabitants, with an impressive historical
architecture and a vibrant local culture. In Imagineni, there are 8 public kindergartens, 8 general
schools and 5 high schools. The city also has a municipal hospital that provides medical services to
both the city and villages in the area, as well as a fire station, a police station and a gendarme unit.
The hospital was assessed and found vulnerable to the earthquake. The rest of the buildings were not
evaluated.

However, the city is exposed to various natural hazards, such as floods, earthquakes, and landslides,
but it also feels the effect of climate change.

Flooding is one of the main problems for Imagineni, due to its location close to the Volbura River,
which can grow rapidly during torrential rains and flood the lowland areas around the city. This
phenomenon has gained momentum in recent years and has come to affect almost 15% of the city's
population, along with their properties and related urban infrastructure (including 2 schools, a police
station and 1 high school).

Earthquakes are also a problem for the city of Imagineni, as it lies under the influence of the Vrancea
seismic zone. The 1977 earthquake caused significant damage to buildings and infrastructure
throughout the city. In addition to housing and other private buildings, 4 schools in the city, as well as
2 high schools, as well as the hospital, were affected in the 1977 earthquake. Their seismic risk has
not yet been officially assessed.

Landslides are also a major risk for Imagineni because of the hilly terrain in which it is located. During
heavy rains, the soil can be affected, which leads to landslides and significant damage to property and
infrastructure. There are certain areas where the phenomenon is traditionally encountered, but with
each torrential rain, other slips can occur.

31
In recent years, the city of Imagineni has begun to feel the effects of climate change. Summers are
getting warmer and drier, and winters are getting colder with heavy rainfall, which leads to flooding
and an increase in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events.

General responsibilities of each participant in the Disaster Risk Reduction Platform in Imagineni

It is important that each participant understands their general roles and responsibilities in order to
get involved in the discussions and negotiations of the disaster risk reduction team and to argue their
own point of view in the negotiations for the final list of actions of each team.

1. Mayor - responsible for coordinating and directing discussions in the team. The mayor is the
elected representative of the citizens of Imagineni and he is also the one who has the role of making
the decisions of the team, when a consensus is not reached. It is also the mayor who is politically
responsible for the impact of a disaster and for the decisions made in the team.
2. City Hall Investment Director – responsible for the planning, development and
implementation of infrastructure projects in the city. Its main problems are related to the state of the
infrastructure in the city – hospitals, schools, fire units, but also roads and utility networks.
3. City Hall Communication Director - responsible for the communication between the city hall
and the citizens, as well as for the development of communication and marketing strategies for the
city.
4. City Hall Strategy Director - responsible for ensuring a long-term vision for the city, developing
and implementing the general strategy of the city as well as other strategies. The Strategy Director
must ensure that objectives and performance indicators are clearly defined and measurable so that
progress can be tracked and reported to policymakers and the local community.
5. Heritage NGO representative - fights for the protection and promotion of the cultural and
historical heritage of the city.
6. Representative of ‘Apele Române’ National Administration (ANAR) - responsible for
monitoring, managing, and protecting the water resources in the city and in the surrounding region.
The representative of the Romanian Waters must also work with the city hall to develop action plans
to deal with the problems related to floods, leaks, and other problems associated with water.
7. Chief Architect - responsible for the coordination and approval of construction projects and
urban planning documentations in the city, ensuring that they comply with regulations and quality
standards.
8. Owners' associations representative - represents the interests of the owners of real estate in
the city and collaborates with the city hall to improve the living conditions.
9. Environmental NGO representative - militates for the promotion and implementation of
environmental policies in the city and taking the necessary measures to protect the environment.
10. Director of the Local Police - responsible for maintaining order and safety in the city and
collaborating with other local authorities in post-disaster situations.

32
ANNEX 4. MATERIALS FOR THE COUNTY INSPECTORATES FOR EMERGENCY SITUATIONS SESSION
Disaster risk reduction interactive scenario outline and materials for teams

General data

Purpose: The purpose of the activity is to identify the main challenges in implementing training actions
in a fictional city in Romania, Imagineni, as well as the ways in which the County Inspectorates for
Emergency Situations can get involved in implementation – by carrying out actions directly or acting
as support for local authorities.

