Equatorial Guinea

Equatorial Guinea:

Risk-sensitive Budget Review

UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction UNDRR Country Reports on Public Investment Planning for Disaster Risk Reduction

This series is designed to make available to a wider readership selected studies on public investment planning for disaster risk reduction (DRR) in cooperation with Member States. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) Country Reports do not represent the official views of UNDRR or of its member countries. The opinions expressed and arguments employed are those of the author(s). Country Reports describe preliminary results or research in progress by the author(s) and are published to stimulate discussion on a broad range of issues on DRR.

Front cover photo credit: UNDP Equatorial Guinea. Page i Table of contents

List of figures...... ii List of tables...... iii List of boxes...... iii List of acronyms and abbreviations...... iv Currency equivalents...... iv Acknowledgements...... v Executive summary...... 1 1. Introduction...... 2 2. Equatorial Guinea at a glance...... 3 3. Disaster risk reduction in Equatorial Guinea...... 5 3.1. Past disasters and losses...... 5 3.2. Disaster risk governance...... 5 4. Risk-sensitive budget review...... 6 4.1. Methodology ...... 6 4.2. Scope of the analysis...... 8 4.3. Principal and significant DRR marked budgets...... 10 4.4. DRR marked budget by categories of the DRM cycle...... 14 5. Conclusion and recommendations...... 19 References...... 21 Annex 1: Risk-sensitive budget review methodology...... 23 Annex 2: Government ministries, and principal and significant DRM investment...... 26 Page ii List of figures

Figure 1: Scoring decision rule for the OECD DAC DRR policy marker and Rio marking system...... 7 Figure 2: Principal and significant DRR budget...... 10 Figure 3: Principal DRR investment by sector...... 10 Figure 4: Significant DRR investment by sector...... 11 Figure 5: Principal DRR investment by ministry...... 12 Figure 6: Significant DRR investment by ministry...... 14 Figure 7: Allocation of humanitarian ODA, 2015–2017...... 18 Page iii List of tables

Table 1: Recorded losses from disaster, 2010–2017...... 5 Table 2: Scope of the RSBR...... 8 Table 3: Ministries with project activities with a DRR element...... 9 Table 4: Principal DRR investment by sector...... 11 Table 5: Significant DRR investment by sector...... 12 Table 6: Principal DRR investment by ministry and sector...... 13 Table 7: Significant DRR investment by ministry and sector...... 14 Table 8: Principal DRR investment across DRM categories ...... 15 Table 9: Principal DRM investment across the disaster cycle...... 15 Table 10: Principal DRR investment across DRM categories ...... 16 Table 11: Significant DRR investment across DRM categories ...... 16 Table 12: Significant DRR investment across the DRM cycle...... 17 Table 13: Significant DRR investment across DRM categories by ministry...... 17 Table A1: UNDRR’s RSBR: an overview...... 25 Table A2: Government ministries in Equatorial Guinea...... 26 Table A3: Project activities marked as principal DRR by ministry...... 27 Table A4: Project activities marked as significant DRR by ministry...... 28

List of boxes

Box 1: Official development assistance by DRR category...... 18 Page iv List of acronyms and abbreviations

BEAC Bank of Central African States (Banque des Etats de l’Afrique Centrale) DRM Disaster risk management DRR Disaster risk reduction FCFA CFA francs GDP Gross domestic product MDAs Ministries, departments and agencies ODA Official development assistance OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development PIB Public investment budget RSBR Risk-sensitive budget review UNDRR United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction

Currency equivalents

Year US$1 to FCFA 2016 545.63 2017 621.94 2018 572.17 Authors’ calculation based on BEAC’s Annual Report 2017; 2018 exchange rate sourced from https://www.xe.com as at 31 December 2018. Page v Acknowledgements

UNDRR wishes to express its profound appreciation for the support provided by the national authorities for disaster risk reduction/disaster risk management and by the United Nations Country Teams in the respective countries.

Coordinators: : Jean-Marc Malambwe Kilolo (Economist) and Roberto Schiano Lomoriello (Associate Expert DRR Economics). Under the overall supervision of Katarina Mouakkid Soltesova (Risk Knowledge Programme Officer) and Luca Rossi (Deputy Chief of the Regional Office for Africa).

Analysts (authors): Belinda Kaimuri (Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Gambia (The), Ghana, Kenya, São Tomé and Príncipe), Brais Álvarez Pereira and Tatiana Martinez Zavala (Angola, Guinea-Bissau), Elvis Mtonga (Botswana, Cameroon, Eswatini (The Kingdom of), Namibia, Zambia), Jean-Claude Koya (Côte d’Ivoire).

UNDRR particularly thanks the country experts and DRR specialists for their comments on and review of two draft versions of the analysis, specifically: Edson Fernando (Angola), Nkosiyabo Moyo (Botswana), Mariatou Yap and Celestin Kegne (Cameroon), Dr. Touré Kader and Paul Kaman (Côte d’Ivoire), Gabriel Ngua Ayecaba (Equatorial Guinea), Russell Dlamini (Eswatini (The Kingdom of)), Hortense Togo (Gabon), Sanna Dahaba and Kawsu Barrow (Gambia (The)), Koranteng Abrokwah (Ghana), Alsau Sambu, Elisio Gomes Sá, Justino Fernandes and Domingos Gomes da Costa (Guinea-Bissau), Charles Owino (Kenya), Japheth Litenge (Namibia), Jean-Baptiste Nsengiyumva (Rwanda), Carlos Dias (São Tomé and Príncipe), Charles Msangi (Tanzania (United Republic of)), Lengandji Sikaona (Zambia).

Produced with support from Development Initiatives.

Published in January 2020. Page 1

Executive summary

This report provides an analysis of public investment planning for disaster risk reduction (DRR) and the level of public investment in DRR in Equatorial Guinea. It does this by means of a risk-sensitive budget review (RSBR) that applies the OECD DAC DRR policy marker to the country’s domestically financed current and capital budgets. The RSBR analysis was used to evaluate and assess the extent to which the government budgeted for DRR in the financial years 2016–2018.

Key findings • Ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs) of Equatorial Guinea’s central government accounted for DRR in some of their project activities over the three-year period. The RSBR analysis identified 21 project activities related to DRR in five ministries between 2016 and 2018. • Over the period, an average of $94.7 million annually was planned for DRR activities, amounting to 7.1% of the national budget, and 10.7% of the total domestic public investment budget. • The marked DRR budget was allocated largely to project activities that indirectly targeted DRR – “significant” DRR investment – amounting to $92.9 million, or 7.0% of the national budget. The remainder was allocated to project activities directly targeting DRR – “principal” DRR investment; this amounted to $1.76 million, or 0.1% of the national budget. • The infrastructure sector accounted for the highest share of the principal DRR budget, with 81.9%. The Ministry of Public Works, Housing and Urban Planning was responsible for the largest part of this share, with a focus on project activities aimed at sea protection. • The economic sector accounted for the largest share of the significant marked DRR budget, with 70.2%. The Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Forestry and Environment held the largest part of this share, with a focus on project activities aimed at food production. • Equatorial Guinea’s targeted DRR budget is focused largely on risk prevention and mitigation (93%) while the remaining portion is channelled towards response and relief. The country benefits from ODA assistance for emergency response and reconstruction, rehabilitation and relief, with a three-year average of $0.03 million annually. Page 2

1. Introduction

In 2013, the European Union (EU) and the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States (ACP) signed an agreement focused on strengthening the ACP Member States’ regional integration and inclusion in the global economy. Furthermore, the agreement addressed challenges related to climate change, agriculture and rural development.

