OECD

1
(No Transcript)
2
OECD INTERNATIONAL FUTURES PROGRAMME

• First Nordic Conference on Emerging Risks25
  November 2003

3

• OECD Futures Project on Risk Management Policies
  in Selected OECD Countries

4
OECD International Futures Programme (IFP)

• Created in 1990 to help governments address the
  challenges of the future
• Identify and explore new, emerging policy issues
• Reports directly to the Secretary-General of the
  OECD
• Multidisciplinary team
• Involvement of the private sector

5
Futures Projects The Process

• Extensive consultation
• Preparation of project proposal
• Organisation of kick-off meeting
• Creation of steering group
• Preparation of background reports
• Drafting of final report and recommendations to
  Council

6
OECD Futures Project on EMERGING SYSTEMIC
RISKS2000-2002
7
Background

• An ongoing shift in the nature of major risks and
  in societys capacity to manage them
• Conventional risks look set to take on new
  dimensions (due to extreme weather conditions,
  concentrations of population and wealth, etc.).
• New hazards are emerging, many of which are
  characterised by extreme uncertainty and the
  possibility of extensive and maybe irreversible
  harm.

8
Aim of the Project

• To provide an extensive picture of possible
  systemic risks
• To explore the implications for the economy and
  society in the 21st century, focusing on the
  impact on vital systems
• To examine underlying forces and challenges
  facing OECD Countries
• To discuss a number of recommendations for
  governments and the private sector as to how the
  management of emerging risks might be improved

9
Risk areas

• Natural disasters earthquakes, floods, storms,
  solar flares
• Technological accidents nuclear power plants,
  dams, transportation of chemicals, new
  technologies (bio-, cyber-, nano-)
• Health-related risks infectious diseases
  (resurgent, new, flu pandemics) food safety,
  impacts of pollution
• Terrorism and cyber-crime.

10
Relevant elements of the risk management cycle

• Risk assessment.
• Risk prevention, risk reduction and ex-ante
  mitigation of the consequences.
• Emergency management.
• Recovery issues liability and compensation
  issues issues surrounding institutional and
  regulatory frameworks experience feed-back into
  various elements of the risk management cycle.

11
Main driving forces

• Demography population growth, ageing,
  urbanisation, migration.
• Environment climate change and its impact on
  natural disasters, infectious diseases, etc.
• Technology connectedness, speed and
  pervasiveness of change, new technologies
  entailing new risks.
• Economy and society income discrepancies and
  poverty, the central role of information,
  increasing scale and concentration, shifts in
  regulation capacities.

12

• Critical issues

• Complexity
• Mobility
• Shifting public/private responsibilities
• Safety in large-scale systems
• Precaution
• Social amplification of risks
• Diversity of stakeholders

13
The Analysis

• For each part of the risk management cycle
  assessment, prevention, emergency management,
  post-crisis issues, and addressing all the
  domains of risk covered by the project
• Current situation
• Challenges
• Emerging responses
• Cross-sectoral issues
• 5 case studies Flooding, nuclear accidents,
  infectious diseases, terrorism and food safety.

14
MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS

• The findings of the Report have led to a number
  of recommendations for action, which fall under
  five major headings
• Adopt a new policy approach to risk management.
• Develop synergies between the public and the
  private sectors.
• Inform and involve stakeholders and the general
  public.
• Strengthen international co-operation.
• Make better use of technological potential and
  enhance research efforts.

15
OECD FUTURES PROJECT
Risk Management Policiesin Selected OECD
Countries2003-2006
16
OECD Futures Project on Risk Management
Policiesin Selected OECD Countries

• It is proposed that the OECD carry out a series
  of (voluntary) country reviews on risk management
  policies
• It would focus on the consistency of related
  policies and on their ability to deal with the
  challenges, present and future, created by
  emerging systemic risks, and identify
  opportunities for improvement and best
  practices.
• The reviews would start with a pilot study of a
  limited number of countries, on a voluntary
  basis..
• Ultimately, most or all member countries could
  be covered, opening the possibility for an OECD
  Outlook on Risk Management.

17

• Risk Management Policies
• in Selected OECD Countries
• Idea put the 36 5 recommendations of the Final
  Report on ESR into practice
• Aim assist OECD countries to self -evaluate the
  soundness of their risk management systems
• Means a peer review process of risk management
  policies (country reviews are a trusted and
  well-tested OECD method)

18
Peer Review an OECD Working Method

•  the systematic examination and assessment of
  the performance of a State by other States,
  conducted in a non-adversarial basis, with the
  goal of helping the reviewed State improve its
  policy making 
• A governance tool for improving policy dialogue,
  transparency, capacity building, organisational
  change

19
Peer Review an OECD long standing tool

• Economic and Development Reviews
• Environmental Performance Reviews
• Development Cooperation Policies and
• Programmes
• Information Technologies Outlook
• Export Credit Arrangement
• Programme for International Student
• Assessment (PISA)
• Etc

20
Factors of success

• Value sharing convergence among the
  participating countries on the criteria.
• Adequate level of commitment.
• Mutual trust a co-operative effort, disclosure
  of data and information.
• Credibility approach of examiners - with the
  help of the OECD Secretariat must be objective,
  fair and consistent