Participants: You will be grouped according to the Inspectorate you represent (as a rule, there will be
3 participants for each CIES). Participants in each group should discuss with each other in a reasoned
manner in order to arrive at the final answer of their group, which must be entered into the
application.

Unfolding the scenario: After going through the introductory text and getting acquainted with the
context given by the city of Imagineni, the participants will have to answer some questions that will
arise during the implementation of the disaster risk reduction strategy at the local level, from the point
of view of a County Inspectorate for Emergency Situations. Participants will then be encouraged to
take part in a discussion based on the answers provided, discussed in terms of impact, stages,
feasibility, and creativity.
Scenario / basic information

Imagineni

Imagineni is a city located in western Romania, with a total population of about 70,000. The city is
located in a hilly and mountainous area, with a rugged geography, which exposes it to the risks of
landslides and flooding.

There is significant ethnic diversity in the city, with important Roma, Hungarian and German
communities. These communities are often marginalized and face problems of socio-economic
integration, including unemployment and poverty. The City Hall is working on creating a more inclusive
environment for these groups and improving access to education and health services.

The economy of the city is mainly based on agriculture, with the production of cereals, vegetables and
fruits. There is also a growing local industry, with a number of small and medium-sized enterprises
producing parts and components for various sectors, including the automotive industry.

Among the most important buildings in the city are the old church in the historical center, but also the
City Hall, which was recently renovated and modernized.

The city's infrastructure is insufficient and requires urgent investment. Most of the streets are in poor
condition, and public transport is unsatisfactory. In addition, the city has an inefficient sewerage
network and a limited source of drinking water, which makes it vulnerable to flooding and other
natural disasters.

As for the political priorities of the current city hall, it recognized the need for better urban planning,
with an improvement in infrastructure and public services and with an improvement in emergency
planning. In addition, the City Hall has established as a priority the improvement of risk
communication, especially for vulnerable communities, by raising awareness and developing action
plans in case of natural disasters.

33
However, there are still some issues related to risk communication. Despite efforts to raise awareness,
some communities are still not aware of the natural risks to which they are exposed and why they
should take precautions. There is also a need to improve coordination and communication between
the different authorities responsible for disaster risk reduction, so that a better response can be made
in emergency situations.

In recent years, the city of Imagineni has been affected by devastating floods, which have caused
significant damage to the population. Some of these problems are related to the demographic and
socio-economic profile of the city, which includes vulnerable and marginalized communities. Thus,
more than 30% of the population does not speak the Romanian language at conversational level.

Climate change has also contributed to the worsening of the situation in Imagineni. In recent years,
the city has experienced periods of intense and frequent rainfall, which have led to rising water levels
and more frequent and severe flooding. In addition, deforestation in the mountainous areas around
the city has helped reduce soil absorption capacity and exacerbated the problems of landslides.

Despite flood management efforts by the city hall and other authorities, demographic and socio-
economic problems in Imagineni, as well as the impact of climate change, continue to pose major
challenges for reducing disaster risks and protecting the local population.

Questions and possible answers

Survey 1: www.menti.com 7753 1402

With respect to disaster risk understanding and disaster risk governance, arrange the following actions
according to the effort and expected impact:

1. Collection and analysis of data about assets in Imagineni (buildings, land, infrastructure)
2. Updating risk maps
3. Amendment and updating of the legislative framework at local level
4. Collection of data on exposed populations in order to adapt information to existing needs
5. Develop partnerships with other organizations and communities outside of Imagineni to share
information and best practices on disaster risk reduction.

With respect to investments in disaster risk reduction, as well as the preparation of the response and
reconstruction, arrange the following actions according to the effort and expected impact:

1. Cooperation with NGOs or local organizations representing marginalized groups to adapt
response plans.
2. Dissemination of information on risks and provision of technical assistance and examples of
good practices to stakeholders, in order to integrate information on risks into decision-making
processes at national/sectoral, county and local level (DRM systematization), disseminating
good examples among stakeholders, especially local authorities.
3. Establishment of evacuation routes in collaboration with the city hall and communication of
the evacuation routes to the population.
4. Performing regular exercises and simulations to prepare the population and identifying areas
that need to be improved.
5. Monitoring the implementation of DRR investments and plans at local level.
6. Organization of consultations to prepare the response and adapt to existing needs.
7. Collecting relevant post-disaster data as part of the damage assessment committee and
introducing them into the IT system.