Under this agreement, a programme titled “Building Disaster Resilience to Natural Hazards in sub- Saharan African Regions, Countries and Communities” was launched in July 2015. Its aim was to provide a comprehensive framework for disaster risk reduction (DRR) and disaster risk management (DRM), and their effective implementation across sub-Saharan Africa.

To support DRR in the region, the €80 million programme covered a period of five years and focused on five key results: strengthening regional DRR monitoring and coordination; enhancing DRR coordination, planning and policy advisory capacities of Regional Economic Communities; improving the capacity of national and Regional Climate Centres for weather and climate services; improving risk knowledge through disaster databases for future risk modelling; and developing disaster risk financing policies, instruments and strategies at regional, national and local levels.

The programme contributed to broader efforts aiming to assist African countries in building capacity in risk-sensitive investment planning and supporting initiatives to increase public investment in DRR. Furthermore, referring to the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015–2030), the programme sought to assist countries in estimating potential disaster impacts, including economic losses. Subsequently, it provided tools for countries to optimize their investment plans in order to address disaster risk and reduce future losses.

As part of the programme, UNDRR has developed risk-sensitive budget review reports for 16 countries in sub-Saharan Africa: Angola, Botswana, Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Equatorial Guinea, Eswatini (The Kingdom of), Gabon, Gambia (The), Ghana, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Namibia, Rwanda, São Tomé and Príncipe, Tanzania (United Republic of) and Zambia.

The analysis uses the DRR policy marker, developed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Development Assistance Committee (DAC). The methodology has been used widely to provide information about DRR mainstreaming. Nevertheless, the tracking of planned and actual expenditures related to DRR is an area that is still evolving.

This report provides information on public investment planning for DRR in Equatorial Guinea and presents the findings of a RSBR analysis of the country’s budget from 2016 to 2018. The analysis which follows was presented and discussed during a series of country-level workshops – conducted in 2018, in each of the 16 countries – and additional feedback and input from country experts was sought to improve the analysis.

The report is organized as follows: following this introductory section, section 2 presents Equatorial Guinea at a glance (key statistics), while section 3 examines the country’s risk profile and highlights the structure and governance of its DRM institutions. Section 4 explains the methodological basis of the OECD DAC DRR policy marker and its application by UNDRR across 16 country analyses, and then presents the findings of the RSBR for Equatorial Guinea. The report concludes with a summary of the findings and recommendations for further action. Sustainable 10 Page 3 20 30 Stable 40 50 60 2. Equatorial Guinea at a glanceWarning 70 80 90 Alert 100 110 120

2016 estimate 2018 estimate 1.6 13.4 (million people) ($ billion)

2050 projection 2050 projection 2.8 (million people) ($ billion)

Area: 28,051 km2 Services: 42% of GDP

Population density: Industry: 54.6% of GDP 48.4 people/km2

Human Development Index: 0.6

Agriculture: 2.5% of GDP

Equatorial Guinea is located in the central West Africa region and is composed of one mainland area and an insular region consisting of two islands, Bioko and Annobón. The population was estimated at 1.4 million people in 2018, and this is expected to grow to 2.8 million by 2050. With an area of 28,051 km2, this gives it a population density of about 48.4 inhabitants per km2, making it a moderately populated country. About 71% of the population live in urban areas.

The country’s economy is dominated by the production of oil and oil by-products; it has the third highest oil production in sub-Saharan Africa. National output relies largely on the industry sector (54.6%) and services (42.9%), with agriculture contributing just 2.5%, based on 2017 estimations.1 Gross domestic product (GDP) purchasing power capita reached $31.52 billion in 2017, a decline from $32.57 billion in 2016.2 The country’s macroeconomic status has significantly worsened following the recent fall in oil prices; however, the country’s GDP purchasing power parity is projected to grow to $60.9 billion by 2050.3

1 Central Intelligence Agency. 2 Ibid. 3 International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis. Page 4

Equatorial Guinea’s fiscal deficit decreased to -0.9% of GDP in 2018, which was a great improvement from the previous year’s deficit of -2.9%. This change was driven by higher oil prices and the government’s efforts to reduce expenditures.4

In less than 30 years, the country’s living standard, measured by gross national income per capita, increased by 1,150% (between 1990 and 2018).5 Its Human Development Index score of 0.59 puts the country in the medium human development category.

4 Africa Development Bank (2019). 5 UNDP (2019). Page 5

3. Disaster risk reduction in Equatorial Guinea

3.1. Past disasters and losses Equatorial Guinea is exposed to a variety of different natural hazards. The EM-DAT, International Disaster Database records only an epidemic in 2004, which affected a total of 946 people and caused 15 deaths.6 UNDRR’s DesInventar database shows a more complete picture with a greater variety of hazards between 2010 and 2017, including electrical storms, epidemics, forest fires, floods and hurricanes (Table 1).7 Fires have killed and affected the highest number of people and have also destroyed or damaged a large number of houses. Floods have damaged homes and affected people, both directly and indirectly.

Table 1: Recorded losses from disaster, 2010–2017

Event Deaths Injured Houses Houses Directly Indirectly Hospitals Damage to destroyed damaged affected affected crops (hectares) Electrical storm 2 – – – – – – – Epidemic 4 – – – – 9 – – Fire 12 10 279 134 1 2,106 1 – Flood – – – 23 20 115 – – Forest fire – – – – – – – 420 Hurricane – – – 3 3 15 – – Total 33 22 279 160 24 2,277 1 420 Source: United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction. DesInventar Open Source Initiative.

3.2. Disaster risk governance In Equatorial Guinea the institution in charge of DRR sits in the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Forestry and Environment, which is also in charge of climate change adaptation and policies. The institution is further responsible for formulating the National Plan for Adaptation. The country does not have specific plans or strategies on DRR and there is no official DRR platform.