21

• Risk Management Policies
• in Selected OECD Countries
• Basis Process of self-assessment and evaluation
  by external experts
• Participation small group (4-6) of OECD
  countries
• Key condition voluntary

22
Futures Project - Duration and Project structure

• Duration 3 years 2003-2006
• 3 stages
• Preparations
• Reviews
• Synthesis report

23
Stage I (mid 2003-mid 2004) Establishing the
Fundamentals

• Creation of a Steering Group of participating
  countries
• Denmark, Italy, and the USAare already on board.
• France, Korea, Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland
  are candidates
• (deadline December 12, 2003)
• Definition of terms of reference with each
  country
• Purpose, expectations, stakes, planning, agreed
  tasks, budget,

24
Stage I Preparations(mid-2003 to mid-2004)

• Key Objective
• Lay the groundwork for the review process
• Tasks for the Steering Group (with OECD
  Secretariat)
• Tasks for individual participating
  countries/regions (with OECD Secretariat)
• Tasks for the OECD Secretariat (with Steering
  Group)

25
Tasks for the Steering Group, co-ordinated by
OECD Secretariat

• Identify which risk areas each participant wishes
  to examine (preferably 1 to 3 risk areas per
  country/region)
• Identify which risk areas should form a common
  cluster, shared by all or most participating
  countries/regions
• Agree on the procedure for conducting the reviews
• (how to conduct stock taking, self assessment,
  reporting)
• Decide on selection and composition of review
  teams

26
Possible elements for a common cluster of risks
27
Tasks for individual participating countries
and/or regions

• Draw up, in collaboration with OECD Secretariat,
  a list of
• risk experts (domestic and foreign) who might
  serve as
• examiners in the review process.
• Start process of descriptive stock-taking in
  each risk area
• (institutional set up, regulatory frameworks,
  methods used,
• systems- and procedures, etc.)

28
Tasks for OECD Secretariat in collaboration with
the Pilot Group

• Production of a roadmap for the interview process
  (questionnaire,
• sequence of interviews, procedures for data
  collection, timeframe etc.)
• Development of a set of relevant indicators to
  measure/assess the extent
• to which the Risk Reports 36 recommendations are
  being applied, e.g.
• How forward-looking are risk management policies?
• How well is the private sector integrated?
• How well are stakeholders involved in the risk
  management process?
• Is international co-operation working
  satisfactorily?
• How well are technology and research integrated
  into risk management?

29
Stage 2 (2004 to mid-2006) Conducting the reviews

• Stock-taking exercise by host country on selected
  risk areas
• Self assessment about sucess/failures, best
  practices/gaps, emerging
• responses
• Visits by OECD team, together with appointed
  experts
• Collection and evaluation of data and other
  information
• Reports and recommendations

30

• Stage 2 (2004 to mid-2006)
• On the basis of the agreed framework of criteria
  (Stage 1) and the review countrys own
  stock-taking and self assessment work, the review
  team
• Holds interviews with pre-identified contact
  persons
• responsible for risk management.
• Consults with industry and civil society, where
  appropriate.
• Collects relevant data and information.
• Compares observed methods and practices with
  those of
• other countries.
• Identifies best practices in the risk management
  system
• under review.

31

• Stage 2
• On its return, the review team prepares its
  evaluation report
• and policy recommendations.
• These are discussed with the risk management
  authorities of
• the review country, modified
  appropriately, and then
• Discussed within the Steering Group to maximise
  learning
• effects, examine best practices and
  verify the review
• methodology.
• Possible second mission to review country for
  verification
• purposes and further interviews, data collection.
• Discussion of revised version of review teams
  report in
• Steering Group.
• Publication of the report.
• Oral presentation of draft report in the host
  country

32
Country Report structure

• Overview the risk landscape economic and social
  context, major harmful events experienced in
  recent years
• Cross sectoral findings (if more than one risk
  areas)
• Case study(ies) 1 to n
• Recommendations

33
Stage 3 (2006) The Synthesis Report

• Draw together lessons from individual country
  reports
• Focus on similarities and divergences in risk
  management
• approaches
• Room for improvements
• Best practices in each of the countries reviewed,
  
• and potential for transfer of best
  practices
• Proposals for a generic policy tool kit
• Recommendations for international co-operation in
  
• strengthening risk-management

34
Summary of Project Management

• Project team based in the OECD International
  Futures
• Programme, which reports to the Secretary-General
  
• of the OECD
• Steering group, made up of representatives from
  volunteer
• review countries, will advise the OECD Project
  team
• OECD Project team and Steering Group will
  identify and
• appoint external OECD examiners to help perform
  reviews

35
Summary of Timetable

• Stage 1 Preparatory Work for the Project
• mid-2003 to mid-2004
• Stage 2 Country Reviews - 2004 to mid -2006
• Stage 3 Synthesis Report and Recommendations -
• end 2006

36
Summary of the terms

• A letter of commitment from a Ministry or PM
• ...covering either Stage 1 only or the entire
  process from Stage 1 to 3 inclusive
• ...providing a representative in the Steering
  Group of the Project, and
• an appropriate funding of at least 50 000 euros
• Deadline December 12, 2003 for Stage 1

37
Thank you.OECD International Futures
Programmewww.oecd.org/futures

• Contact Pierre-Alain Schieb
• Counsellor, Head of Futures Projects
• Pierre-Alain.Schieb_at_oecd.org