34
8. Cooperation with specialized institutions in the field of cultural heritage for drawing up
specific plans and methods of intervention for the old church in the city and other existing
goods.
9. Organization of regular consultation sessions with all relevant actors in Imagineni.

Survey 2: www.menti.com 5197 1475

Question with a free answer: What type of partners could CIES cooperate with in order to improve the
level of preparedness of the population?

Free answer question: Name 1-3 ways you think a CIES can get involved in supporting the
implementation of a disaster risk reduction strategy – the role CIES could play, or the actions it could
take.

35
ANNEX 5. MENTIMETER QUESTIONS AND RESULTS FOR EACH AUDIENCE
Central-level authorities

During the training for central-level authorities on March 3, 2023, a set of questions were addressed
to the participants through the Mentimeter platform. The overview of the answers received can be
found below.

1. What do you think it is the most important ingredient for the successful implementation of a
Disaster Risk Reduction Strategy?

Answer(s): Among the most common answers to this question were collaboration, communication,
engagement, knowing the objectives, financing, legislation and sustainability.

Figure 1. Mentimeter results from the training for central-level authorities – Question 1

2. Please arrange the following types of disasters by order of the importance you think they
should be given.

Ranking according to the responses received: (1) Earthquakes, (2) Epidemics and epizootics, (3) Floods,
(4) Extreme weather events, (5) Drought, (6) Landslides, (7) Technological accidents and (8) Wildfires.

Figure 2. Mentimeter results from the training for central-level authorities – Question 2

36
3. The total cumulative value of all disasters that took place between 1900 and 2021 on the
territory of Romania is of approximately: a) 3.9 billion USD, b) 17.1 billion USD, c) 30.5 billion
USD or d) 9.1 billion USD?

Answer(s): The majority of participants chose option c) 30.5 billion USD, while the second most voted
option was the correct one b) 17.1 billion USD.

Figure 3. Mentimeter results from the training for central-level authorities – Question 3

4. Which of the following factors contribute to increasing the potential impact of natural disasters:
a) increasing exposure of people and economics assets, b) insufficient financing for reducing
disaster risks, c) climate change effects or d) all of the above.

Answer(s): The majority of participants chose the correct option d) all of the above.

Figure 4. Mentimeter results from the training for central-level authorities – Question 4

37
Local-level authorities

During the training for local level authorities on March 23, 2023, a set of questions were addressed to
the participants through the Mentimeter platform. The overview of the answers received can be found
below.

1. What do you think it is the most important ingredient for the successful implementation of a
Disaster Risk Reduction Strategy?

Answer(s): Among the most common answers to this question were communication, efficient
organization, prevention and preparedness, responsibility and financing.

Figure 5. Mentimeter results from the training for local-level authorities – Question 1

2. Please arrange the following types of disasters by order of the importance you think they
should be given.

Ranking according to the responses received: (1) Earthquakes, (2) Floods, (3) Extreme weather events,
(4) Epidemics and epizootics, (5) Drought, (6) Wildfires, (7) Landslides and (8) Technological accidents.

Figure 6. Mentimeter results from the training for local-level authorities – Question 2

38
3. The total cumulative value of all disasters that took place between 1900 and 2021 on the
territory of Romania is of approximately: a) 3.9 billion USD, b) 17.1 billion USD, c) 30.5 billion
USD or d) 9.1 billion USD?

Answer(s): The majority of participants chose option c) 30.5 billion USD, while the second most voted
option was the correct one b) 17.1 billion USD.

Figure 7. Mentimeter results from the training for local-level authorities – Question 3

Answer(s): The majority of participants chose option c) climate change effects, while the second
most voted option was the correct one, that is d) all of the above.