6 www.emdat.be/. 7 www.desinventar.net/DesInventar/index.jsp. Page 6

4. Risk-sensitive budget review

4.1. Methodology The OECD DAC DRR policy marker is a quantitative tool used to identify spending activities that target DRR as a policy objective. An activity should be classified as linked to DRR if it promotes the targets of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 to achieve “substantial reduction of disaster risk and losses in lives, livelihoods and health and in the economic, physical, social, cultural and environmental assets of persons, businesses, communities and countries”.8 According to the OECD DAC policy marker document,9 a DRR-related activity focuses on preventing new risks, and/or reducing existing disaster risks and/or strengthening resilience through “the implementation of … measures that prevent and reduce hazard exposure and vulnerability to disaster and increase preparedness for response and recovery with the explicit purpose of increasing human security, well-being, quality of life, resilience, and sustainable development”. In addition, a DRR-related activity must meet at least one of the four priorities for action of the Sendai Framework,10 namely: (1) understanding disaster risk; (2) strengthening disaster risk governance to manage disaster risk; (3) investing in DRR for resilience; or (4) enhancing disaster preparedness for effective response and to “Build Back Better” in recovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction.11 The risk-sensitive budget review (RSBR) is simply the application of the OECD DAC DRR policy marker to country budgets to identify and mark public expenditures that have a DRR objective. By doing this, the extent to which the government has planned or invested implicitly or explicitly in DRR can be identified. Spending activities targeting DRR are screened, marked and weighted as follows: • Activities are marked as “principal” (marked as 2) when DRR is their principal objective and it is fundamental in the design of and motivation for the activity. These budget activities are then weighted as 100% of the planned or spent allocations which underpin them.12 • Activities are marked as “significant” (marked as 1) when their DRR objective is explicitly stated but is not a fundamental motivation for undertaking and designing the activity. These budget activities are weighted as 40% of the planned or spent allocations which underpin them. • Activities are not marked (marked as 0) when they have no DRR-related objective. These budget activities are weighted as 0% of the planned or spent allocations which underpin them.

8 UNDRR (2015), p. 12. 9 OECD (2017), p.8. 10 UNDRR (2015), p.14. 11 From this, a DRR-related activity can be located along the disaster management cycle: pre-disaster activities (prevention, mitigation or preparedness) or post-disaster activities (response or mitigation). 12 Petri (2016); European Commission (2016). Page 7

The total of principal and significant marked budget allocations is counted as DRR-focused planned or spent budgets or, put simply, DRR investments. Figure 1 illustrates the marking and scoring procedure for the OECD DRR policy marker and how funding allocated to DRR objectives is accounted for.

Figure 1: Scoring decision rule for the OECD DAC DRR policy marker and Rio marking system

Do any objectives of the budget activity meet any “eligibility criteria” • DRR marker = 0 ~ Rio marker = 0 of the DRR marker? 0% of budget • DRR marker = 1 ~ Rio marker = 1 YES NO 40% of budget • DRR marker = 2 ~ Rio marker = 2 100% of budget Would the budget activity have been undertaken without that DRR objective?

NO YES

2 1 0 Principal Significant Not marked

Source: OECD (2017). Page 8

4.2. Scope of the analysis The RSBR explored budgets presented by MDAs and the various programmes and activities budgeted for under the central government for the financial years 2016 to 2018. Planned public investments funded by the government from its own resources were considered for the analysis; external resources were not considered. The main documents used were the public investment budgets (PIBs) published by the Ministry of Finance, Economy and Planning, sourced online in electronic format.13 Of the 21 ministries reviewed,14 only five were identified to have programmes with principal or significant DRR policy objectives. Table 2 shows the scope of the RSBR and the specific sectors and ministries that were found to have programmes with DRR policy objectives.

Table 2: Scope of the RSBR

Years 2016–2018

Coverage Economic sector • Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Forestry and Environment • Ministry of Health and Social Welfare

Social sector15 • Ministry of Public Works, Housing and Urban Planning

Infrastructure sector16 • Ministry of Interior and Local Corporations

Services and cross-sectoral sector17 • Ministry of National Defence Planned budget or executed budget Planned budgets (public investment) Target hazards Drought, floods, storms, fires, epidemics, pests and outbreaks of disease

Source: Author’s calculations, based on Public Investment Budgets 2016, 2017 and 2018. Ministry of Ministry of Finance, Economy and Planning, Equatorial Guinea. Available at www.minhacienda.gob.gq.

Based on the OECD DAC DRR policy marker, the Rio marker and the priority action areas of the Sendai Framework, the analysis found 28 project activities that either implicitly or explicitly targeted DRR under five ministries of the central government for the fiscal years 2016 to 2018. These project activities are listed in Table 3. Of the five ministries, the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare was responsible for the largest number of DRR project activities, with 12, while the fewest came under the Ministry of Interior and Local Corporations of the national government and the Ministry of National Defence, with one programme each. Table 3 shows the DRR marked project activities under the five ministries.

13 http://www.minhacienda.gob.gq/. 14 For a list of ministries in Equatorial Guinea, see Table A2 in Annex 2. 15 Defined as a sector whose main aim is to achieve social development and improve the welfare of the country’s people. 16 Defined as a sector that focuses on the provision of physical infrastructure, generally including high-cost investment projects. 17 Defined as a sector that mainly includes services and cuts across all other sectors in the economy. Page 9

Table 3: Ministries with project activities with a DRR element

Ministries Project activities

• Green Revolution Project (12 model farms in Mboete-Bata, King-Mbini, Basile-Kogo, Mongom-Niefang, Teguete-Evinayong, Oveng-Evinayong, Oveng- Mongomo, Ewonayong-Añisok, Oveng-Ebibeyin, Moos-Mocomiseng, Musola- Luba, Inasa) • Industrial rice production Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Forestry and • Industrial Chicken Production Project (Insular Region, Continental) Environment • Porcine Meat Industrial Production Project • Starch Production Project from Cassava • Vegetables and Fruits Platform Project • Cocoa Transformation Project • Flour Yucca Transformation Project • Dredging of the Mbangan river in Bata • Construction of hospitals in Nsok-Nsomo, Nsork Mbatung, Riaba, Micomiseng, Mbini • Construction and equipping of a polyclinic hospital in Oyala • Construction and equipping of a polyclinic hospital in Djibloho • Rehabilitation of health centre in the municipality of Moka • Construction and equipping of blood banks at hospitals in Bata and regional blood transfusion centres Ministry of Health and Social Welfare • Construction of a blood transfusion centre in Mongomo • Construction and equipping of health centres in various areas • Construction and equipping of health posts in various urban districts • Supply of two ambulances with advanced life support capabilities • Malaria Control Project • Construction and equipping of vaccines storage in Malabo • Construction of medical gases factory

• Canalization of the Andeme River in Mongomo; Rio Monsueñ de Mongomo; Kie River in the city of Mongomo; Rios Consul and Nicolas de Malabo; Mbangan and Esimbo rivers in Bata; Ngolo river course Ministry of Public Works, Housing and Urban Planning • Dredging of Mangazin River and rehabilitation of three bridges in Luba district • Beach protection wall, Asonga Bata • Channelling of the Memi River in Ebibeyín • Construction of a breakwater on the coast of Mbini Ministry of Interior and Local Corporations • National emergency response and preparation

