When does recovery truly begin? Is it the moment the roads are cleared? When the GDP rebounds? When humanitarian assistance ends? Or is it when communities regain trust in institutions, when youth begin to envision a future in their hometowns, and when farmers no longer need support to feed their families? 
 
As we prepare for the World Resilient Recovery Conference (WRRC), part of the preparatory days leading to the 8th Global Platform for Disaster Risk Reduction under the theme "Everyday Counts: Act for Resilience Today," UNDP launched a global consultation with colleagues across UNDP Country Offices and regions to challenge these very assumptions. The goal: to bring grounded insights into how we measure recovery, and whether our current metrics are capturing what truly matters to people. 
 
Rethinking recovery: Not just a return to the past 
 
Colleagues from across the globe—Bosnia and Herzegovina to Bhutan, Somalia to Uruguay—were unequivocal: real recovery is not a return to pre-crisis conditions. It's a transformation - a shift from fragility to opportunity, from dependence to agency, from exclusion to inclusion, from vulnerability to resilience. 
 
Tom from our office in Uganda put it: "We always think about resilience as being able to recover and flourish amidst changing climate and shocks. I would think of resilient recovery as the ability to sustain and grow the recovery process. This requires thinking deeply through the drivers of vulnerability, root causes and designing mechanisms and interventions that will address them." His reflection urges us not just to respond to what’s visible, but to go deeper—to the structural weaknesses that crises expose and sadly, magnifies. 
 
Tom was spot on. True recovery is an opportunity to address  existing vulnerabilities that exist in our societies, and which present the antecedents upon which adverse triggers often exploit. Recovery, then, is not simply rebuilding—it is a rare and urgent opportunity to learn from exposed root vulnerability determinants and fix what was already broken. 
 
Another colleague, Anneke, reflecting on her research in the Philippines, added another dimension: "Real recovery is best measured by the return of human dignity." She described how extended stays in temporary shelters and a reliance on emergency rations can erode agency and reinforce cycles of passivity. In a country that faces multiple super typhoons each year, such measures—however well-intentioned—often frame communities as helpless victims. “To me, the true indicators of progress after a shock are not only physical reconstruction or economic metrics, but also the restoration of choice, autonomy, and hope,” she wrote. 

Her reflection is a powerful reminder that dignity, inclusion, agency and voice are essential. “Building back better” must go beyond infrastructure. It must prioritize equity, well-being and community ownership. “Those most affected should have a central role in defining what ‘better’ looks like.” 
 
From Uganda, we also heard how wetlands became a symbol of systems resilience, with conservation linked directly to building resilience to climate impacts. Protecting ecosystems was seen not only as an environmental priority but as a foundation for sustainable recovery. 
 
In The Gambia, recovery was measured not just in rebuilt markets or homes, but in the resilience of cross-border trade, women's economic networks, and youth-led digital monitoring.  
 
And in Yemen and Pakistan, recovery was described as a convergence of peace, governance, and restored dignity—where people feel safe, seen, and heard. 
 
These country reflections echo broader trends in UNDP’s global recovery work: 
 

• Following Typhoon Yagi in 2024, UNDP Viet Nam launched the BRIDGE programme, supporting housing, resilient livelihoods, and disaster risk governance to empower affected communities to recover with dignity and strength.
• In Ukraine, UNDP is driving a green recovery agenda—rebuilding infrastructure with energy efficiency, environmental sustainability, and inclusivity in mind. Initiatives range from repairing critical energy systems to clearing explosive ordnance, helping transform ruins into opportunities for lasting development.
• In Türkiye, community-based recovery models have been central in response to the 2023 earthquakes, providing vocational training and access to employment while rebuilding inclusive social services and enhancing municipal resilience capacities.
• In Syria, UNDP supported women-led community kitchens that reached over 113,000 people. These efforts not only met urgent needs but also strengthened social cohesion and women’s leadership in recovery processes.
• In Balochistan, Pakistan, UNDP is constructing climate-resilient homes for flood-affected families—combining sustainable recovery with forward-looking disaster risk management in collaboration with KfW Development Bank.
• In Mozambique, UNDP, in collaboration with the Government, initiated a groundbreaking response to the crisis through the establishment of the Mozambique Recovery Facility (MRF) focusing on catalyzing recovery and resilience across Mozambique: (1) Livelihood Recovery and Women Economic Empowerment, (2) Resilience Housing and Community Infrastructure, and (3) Institutional Strengthening. 