Figure 8. Mentimeter results from the training for local-level authorities – Question 4

39
County Inspectorates for Emergency Situations

During the training for County Inspectorates for Emergency Situations on April 4, 2023, a set of
questions were addressed to the participants through the Mentimeter platform. The overview of the
answers received can be found below.

1. What do you think it is the most important ingredient for the successful implementation of a
Disaster Risk Reduction Strategy?

Answer(s): Among the most common answers to this question were preparedness, prevention,
education, legislation, human resources and teamwork.

Figure 9. Mentimeter results from the training for CIES – Question 1

2. Please arrange the following types of disasters by order of the importance you think they
should be given.

Ranking according to the responses received: (1) Earthquakes, (2) Floods, (3) Extreme weather events,
(4) Technological accidents, (5) Epidemics and epizootics, (6) Wildfires, (7) Landslides and (8) Drought.

Figure 10. Mentimeter results from the training for CIES – Question 2

40
3. The total cumulative value of all disasters that took place between 1900 and 2021 on the
territory of Romania is approximately: a) 3.9 billion USD, b) 17.1 billion USD, c) 30.5 billion USD
or d) 9.1 billion USD?

Answer(s): The majority of participants chose the correct option b) 17.1 billion USD.

Figure 11. Mentimeter results from the training for CIES – Question 3

Answer(s): The majority of participants chose option c) climate change effects, while the second
most voted option was the correct one, that is d) all of the above.

Figure 12. Mentimeter results from the training for CIES – Question 4

41
Civil Society Organizations, Academia and the private sector

During the training for representatives of CSOs, Academia and the private sector that took place on
April 21, 2023, a set of questions were addressed to the participants through the Mentimeter
platform. The overview of the answers received can be found below.

1. Please arrange the following types of disasters by order of the importance you think they
should be given.

Ranking according to the responses received: (1) Earthquakes, (2) Floods, (3) Epidemics and epizootics,
(4) Extreme weather events, (5) Drought, (6) Wildfires, (7) Landslides and (8) Technological accidents.

Figure 13. Mentimeter results from the training for CSOs, Academia and private sector – Question 1

2. Please vote whether you think the following statements are true or false:

Statement Answers (true/false)
In 1977, many building were seriously Correct answer: false
consolidated immediately after the Answers received:
earthquake. • 6 correct answers
• 18 wrong answers
In Bucharest, there are buildings on rollers Correct answer: false
that resisted very well during the 1977 Answers received:
earthquake. • 8 correct answers
• 16 wrong answers
We [the population] can be alerted a few Correct answer: true
seconds right before an earthquake is about Answers received:
to hit Bucharest • 21 correct answers
• 3 wrong answers
The buildings that went through the 1977 Correct answer: false
earthquakes can be considered to be Answers received:
stronger given that they were put to the test. • 24 wrong answers
There are certain buildings in Bucharest that Correct answer: false
have no seismic risk Answers received:
• 13 correct answers

42
• 10 wrong answers
The small and frequent earthquakes decrease Correct answer: false
the chances of a major earthquake to occur Answers received:
• 8 correct answers
• 15 wrong answers

Figure 14. Mentimeter results from the training for CSOs, Academia and private sector – Question 2

43
ANNEX 6. TECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE COMMUNICATION OF THE STRATEGY

The following are technical recommendations that can inform stakeholders in developing a
communications strategy related to the National Disaster Risk Reduction Strategy and/or broader
communication and awareness activities. These additional recommendations are provided beyond the
scope of the Reimbursable Advisory Services.

Summary
Communicating the NDRRS is more than a campaign to raise awareness of the strategy. Rather, it is
the first step toward a long-term investment in communicating disaster risk and engaging the whole
of society in risk reduction. Reaching an entire population through targeted communication relies on
the efforts of partners who understand the needs and perceptions of the audience. This is only
possible through dedicated investments and support for collaboration and confidence building among
different stakeholders and strengthening of the general knowledge of DRR at all levels. To this end, a
continuous disaster risk communication will empower a resilient society.