Ministry of National Defence • Construction of a fire station in Sipopo

Source: Author’s calculations, based on Public Investment Budgets 2016, 2017 and 2018. Ministry of Ministry of Finance, Economy and Planning, Equatorial Guinea. Available at www.minhacienda.gob.gq. Page 10

4.3. Principal and significant DRR marked budgets

Aggregate DRR marked budget Budget marked as DRR budget amounted to 7.1% of the total public investment budget18 (10.7% of the domestic public investment budget), with an average of $94.7 million for each of the three years. Activities with significant DRR policy objectives accounted for the vast majority of these budget allocations, with a total value of $92.94 million, or 7.0% of the public investment budget, while a much smaller amount was allocated to activities with a principal DRR objective – $1.76 million, or 0.1% of the national budget (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Principal and significant DRR budget

$ 1.76 $ 92.94 (0.1% of PIB) (7.0% of PIB)

DRR investment (current prices)

Principal Significant

Source: Author’s calculations, based on Public Investment Budgets 2016, 2017 and 2018. Ministry of Ministry of Finance, Economy and Plan- ning, Equatorial Guinea. Available at www.minhacienda.gob.gq.

DRR marked budget by sector

Principal marked DRR budget Breaking these figures down by sector, we find that for DRR marked investment with a principal objective the infrastructure sector had the highest share, with an annual average of 81.9% (Figure 3). The rest was shared between the social sector (10.1%), the services and cross-sectoral sector (7.0%) and the economic sector, which had the smallest share of principal marked DRR budget (1.0%).

Figure 3: Principal DRR investment by sector Economy sector 1.0% Services and cross sector 7.0% Social sector 10.1%

Infrastructure sector 81.9%

Source: Author’s calculations, based on Public Investment Budgets 2016, 2017 and 2018. Ministry of Ministry of Finance, Economy and Planning, Equatorial Guinea. Available at www.minhacienda.gob.gq.

18 The total public investment budget includes both domestic and external resources. Page 11

Table 4: Principal DRR investment by sector

Sectors( value in $ millions No. of 2016 2017 2018 Total Three year % current prices) projects planned average activities budget budget Infrastructure 2 – 0.02 4.30 4.32 1.44 81.9% Social 1 – 0.53 – 0.53 0.18 10.1% Services and cross-sectoral 1 0.37 – – 0.37 0.12 7.0% Economic 1 – – 0.05 0.05 0.02 1.0% Total DRR budget 0.37 0.55 4.35 5.27 1.76 100% Total DRR investment budget 1,611.07 1,532.31 825.13 3,968.50 1,322.83 – Share of DRR investment budget (total) 0.1% –

Source: Author’s calculations, based on Public Investment Budgets 2016, 2017 and 2018. Ministry of Ministry of Finance, Economy and Planning, Equatorial Guinea. Available at www.minhacienda.gob.gq.

Significant marked DRR budget Figure 4 and Table 5 show significant DRR investment for the four sectors. The economic sector had the largest share of significant investment over the period, with 70.2%, followed by the social sector (18.3%) and the infrastructure sector (11.4%). The services and cross-sectoral sector had a share of just 0.1%. The estimated amount marked as significant DRR investment was $92.94 million, which was approximately 7.0% of the total public investment budget.

Figure 4: Significant DRR investment by sector

Services and cross sector 0.1% Infrastructure sector 11.4%

Social sector 18.3% Economy sector 70.2%

Table 5: Significant DRR investment by sector

Sectors (value in $ millions, Number 2016 2017 2018 Total Three-year % current prices) of project planned average activities budget budget Economic 8 110.33 58.93 26.60 195.85 65.28 70.2% Social 11 27.39 14.24 9.50 51.12 17.04 18.3% Infrastructure 3 22.78 8.93 – 31.71 10.57 11.4% Services and cross-sectoral 1 – 0.13 0.13 0.04 0.1% Total DRR budget 160.49 82.10 36.23 278.82 92.94 100% Total DRR investment budget 1,611.07 1,532.31 825.13 3,968.50 1,322.83 Share of DRR investment budget (total) 7.0%

Source: Author’s calculations based on 2016–2018 Public Investment Budgets published by Ministry of Finance, Equatorial Guinea.

DRR marked budget by ministry

Principal DRR investment Figure 5 and Table 6 disaggregate principal DRR investment by ministry and sector. The Ministry of Public Works, Housing and Urban Planning had the greatest average share over the three-year period, with 81.9%. It was followed by the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare (10.1%) and the Ministry of Interior and Local Corporations (7.0%). The Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Forestry and Environment had a share of just 1.0%, while the Ministry of National Defence had no DRR investment marked as principal. Table A3 in Annex 2 shows the various project activities under these ministries marked with a principal DRR objective.

Figure 5: Principal DRR investment by ministry

Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Forestry and Environment 1.0% Ministry of Interior and Local Cooperation 7.0% Ministry of Health and Socia Welfare 10.1%

Ministry of Public Works, Housing and Urban Planning 81.9%

Table 6: Principal DRR investment by ministry and sector

Sectors (value in $ millions, 2016 2017 2018 Total planned Three-year % current prices) budget average budget Infrastructure – 0.02 4.30 4.32 1.44 81.9% Ministry of Public Works, Housing – 0.02 4.30 4.32 1.44 81.9% and Urban Planning Social – 0.53 – 0.53 0.18 10.1% Ministry of Health and Social – 0.53 – 0.53 0.18 10.1% Welfare Services and cross-sectoral 0.37 – – 0.37 0.12 7.0% Ministry of Interior and Local 0.37 – – 0.37 0.12 7.0% Corporations Economic – – 0.05 0.05 0.02 1.0% Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, – – 0.05 0.05 0.02 1.0% Forestry and Environment Total DRR budget 0.37 0.55 4.35 5.27 1.76 100% Total DRR investment budget 1,611.07 1,532.31 825.13 3,968.50 1,322.83 Share of national budget 0.1%

Source: Author’s calculations, based on Public Investment Budgets 2016, 2017 and 2018. Ministry of Ministry of Finance, Economy and Planning, Equatorial Guinea. Available at www.minhacienda.gob.gq.