 
The recovery indicators that matter 
 
A recurring theme across responses was the inadequacy of conventional recovery indicators. GDP growth or restored infrastructure can mask persistent inequalities. Instead, colleagues pointed to other signs of real progress: 
 

• Reduced reliance on humanitarian assistance
• Functioning and inclusive local governance systems
• Return and reintegration of displaced persons
• Community-led monitoring and feedback mechanisms
• Restoration of trust and social cohesion
• Uptake of resilience innovations by women and youth
• Psychological and emotional recovery, including support systems for trauma
• Restoration of dignity, autonomy, and community voice
• Rehabilitation of cultural practices 

 
Several colleagues proposed dual-track metrics: one to measure the visible, tangible recovery of infrastructure and services, and another to track the less visible—but equally vital—progress in governance, inclusion, and well-being. 
 
These reflections reinforce UNDP’s position that recovery must be rights-based, inclusive, equitable, and risk-informed. Building on this understanding, UNDP emphasizes that risk is systemic and multi-dimensional—requiring governance systems that bridge social protection, health, climate action, and inclusive service delivery. 
 
Recovery readiness: Before the next shock 
 
The WRRC’s focus on Priority 4 of the Sendai Framework—enhancing disaster preparedness for effective response and to "Build Back Better"—resonated throughout our Community of Practice. 
 
Recovery readiness is increasingly being recognized as a transformative concept. It is not only about being ready to respond, but also about embedding resilience into development systems before disaster strikes. This includes strong governance, early warning systems, community-based contingency planning, capacities for post disaster needs assessments, inclusive financing, and scalable recovery frameworks. 
 
From Bhutan’s digital preparedness to Iraq’s post-conflict stabilization programmes, colleagues emphasized that recovery readiness must begin well before the next crisis. It requires institutional coordination, local-government recovery capacity building, anticipatory financing, legal and policy frameworks, and community-level preparedness systems. As Kamilla from UNDP’s global Insurance & Risk Finance Facility put it, “Recovery readiness is about institutional frameworks, financial arrangements, and community-based planning systems that are in place before the crisis hits. It’s not a one-off—it's part of how a country governs risk.” 
 
Kamilla’s message aligns with the WRRC’s broader agenda: catalyzing global commitment to pre-arranged institutional, financial, and technical measures to advance recovery readiness as a core element of disaster and climate risk governance. 
 
UNDP further reinforces that resilient recovery is key to achieving sustainable development, as outlined in our Strategic Plan. Crises will continue to set back development unless countries invest in systems that reduce vulnerability and prevent future risks—especially in urban centers, informal settlements, and fragile settings where recovery is most complex. 
 
Who decides what 'better' looks like? 
 
One of the most provocative reflections came from colleagues who asked: who gets to define what it means to "build back better"? 
 
Too often, better is decided in capital cities or donor strategy rooms. Yet, as responses from Namibia, Ecuador, and Montenegro emphasized, recovery must be co-designed—with youth, women, indigenous peoples, and historically excluded communities. “Better” must reflect lived realities, local aspirations, and cultural context—not just technical benchmarks established by the international community. 
 
What next? Toward a Global Call to Action 
 
The WRRC is more than a meeting—it is a pivot point. It builds on lessons from the 2024 International Recovery Forum, the Asia-Pacific Call to Action, and the G20 DRR Ministerial Declaration. Together, these efforts signal a shift in global thinking: resilient recovery is essential for sustainable development. 
 
As WRRC aims to produce a Global Call to Action for Recovery Readiness, the stories and insights shared by our colleagues offer a crucial compass. 
 
We must codify and invest in the lessons already emerging from UNDP’s work: from social cohesion indicators in post-conflict areas, to early warning systems co-managed with communities, to innovative financing mechanisms that enable faster, more equitable recovery. 
 
Recovery is not just about rebuilding what was lost—it is about reimagining what is possible. Let’s ensure that the metrics we use, the policies we shape, and the institutions we strengthen reflect that. 
 
Join us at the WRRC to continue this conversation, and to help shift recovery from a moment of repair to a pathway of transformation.