General Awareness and Empowerment
Empowering the whole of society to share ownership of disaster risk reduction is a gradual process
that relies heavily on communication-focused activities. Informing the public is an ongoing process
of building awareness of risks, providing access to data and materials, and communicating desired
actions. Although it may seem counterintuitive, increasing understanding of disaster risk does not
immediately result in actions that reduce risks, and so a coordinated approach is required to create
the kinds of communication campaigns which inspire engagement throughout the entire society.
Empowered societies have all the necessary tools for risk reduction: individuals, communities, and all
of society participate in risk reduction activities; they know where to find information about risks; and
they work collaboratively to solve problems and develop new tools and information to meet their
needs. In the long term, risk communication activities enable all of society to develop specific skills
and capacities to prevent, prepare for, and cope with disasters (Figure 15).

Figure 15. Process of building awareness: From informed to empowered

Source: World Bank

44
Communication Partners
Risk communication and awareness raising is a shared responsibility. According to Romanian DRR
and DRM legislation, many stakeholders at the national, county, and local levels have responsibilities
toward risk communication and collaboration between different stakeholders is indicated to
systematically strengthen risk communication at all levels. An information ecosystem map (Figure 16)
describes the stakeholders involved in disaster risk communication and current methods and channels
of communication between them.

Figure 16. Disaster risk communication and awareness raising - Information ecosystem

Source: World Bank

The National Disaster Risk Reduction Platform (NDRRP) seeks to enable the collaboration of the
government, public institutions, civil society, research and academic institutions to improve DRM
and DRR. While the NDRRP already connected a wide range of stakeholders at the national level to
find solutions for DRR, the long-term vision is to engage citizens, communities, and regions in
promoting resilience. Currently, there are several agencies working simultaneously to communicate

45
disaster risk information, although not always in a coordinated manner. Aligning these ad-hoc efforts
will boost levels of awareness and reach and the NSRRS offers an opportunity to build the necessary
partnerships for communicating disaster risk. Therefore, it is desirable to address topics related to risk
communication and to seek out solutions to improve awareness raising of different hazards at all
levels. Also, creating a Risk Communication Advisory Group within the NPDRR could be considered,
which could offer guidance and support for awareness raising to all stakeholders, thus advocating for
a unified approach to build awareness and enabling a better collaboration in the future.

Involving partners in risk communication and awareness raising would contribute to accomplishing
the following:

• Provide in-depth understanding of communities: stakeholders who regularly engage
communities, especially marginalized and vulnerable groups, have a detailed understanding of the
information and development needs of these communities. Therefore, they have the knowledge
and expertise to participate in risk communication program planning, review, and development.
• Provide access and better outreach to specific segments of the population: stakeholders who
have well-established relationships of trust within their communities and have the necessary
communication capacities to increase community engagement, especially for vulnerable groups
(for example, children, elderly, people with disabilities, linguistic minorities).
• Provide resources and expertise to develop communication materials and tools: CSOs,
academics, technical professionals, and the media all have specific expertise needed for disaster
risk communication. Individually and through collaboration, they are best able to reach civil
society with information that is targeted to their needs and designed to best reach the audience.

Mobilizing action for the NDRRS
The NDRRS outlines a strong vision of a more resilient Romania in the future. For it to be successful,
it is important for the vision to be shared by all stakeholders. Thus, communicating the strategy plays
a key role in gaining support and maintaining momentum for its implementation. Communicating the
strategy happens in a complex environment where many stakeholders share responsibilities for
achieving the objectives set by the NDRRS. Therefore, communication should facilitate synergies
between the implementing agencies and other stakeholders, including the general public.

Communication goals and objectives according to different target audiences
While DRR is the responsibility of the whole society, each stakeholder has its own role to play and
these roles should be reflected in the overarching goals and strategic objectives set for
communicating the strategy (Figure 17).

46
Figure 17. Target Audiences and goals/objectives

Source: World Bank.