Significant marked DRR budget Figure 6 and Table 7 show the share of the five ministries of DRR investments marked as significant. One ministry, the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Forestry and Environment, accounted for over two-thirds of all significant DRR investment, with 70.2%. The Ministry of Health and Social Welfare had a share of 18.3%, the Ministry of Public Works and Infrastructure 11.4% and the Ministry of National Defence 0.1%. Table A4 in Annex 2 shows the various project activities under these ministries with DRR objectives marked as significant. Overall, the significant DRR project activities under these four ministries indicate a wider approach in terms of commitment and availability of funds for DRR. Moreover, the project activities cover all sectors of the economy, which may imply that Equatorial Guinea is likely to strengthen its resilience to disaster risk in the long run. Page 14

Significant DRR investment by ministry

Figure 6: Significant DRR investment by ministry

Ministry of Public Works, Housing Ministry of National Defense 0.1% and Urban Planning 11.4%

Ministry of Health and Social Welfare 18.3% Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Forestry and Environment 70.2%

Table 7: Significant DRR investment by ministry and sector

Sectors (value in $ millions, 2016 2017 2018 Total planned Three-year % current prices) budget average budget Economic 110.33 58.93 26.60 195.85 65.28 70.2% Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, 110.33 58.93 26.60 195.85 65.28 70.2% Forestry and Environment Social 27.39 14.24 9.50 51.12 17.04 18.3% Ministry of Health and Social 27.39 14.24 9.50 51.12 17.04 18.3% Welfare Infrastructure 22.78 8.93 – 31.71 10.57 11.4% Ministry of Public Works, Housing 22.78 8.93 – 31.71 10.57 11.4% and Urban Planning Services and cross-sectoral – – 0.13 0.13 0.04 0.1% Ministry of National Defence – – 0.13 0.13 0.04 0.1% Total DRR budget 160.49 82.10 36.23 278.82 92.94 100% Total DRR investment budget 1,611.07 1,532.31 825.13 3,968.50 1,322.83 – Share in national budget 7.0% –

Source: Author’s calculations, based on Public Investment Budgets 2016, 2017 and 2018. Ministry of Ministry of Finance, Economy and Planning, Equatorial Guinea. Available at www.minhacienda.gob.gq.

4.4. DRR marked budget by categories of the DRM cycle As well as breaking down investment for different project activities and categorizing them as principal or significant, DRR investments were split into the four distinct categories of the DRM cycle: risk prevention and mitigation, preparedness, response and relief, and reconstruction and recovery. Page 15

Principal investment by DRR category

Aggregate results Table 8 shows principal DRR investments across the four key DRM categories. By far the largest share – 93.0% – went to the category of risk prevention and mitigation. The rest – 7% – fell into the response and relief category. No principal DRR investment was budgeted for either the preparedness or the reconstruction and recovery category.

Table 8: Principal DRR investment across DRM categories

Sectors (value in $ millions, 2016 2017 2018 Total planned Three-year % current prices) budget average budget Risk prevention and mitigation – 0.55 4.35 – 1.63 93.0% Response and relief 0.37 – – 0.37 0.12 7.0% Preparedness – – – – – 0.0% Reconstruction and recovery – – – – – 0.0% Total DRR budget 0.37 0.55 4.35 5.27 1.76 100%

Source: Author’s calculations, based on Public Investment Budgets 2016, 2017 and 2018. Ministry of Ministry of Finance, Economy and Planning, Equatorial Guinea. Available at www.minhacienda.gob.gq.

Table 9 shows that this 93.0% of principal marked DRR budget was allocated under the pre-disaster phase of the DRM cycle, with just 7% for post-disaster activities.

Table 9: Principal DRM investment across the DRM cycle

Period Pre-disaster activities Post-disaster activities

Risk prevention Preparedness Response and Reconstruction Values in $ and mitigation relief and recovery millions, current prices 2016–2018 93.0% 0.0% 7.0% 0.0% 5.27 Three-year average 93.0% 7.0% 1.76

Source: Author’s calculations, based on Public Investment Budgets 2016, 2017 and 2018. Ministry of Ministry of Finance, Economy and Planning, Equatorial Guinea. Available at www.minhacienda.gob.gq.

Results across ministries Table 10 shows principal DRR investment in the four key DRM categories by ministry for the last three fiscal years. The main finding was that three ministries plan for risk prevention and mitigation: the Ministry of Public Works, Housing and Urban Planning (81.9% of the total), the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare (10.1%) and the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Forestry and the Environment (1.0%). Response and relief is covered by the Ministry of Interior and Local Corporations, with 7.0% of the total. No principal DRR project activities were undertaken by any ministry in the categories of preparedness and reconstruction and recovery. Page 16

Table 10: Principal DRR investment across DRM categories

Principal DRR budget 2016 2017 2018 Total planned Three-year % allocations by risk category budget average (values in $ millions, current budget prices) Risk prevention and mitigation – 0.55 4.35 – 1.63 93.0% Ministry of Public Works, Housing – 0.02 4.30 4.32 1.44 81.9% and Urban Planning Ministry of Health and Social – 0.53 – 0.53 0.18 10.1% Welfare Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, – – 0.05 0.05 0.02 1.0% Forestry and the Environment Response and relief 0.37 – – 0.37 0.12 7.0% Ministry of Interior and Local 0.37 – – 0.37 0.12 7.0% Corporations Preparedness – – – – – 0.0% Reconstruction and recovery – – – – – 0.0% Total DRR budget 0.37 0.55 4.35 5.27 1.76 100%

Source: Author’s calculations, based on Public Investment Budgets 2016, 2017 and 2018. Ministry of Ministry of Finance, Economy and Planning, Equatorial Guinea. Available at www.minhacienda.gob.gq.

Significant investment by DRR category

Aggregate results Table 11 shows significant DRR investment split across the different categories. Preparedness had the largest share over the three-year period, with 88.6%, followed by risk prevention and mitigation (11.2%) and reconstruction and recovery (0.2%). No significant DRR investments were allocated to response and relief.

Table 11: Significant DRR investment across DRM categories

Significant DRR budget 2016 2017 2018 Total planned Three-year % allocations by risk category budget average (values in $ millions, current budget prices) Preparedness 137.71 73.17 36.23 247.11 82.37 88.6% Risk prevention and mitigation 22.78 8.32 – 31.09 10.36 11.2% Reconstruction and recovery – 0.62 – 0.62 0.21 0.2% Response and relief – – – – – 0.0% Total DRR budget 160.49 82.10 36.23 278.82 92.94 100%

Table 12 shows that 99.8% of Equatorial Guinea’s significant DRR budget fell under the pre-disaster phase of the DRM cycle, with a negligible 0.2% allocated to post-disaster activities.

Table 12: Significant DRR investment across the DRM cycle

Period Pre-disaster activities Post-disaster activities

Risk prevention Preparedness Response and Reconstruction Values in $ and mitigation relief and recovery millions, current prices 2016–2018 11.2% 88.6% 0.0% 0.2% 278.82 Three-year average 99.8% 0.2% 92.94

Source: Author’s calculations, based on Public Investment Budgets 2016, 2017 and 2018. Ministry of Ministry of Finance, Economy and Planning, Equatorial Guinea. Available at www.minhacienda.gob.gq.

Results across ministries Table 13 looks at the four DRM categories by ministry. It shows that three ministries undertook preparedness activities, which accounted for 88.6% of significant investment. The Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Forestry and Environment accounted for the biggest share of the significant budget for preparedness activities, with 70.2%, while the remainder was split between the Ministry of Health and Social Welfare (18.3%) and the Ministry of National Defence (0.1%). Risk prevention and mitigation activities were undertaken only by the Ministry of Public Works, Housing and Urban Planning, with 11.2% of the significant total, while reconstruction and recovery accounted for 0.3%, under the Ministry of Public Works, Housing and Urban Planning. There were no significant DRR project activities marked in the response and relief category.

