The Gap Between Building Anticipatory Action Frameworks and Their Activation: A global study on Anticipatory Action Readiness
CONTEXT
Over the past decade, Anticipatory Action (AA) has expanded rapidly in scale, geographic reach, and institutional uptake. Although the total amount of funding released per activation decreased in 2024 compared to previous years, the year saw an increase in total numbers of frameworks and activations. According to the Anticipation Hub 2024 annual report[1], AA reached over 17 million people through 121 activations, supported by financing worth 110.7 million US dollars. There were 154 active frameworks and 194 frameworks under development across 48 countries, representing 248 million US dollars in pre-agreed financing.
After more than a decade of progress, AA has reached significant levels of proliferation and institutional recognition. This may shift attention beyond questions of expansion and activation toward the effectiveness and sustainability of existing frameworks. The Anticipation Hub 2024 annual report[2] notes that, out of 154 frameworks reported as active, approximately 79% were activated in 2024 (121 activations during the year). However, the 2024 regional [3] (AAF) in the Asia-Pacific, led by the Asia-Pacific Technical Working Group (AP TWG), identified 137 AAFs, of which 52 were activated (38%) since the frameworks have been built. This implies that around 62% of AAFs were never triggered. [4] The AP TWG report also highlights that “some respondents informed that they had faced difficulties keeping their AA systems active due to the lack of access to flexible fuelling budget, or due to the country context (for instance in Myanmar)[5]”.
Despite significant investment in AA over recent years, there seems to be a gap between the development of the frameworks and their effective activation. This gap could have notable implications: frameworks that are not triggered may fall short of fully delivering AA’s core purpose of mitigating impacts ahead of disasters. It may also point to potential inefficiencies in financial investment and risk, undermining the trust of local communities, national authorities, and donors in the approach.
As the number of frameworks continues to grow, alongside increasing calls for more effective and cost-efficient humanitarian assistance, there is a need to ensure that AAFs lead to timely and effective early action. This requires sustained attention to their operational readiness and long-term sustainability — including the regular updating of data and forecasting systems, maintenance of protocols, and ensuring operational and financial capacity.
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The study, conducted by CARE International (CI) and led by CARE Climate Justice Center (CJC), seeks to explore the current state of AAF readiness, including what contributes to the readiness for activation and the key factors influencing readiness, maintenance, and sustainability of AAF. The objectives of the study are:
- To explore the status of frameworks worldwide.
- To analyse the key enablers and barriers for maintenance, activation, and sustainability.
- To identify good practices and key recommendations to maintain the operational readiness of AAFs.