Key Implementing Institutions/Organizations
The communication of the strategy should focus on building a shared understanding of existing and
future DRR initiatives and creating opportunities for collaboration. To improve disaster governance,
it is essential to strengthen horizontal and vertical coordination and communication mechanisms
between key implementing institutions/organizations. Furthermore, implementing the NDRRS
requires dedicated investments from many different stakeholders that calls for a continuous dialogue
to allocate necessary resources efficiently early on.
It is important to consider non-state stakeholders’ role as enablers in supporting the government in
implementing the NDRRS. Beyond the public institutions, stakeholders such as CSOs, research
institutes/academia, professional bodies and technical institutions, the private sector and the media,
as well as schools and religious institutions, can all contribute to scaling up the state’s effort in risk
communication and awareness raising. Therefore, they should also be targeted with tailor-made risk
communication regarding (a) the specific risk they and their communities face, (b) opportunities for
them to get engaged in DRR, and (c) training opportunities to build DRR capacities.

General public
Public empowerment to take ownership of the risks they are exposed to begins with building
general awareness of risk and prevention and preparedness measures. This requires a strategic and
long-term approach, with clear targets for behaviour change. Preferably, risk communication needs
to shift from a one-way, top-down approach to a two-way, participatory process, where all citizens,

47
even the most vulnerable, are empowered to be part of the solution by being directly implicated in
DRR activities, thus contributing to the implementation of the NDRRS.

Methods and Timelines
Working groups, consultations and focus groups are useful communication tools for stakeholders
who play a role in the design, funding, and implementation of the NSDRR, and beneficiaries affected
by the newly introduced programs, regulations, and so on. Consultative meetings serve to:

• Ensure that the key implementing agencies form an effective community
• Offer an opportunity to review specific programs at completion and evaluate their
effectiveness and capture lessons; and
• Generate new solutions by increasing participation in providing feedback to future DRR
programs and policies. Surveys, interviews, and focus groups are also useful tools for
gathering the information necessary for feedback and progress reviews.

Timing of the communication related to specific DRR programs and policies should also be carefully
considered in accordance with different program phases. Also, stakeholders should have
opportunities to submit their proposals for new DRR measures and programs.

Figure 18. Timeline and methods

Source: World Bank

Summary
The ultimate goal of risk communication is to empower the whole of society to engage in DRR. Risk
communication activities must be implemented continuously, building on already acquired risk
knowledge, so that in the long-term communities and individuals are enabled to make informed
decisions and inspired to take action to improve their safety. Furthermore, the NDRRS in itself
represents a great tool to support improved public awareness. Key strategic activities that MoIA could
take to lay the groundwork for effective risk communication are outlined in Table 4. Effectively

48
communicating the NDRRS will require a coordinated effort between multiple stakeholders (for
example, line ministries and public institutions involved in DRM, local governments, CSOs, media, and
others).

Table 4. Objectives and Strategic Directions of Actions for Communication
Objectives Strategic Directions of Actions
General awareness
• Implementing public outreach campaigns
Continuously extend and • Creating new and improving already existing DRR information tools to be
improve risk communication more user friendly and inclusive
• Developing new, engaging DRR information materials and activities
• Working together with other stakeholders to scale up awareness activities
Increase strategic and to ensure a unified approach to risk communication
partnerships for risk • Having a mechanism and guidance materials in place to offer support for risk
communication communication and awareness raising
• Establishing a culture of information sharing
Create and allocate • Allocating and maintaining budget for risk communication at all levels
capacities for risk • Providing training opportunities to develop risk communication skills for
communication stakeholders at all levels, involved in risk communication
Communication of the strategy
• Providing continuous and targeted communication about the specific roles
and responsibilities of different stakeholders for DRR as well as the
Boost participation and implementation progress of the NDRRS, through multiple channels, including
support for DRR among key a dedicated website
implementing • Fostering knowledge exchange and sharing of best practices related to the
institutions/organizations implementation of the NDRRS among stakeholders
• Providing guidance materials and training opportunities for stakeholders to
support the implementation of the NDRRS
• Providing continuous and targeted communication about disaster risk and
available DRR policies and programs for key program beneficiaries
Facilitating support and • Developing and conducting research to better understand the needs of
participation in DRR among specific target groups related to DRM and DRR to inform the design of
the general public efficient DRR programs and policies
• Providing education and training to build capacity and empower the general
public, including the most vulnerable, to engage in DRR.

49
Project co-financed from the European Social Fund through the Operational Programme
for Administrative Capacity 2014–2020