Table 13: Significant DRR investment across DRM categories by ministry

Significant DRR budget 2016 2017 2018 Total planned Three-year % allocations by risk category budget average (values in $ millions, current budget prices) Preparedness 137.71 73.17 36.23 247.11 82.37 88.6% Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, 110.33 58.93 26.60 195.85 65.28 70.2% Forestry and Environment Ministry of Health and Social 27.39 14.24 9.50 51.12 17.04 18.3% Welfare Ministry of National Defence – – 0.13 0.13 0.04 0.1% Risk prevention and mitigation 22.78 8.32 – 31.09 10.36 11.2% Ministry of Public Works, Housing 22.78 8.32 – 31.09 10.36 11.2% and Urban Planning Reconstruction and recovery – 0.62 – 0.62 0.21 0.2% Ministry of Public Works, Housing – 0.62 – 0.62 0.21 0.2% and Urban Planning Response and relief – – – – – 0% Total marked DRR budget 82.10 36.23 278.82 92.94 160.49 100%

Box 1: Official development assistance by DRM category A key finding from the RSBR was that most of Equatorial Guinea’s marked DRR budget goes to pre-disaster activities rather than to post-disaster activities. Most post-disaster activities in the country are carried out by humanitarian actors. This fits with the findings of a study by van Aalst et al. (2013) which showed that, globally, of total ODA dedicated to DRR 69.9% was used for emergency response activities and 24.8% for reconstruction activities (post-disaster activities), with 3.6% for disaster prevention and preparedness (pre-disaster activities). The figure below shows the ODA received by Equatorial Guinea between 2015 and 2017 and its allocation to different DRM categories. An average of $0.03 million was used each year for post-disaster activities – emergency response and reconstruction and rehabilitation and relief. This assistance could explain why Equatorial Guinea has focused on pre-disaster activities, as it relies on humanitarian efforts to cover post-disaster activities.

Figure 7: Allocation of humanitarian ODA, 2015–2017

0.10

0.07

0.03

0.01

$ millions (constant 2010 prices) 2015 2016 2017

Emergency response Reconstruction relief Disaster prevention and rehailitation and preparedness Page 19

5. Conclusion and recommendations

UNDRR has partnered with the EU, African Union and ACP to deliver a programme to build the capacity of African countries in risk-sensitive investment planning and increase their public investment in DRR. The intention is to assist countries to align their strategies with the targets outlined in the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. This report contributes to this deliverable with a risk-sensitive budget analysis of Equatorial Guinea’s national budgets for 2016–2018 using the OECD DAC DRR marker and the Rio marking system to determine marked investments contributing to the DRM cycle. It made the following conclusions about the state of the country’s public investment planning for DRR: • DRR is not explicitly documented in project activities detailed in the national budgets for the years 2016–2018. However, project activities were broken down to specific deliverables by applying the OECD DAC policy marker. This shows that there was a specific allocation of public investment planned for disaster prevention and mitigation activities under the Ministry of Interior and Local Corporations. The three-year average planned for such activities was estimated at $0.12 million, representing 0.1% of the total public investment budget. • Applying the OECD DAC DRR policy marker, the research found 28 project activities related to DRR in six ministries of the central government in the public investment budgets for this period. • Over the three years, a total of $284.09 million was marked as DRR investment, averaging $94.7 million a year. This represented 7.1% of the total public investment budget of about $3,969 million (averaging out at $1,323 million annually). Looking at domestic resources only, the total DRR budget represented 10.7% of the total domestic public investment budget. • Marked investments directly targeting DRR – principal DRR investments – averaged $1.76 million a year. This accounted for just 2% of the total DRR budget, and was equivalent to 0.1% of the total public investment budget. • Investments for project activities indirectly targeting DRR – significant DRR investments – averaged $92.94 million annually. This accounted for 98% of the total DRR budget, and was equivalent to 7.0% of the total public investment budget. • Principal DRR investments were identified in the budgets of four ministries but were concentrated under a single ministry, the Ministry of Public Works, Housing and Urban Planning, which was responsible for 81.9% of principal DRR. Similarly, four ministries were found to have DRR investments marked as significant, but the bulk of these were concentrated under the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Forestry and Environment, which accounted for 70.2% of the total. • Categorizing investments according to the disaster risk categories of the DRM cycle, the RSBR found that the marked DRR budget was heavily concentrated on a single risk category, preparedness, which accounted for 87.0% of all DRR allocations. Nearly all principal DRR investments (93.0%) were allocated to risk prevention and mitigation activities, while 88.6% of significant DRR investments were allocated to preparedness activities. National budgets for the period 2016–2018 allocated much more funding to pre-disaster activities than to post-disaster activities – 93.0% of principal investments and 99.8% of significant investments. Page 20

• There is a heavy reliance on donor funding for both post-disaster activities and pre-disaster activities. During the three-year period from 2015 to 2017, Equatorial Guinea received $0.03 million of ODA for emergency response (post-disaster activities), against an average of $0.04 million for disaster prevention and preparedness (pre-disaster activities).

Recommendations This report contributes to the body of knowledge on DRR investment in Equatorial Guinea and, it is hoped, will assist with the ongoing mainstreaming of DRR in the country’s budget planning process. It makes the following recommendations: • The Government of Equatorial Guinea should make a yearly allocation of its DRR marked budget to the agency under the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Forestry and Environment in charge of DRR activities. This will help in strengthening the mandate of the agency and will make funds available for the coordination of DRR activities. • It should classify and code DRR project activities when planning budgets. This will involve continuous capacity building at technical and institutional levels to efficiently apply the OECD DAC DRR policy marker. • It should classify planned DRR budgets according to the four key DRM categories – risk prevention and mitigation, preparedness, response and relief, and reconstruction and recovery. • It should balance DRR budget provisions between pre-disaster and post-disaster activities. • It should apply the OECD DAC DRR policy marker to detailed planned budgets to account for project activities that are not visible currently from the titles of budgeted programmes. Page 21

