Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
previous
sessions,
we
learned
about
how
to
iden4fy
and
assess
risks
and
quan4fy
their
impacts.
We
learned
various
approaches
on
assessing
the
capacity
of
stakeholders
to
manage
dierent
risks.
In
this
session,
well
learn
approaches
to
priori4zing
risks.
Again,
why
do
we
priori4ze?
So
that
we
can
op4mize
available
resources
to
beDer
manage
those
risks
that
are
having
the
biggest
adverse
impacts
on
incomes
and
livelihoods,
and
sector
growth.
At
this
point
we
need
to
understand
which
risks
are
more
likely
to
cause
the
most
adverse
shocks
to
specic
stakeholder
groups,
target
sub-sectors
and
the
sector
as
a
whole.
The
primary
criteria
used
to
priori4ze
risk
are:
(1)
probability
of
event
(or
frequency
of
occurrence),
and
(2)
severity
of
impact.
However,
lack
of
clarity
about
the
meaning
of
dierent
terms
might
introduce
undesired
bias.
Strategic
Priori,es-
Certain
stakeholders,
objec4ves
or
regions
may
be
priori4zed
based
on
sub-sector
context
or
client
preferences.
Regional
varia,ons
-
There
may
be
a
need
to
account
for
dierent
regional
or
crop
risk
proles
given
the
varia4ons
in
climate,
agro-ecological
and
socio-economic
condi4ons.
Recovery
period
-
The
amount
of
4me
it
takes
stakeholders
to
recover
could
be
used
for
priori4za4on.
For
example:
Short
term.
Single
produc4on
season/year.
Medium
term.
Impact
lasts
a
three
to
ve
seasons
/
years.
Long
term.
Event
permanently
cripples
an
industry.
Classica4on
is
based
on
the
occurrence
of
historical
events
that
have
records
and
their
impact
is
known.
But
in
some
cases,
historical
records
might
not
be
available.
In
such
cases,
interviews
with
the
stakeholders
and
key
informants
and
their
individual
(subjec4ve)
experiences
about
the
frequency
of
occurrences
can
help
classify
the
risk
in
an
appropriate
category.
Historical
occurrence
of
events
is
the
best
way
to
determine
the
probability
of
events
occurring
in
the
future.
Frequency
of
occurrence
of
risk
events
can
be
es4mated
from
news,
databases
and
stakeholder
input.
To
reduce
subjec4ve
bias,
dene
clear,
measurable
terms
such
as
those
in
this
table.
The
magnitude
of
losses
from
each
risk
reects
the
severity
of
impacts.
This
in
turn
is
a
func4on
of
two
dierent
factors:
1)
frequency
of
the
risk
event
and
2)
likelihood
(or
probability)
of
loss
from
a
risk
event.
This
o\en
can
be
calculated
by
mul4plying
the
nancial
loss
sustained
by
an
actor
by
the
frequency/spread
of
the
event).
Since
the
objec4ve
of
the
assessment
is
to
provide
a
na4onal
snapshot,
losses
should
be
assessed
at
na4onal
level,
using
disaggregated
regional
and
district
level
data,
where
available.
10
There
are
dierent
approaches
to
visualizing
scope
and
frequency
of
vola4lity
and
risk
events.
The
rst
step
is
mapping
via
a
visual
4meline
of
loss
events.
This
will
provide
insights
into
what
are
the
principal
causes
of
observed
vola4lity
and
resul4ng
losses.
Time-series
FAOSTA
Produc4on
indices
(e.g.,
crops,
good,
livestock)
can
be
useful
or
Agricultural
GDP
growth.
11
As
we
saw
earlier,
iden4fying
the
specic
sources
of
risks
that
may
have
contributed
to
observed
shocks
based
on
best
available
primary
and
secondary
sources
allows
us
to
ascribe
aDribu4on
12
Another
tool
leverages
the
results
of
the
crop
loss
analysis
to
compare
scope
and
frequency
of
losses
across
commodi4es
to
see
which
are
most
impacted,
in
terms
of
frequency
and
cumula4ve
nancial
losses
This
aids
in
highligh4ng
which
commodi4es
are
most
suscep4ble
to
risk-induced
losses
and
therefore
might
benet
from
closer
scru4ny
during
the
solu4ons
assessment.
In
the
risk
assessment
of
Paraiba,
Brazil,
sugar
cane
and
fruit,
especially
grapefruit,
due
to
their
large
share
in
the
total
agricultural
output
value
of
Paraiba,
are
most
suscep4ble
to
losses,
and
so,
might
be
given
priority
in
the
risk
management
strategy.
13
14
15
Par4culalry
when
quan4ta4ve
data
is
scarce,
focus
groups
interviews
can
be
useful
to
inform
the
development
and
comparison
of
how
stakeholders
perceive
risks
from
one
region
to
the
next.
These
bar
charts
illustrate
the
risk
priori4es
for
rice
producers
in
dierent
regions
of
Guyana.
Flooding
was
the
highest
ranked
priority
in
Region
5
whereas
red
rice
was
the
highest
ranked
priority
in
Regions
3
and
6.
16
To
help
inform
the
risk
priori4za4on
process,
it
is
helpful
for
the
Team
to
collec4vely
iden4fy
the
leading
risks
for
each
target
commodity
to
iden4fy
similari4es
and
divergences.
This
list
can
then
be
more
easily
aggregated
at
sector
level.
17
Ranking risks by region is yet another lens that aids the risk priori4za4on process.
18
This
chart
illustrates
how
observed
risks
can
also
be
weighted
by
percep4ons
of
stakeholder
vulnerability:
1)
expected
losses
when
a
given
risk
event
manifests
and
perceived
levels
of
exis4ng
stakeholder
capacity
to
manage
that
risk.
Risks
in
the
top
le\
quadrant
are
given
the
highest
priority.
19
This
table
illustrates
the
priori4za4on
of
risk
to
the
cocoa
supply
chain
in
Ghana
based
on
to
two
indicators:
(1)
probability
of
event,
and
(2)
severity
of
impact.
For
the
Y-axis,
each
risk
is
ranked
from
remote
to
highly
probable
20
This
table
illustrates
the
priori4za4on
of
risk
to
the
cocoa
supply
chain
in
Ghana
according
to
two
indicators:
(1)
probability
of
event,
and
(2)
severity
of
impact.
21
22
23
24
25