References

African Development Bank (2019). Countries. Available at https://www.afdb.org/en/countries. Accessed on 15 January 2020. Bank of Central African States (2017). Annual Report 2017. Available at https://www.beac.int/ wp-content/uploads/2016/10/RAPPORT-ANNUEL-BEAC-2017-version_-30oct181.pdf. Central Intelligence Agency. The World Factbook. Available at https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/za.html. Accessed on 15 January 2020. Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED), EM-DAT: The International Disaster Database. Available at https://www.emdat.be/. Equatorial Guinea, Ministry of Finance, Economy and Planning (2018). State General Budget Law 2018. Available at http://www.minhacienda.gob.gq/presupuesto-general-del-estado-2018/. Equatorial Guinea, Ministry of Finance, Economy and Planning (2017). State General Budget Law 2017. Available at http://www.minhacienda.gob.gq/presupuesto-general-del-estado-2017/h. Equatorial Guinea, Ministry of Finance, Economy and Planning (2016). State General Budget Law 2016. Available at http://www.minhacienda.gob.gq/presupuesto-general-del-estado-2016/. European Commission (2016). Guidelines No. 6: Integrating the Environment and Climate Change into EU International Cooperation and Development. Available at https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/sites/ devco/files/guidelines-env-climate-change-sust-dev-20160201_en.pdf. International Institute for Applied Analysis. Shared Socioeconomic Pathways Database. Available at https://tntcat.iiasa.ac.at/SspDb/dsd?Action=htmlpage&page=welcome. Accessed on 15 January 2020. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2019). Net ODA. Available at https://data.oecd.org/oda/net-oda.htm. Accessed on 21 January 2019. OECD (2017). Proposal to Establish a Policy Marker for Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) in the OECD DAC Creditor Reporting System (CRS). Available at http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdis- playdocumentpdf/?cote=DCD/DAC/STAT(2017)26&docLanguage=En. OECD (2016). Converged Statistical Reporting Directives for the Creditor Reporting System (CRS) and the Annual DAC Questionnaire. https://www.oecd.org/dac/stats/DCD-DAC(2016)3-ADD2-FINAL -ENG. pdf. Petri, H. (2016). Short guide to the use of Rio markers. Capacity4dev, European Commission. Available at https://europa.eu/capacity4dev/public-environment-climate/minisite/tools-and-meth- ods/short-guide-use-rio-markers. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2019). World Population Prospects 2019 database. Available at https://population.un.org/wpp/DataQuery/. Accessed on 15 January 2020. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) (2019). Human Development Index (HDI). Available at http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-index-hdi. Page 22

UNDP (2019). Inequalities in Human Development in the 21st Century: Briefing note for countries on the 2019 Human Development Report – Equatorial Guinea. Available at http://hdr.undp.org/sites/all/ themes/hdr_theme/country-notes/GNQ.pdf. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR). DesInventar Open Source Initiative. Avail- able at https://www.desinventar.net/DesInventar/index.jsp. UNDRR (2015). Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030. Available at https://www. unisdr.org/we/inform/publications/43291. UNDRR and CIMA (2018). Equatorial Guinea Disaster Risk Profile. Available athttp://riskprofilesundrr. org/documents/?limit=20&offset=0®ions__name__in=Equatorial%20Guinea. United Nations, Statistics Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2018). Demographic and Social Statistics. Available at https://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic-social/products/dyb/ dyb_2018/. Accessed on 15 January 2020. Van Aalst, M., Kellett, J., Pichon, F., and Mitchell, T. (2013). Incentives in Disaster Risk Management and Humanitarian Response: Background Note. Available at http://siteresources.worldbank.org/ EXTNWDR2013/Resources/8258024-1352909193861/8936935- 1356011448215/8986901-1380568255405/WDR14_bn_Incentives_in_disaster_risk_management_ vanAalst.pdf. World Bank. Data: GDP growth (annual %). Available at https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP. MKTP.KD.ZG. Accessed on 15 January 2020. World Bank. Data: GDP per capita (current US$). Available at https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/ NY.GDP.PCAP.CD. Accessed on 15 January 2020. World Bank (2019). Sub-Saharan Africa Macro Poverty Outlook: Country-by-country Analysis and Projections for the Developing World. Available at http://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/720441492455091991/ mpo-ssa.pdf. Page 23

Annex 1: Risk-sensitive budget review methodology

UNDRR’s application of the OECD DAC DRR policy marker: an overview

Performing the RSBR for each country involved several steps, the first one being to access programme-based budgets.19 For most countries (13 out of 16), the budget information was readily available online (generally through the Ministry of Finance web portal).20 Budget information from Cameroon and Côte d’Ivoire was shared by some participants during national DRR workshops organized by UNDRR in Yaoundé and Abidjan, respectively, both in 2018. In the case of Guinea- Bissau, consultants managed to gain access through their connection with the Ministry of Finance. For a more detailed methodological note on UNDRR’s application of the RSBR, please consult the companion document, A methodological guidance note on risk-sensitive budget reviews.

Once the budget data was secured, the OECD policy marker methodology was applied to identify DRR components from the budgets. This involved reviewing the most recent national budgets available (see Table A1) in several steps:

Step 1: Review of overall performance of each ministry/institution in its respective programmes.

Step 2: Review of targets and policy outcomes expected to be delivered for DRR elements. This then guided the authors in reviewing budget allocations under each programme and subprogramme.

Step 3: Analysing subprogramme activities that had DRR elements and categorizing them according to the four key DRM categories – risk prevention and mitigation, preparedness, response and relief, and reconstruction and recovery.

Step 4: The same subprogramme activities were further categorized according to DRR policy objectives – principal, significant and not targeted – and were weighted using the OECD DAC Rio marker weighting guidelines (principal = 100%, significant = 40% and non-DRR = 0%).

The policy marker relies on – and the quality of results therefore depends on – the availability of documentation in relation to policy objectives and spending activities. In general, the more disaggregated and documented the budget at the activity level, the more accurate the marking. In reality, the level of disaggregation varies from one country to another.21

Although programme objectives were stated in 14 country budgets out of 16, Table A1 shows that only half of the countries disaggregated activities. In most cases (13 out of 16), financial documents

19 When budget data was not available (i.e. for Cameroon and Guinea-Bissau), public investment plans were used instead. Due to data availability, the analysis is based on ‘planned’ rather than ‘executed’ expenditures. 20 Budget information for Gabon and São Tomé and Príncipe was retrieved from www.mays-mouissi.com and www.cabri-sbo.org respectively. 21 An interesting aspect of disaggregation is whether local government authorities have their own budgets, in addition to national budgets. In 13 cases out of 16, countries have only national budgets (the exceptions are Angola, Rwanda and Tanzania (United Republic of)). Page 24 available captured exclusively domestic budget resources; Angola,22 Côte d’Ivoire and Guinea-Bissau were the exceptions (both domestic and foreign resources were presented in the budgets).

The main challenge experienced during the RSBR was that programmes and activities are often neither classified/coded for DRR nor sufficiently described. This makes it difficult to identify the full range of activities that may be related to DRR in the budget. For some countries, such as Angola, budget expenditures are simply not coded; this requires the titles of expenditures to be linked across different years to perform the RSBR.

Considering these challenges and the 13 countries with national budgets only, the RSBR overview shows that, on average, a country has 27 national ministries, departments and agencies, of which 11 have DRR expenditures (either principal or significant).

In addition, 9 out of 16 countries have a specific budget allocated to the administration in charge of DRR. This specific budget always represents a small fraction of total DRR expenditures, given the cross-cutting nature of DRM/DRR activities.

As climate change is an important underlying disaster risk driver, it is important to understand whether governments are taking climate change adaptation (CCA) measures. Table A1 shows the countries with expenditures related to CCA, marked either as principal (eight countries) or significant DRR measures (two countries). It is worth noting that 6 countries out of the 16 have not planned for CCA expenditures.

22 For example, the publicly available budgets for Angola do not separate domestic and external resources, making it impossible to take the origin of resources into account into the analysis. Page 25

Table A1: UNDRR’s RSBR: an overview

Country Coverage of RSBR analysis Source of budget Disaggregation level DRR agency Climate DRR/DRM marked sectors* portfolio change adaptation (CCA) Period # of MDAs # of DRR Budget resources Are Are programme Was the How was Larger share Larger share Larger share of (ministries, marked considered in the programme objectives national climate of Agriculture of Health Infrastructure departments, MDAs analysis^ objectives disaggregated DRR agency change marked DRR marked DRR marked DRR stated in the to activities? budget marked in budget lies budget lies budget lies budget? marked? budgets? under… under… under…

Angola 2017–2019 66 40 Domestic/foreign No No Yes* Principal Principal Significant Significant Botswana 2014/15–2018/19 25 9 Domestic Yes Yes No NA Significant Significant Significant Cameroon 2019 54 13 Domestic Yes Yes Yes Principal Significant Principal Significant

Côte d’Ivoire 2016–2018 38 29 Domestic/foreign Yes No No Principal Significant Significant Significant Equatorial Guinea 2016–2018 21 5 Domestic Yes Yes Yes NA Significant Significant Significant Eswatini (The Kingdom 2014/15–2018/19 35 12 Domestic Yes Yes No Principal Principal Significant Significant of) Gabon 2014–2017 21 9 Domestic Yes No Yes Significant Significant Significant Significant Gambia (The) 2014–2017 19 5 Domestic Yes No Yes NA Significant Significant Significant Ghana 2016–2018 29 8 Domestic Yes Yes Yes Principal Significant Significant Principal

Guinea-Bissau 2015–2018 23 7 Domestic/foreign No No No Principal Significant Significant None Kenya 2013/14–2016/17 23 10 Domestic Yes Yes No Principal Principal Significant Principal Namibia 2014/15–2018/19 35 8 Domestic Yes Yes Yes NA Significant Significant Significant Rwanda 2016/17–2018/19 56 42 Domestic Yes No Yes Significant Significant Significant Significant São Tomé and Príncipe 2014–2017 11 7 Domestic Yes No No NA Significant Significant Significant Tanzania (United 2016/17–2018/19 93 48 Domestic Yes No No Principal Significant Significant Significant Republic of) Zambia 2015–2017 27 21 Domestic Yes Yes Yes Principal Significant Significant Significant Source: UNDRR (2019). * These sectors were chosen due to their direct linkage to natural hazards; NA – No programmes for CCA were found in the RSBR analysis; ^ - All budgets analysed were planned budgets. Page 26

Annex 2: Government ministries, and principal and significant DRM investment

Table A2: Government ministries in Equatorial Guinea

No. Ministries

1 Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Forestry and Environment 2 Ministry of Civil Aviation 3 Ministry of Commerce and Promotion of Small and Medium Enterprises

4 Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Artisanal Promotion 5 Ministry of Education, University Teaching and Sports 6 Ministry of Finance, Economy and Planning 7 Ministry of Fisheries and Water Resources 8 Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation 9 Ministry of Health and Social Welfare 10 Ministry of Industry and Energy 11 Ministry of Information, Press and Radio 12 Ministry of Justice, Worship and Penitentiary Institutions 13 Ministry of Labour, Promotion of Employment and Social Security 14 Ministry of Mines and Hydrocarbons 15 Ministry of National Defence 16 Ministry of National Security 17 Ministry of Public Administration and Administrative Reform 18 Ministry of Public Works, Housing and Urban Planning 19 Ministry of Regional Integration 20 Ministry of Social Affairs and Gender Equality 21 Ministry of Transport, Post and Telecommunications 22 Ministry of Interior and Local Corporations

Source: Author, based on the Government of Equatorial Guinea’s press website (https://www.guineaecuatorialpress.com/noticia.php?id=126). Page 27

Table A3: Project activities marked as principal DRR by ministry

Ministry Share of principal marked Marked DRR project activity DRR budget Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Forestry and 1.0% Dredging of the Mbangan river in Bata Environment Ministry of Health and Social Welfare 26.7% Malaria control project Ministry of Public Works, Housing and Urban Planning 17.3% Beach protection wall, Asonga Bata

Ministry of Interior and Local Corporations 16.0% National emergency response and preparation

Table A4: Project activities marked as significant DRR by ministry

Ministry Share of principal marked Marked DRR project activity DRR budget • Green Revolution Project (12 model farms in Mboete-Bata, King-Mbini, Basile-Kogo, Mongom-Niefang, Teguete- Evinayong, Oveng-Evinayong, Oveng-Mongomo, Ewonayong- Añisok, Oveng-Ebibeyin, Moos-Mocomiseng, Musola-Luba, Inasa) Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, 70.2% • Industrial Rice Production Forestry and Environment • Industrial Chicken Production Project (Insular Region, Continental) • Porcine Meat Industrial Production Project • Starch Production Project from Cassava • Vegetables and Fruits Platform Project • Cocoa Transformation Project • Flour Yucca Transformation Project

• Construction of hospitals in Nsok-Nsomo; Nsork Mbatung; Riaba; Micomiseng; Mbini • Construction and equipping of a polyclinic hospital in Oyala • Construction and equipping of a polyclinic hospital in Djibloho • Rehabilitation of health centre in the municipality of Moka • Construction and equipping of blood banks at hospitals in Bata and Regional Blood Transfusion Centre Ministry of Health and Social Welfare 18.3% • Construction of a blood transfusion centre in Mongomo • Construction and equipping of health centres in various areas • Construction and equipping of health posts in various urban districts • Supply of two ambulances with advanced life support capabilities • Construction and equipping of a modular building in Malabo for the storage of vaccines • Construction of medical gases factory

• Canalization of the Andeme river in Mongomo; Rio Monsueñ de Mongomo; Kie river in the city of Mongomo; Rios Consul Ministry of Public Works, Housing 11.4% and Nicolas de Malabo; Mbangan and Esimbo rivers in Bata; and Urban Planning Ngolo river course • Dredging of Mangazin River and maintenance of three bridges in Luba district • Construction of a breakwater on the coast at Mbini Ministry of National Defence 0.1% • Construction of a fire station in Sipopo

www.preventionweb.net/resilient-africa www.undrr.org This publication has been produced with the assistance of the European Union.

The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction and can in no ywa be taken to reflect the views of the European Union.

The material in this document is subject to copyright. Because UNDRR encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for non-commercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given.

Citation: UNDRR (2020). Equatorial Guinea: Risk-sensitive Budget Review.