The objective of this study is to assess whether the financing practice of recovery efforts is consistent with the international architecture in place to promote the transition from crisis to sustainable development in fragile and conflict-affected states. The recommendations of this study are based on a mapping and comparative analysis of humanitarian, development and climate adaptation pooled financing mechanisms at the global and country levels. Findings from this study reveal that the current financing practice reinforces rather than bridges a silo approach towards recovery efforts. Development pooled financing mechanisms for recovery in fragile and conflict-affected countries are limited in terms of their: i) coverage - they do not exist in the majority of countries or are established too late to promote synergies with humanitarian assistance; ii) capitalization - they are too small and fragmented to act as gravity centres for aid coordination and alignment; and iii) coherence - they cover too many issues, leaving some key areas unaddressed.
The study highlights practical steps to enhance the effectiveness of country-level development pooled financing mechanisms for recovery by: i) coverage - better leveraging the potential of pooled funds to manage risk and enable an early release of development finance in fragile and conflict-affected countries; ii) capitalization - consolidating the large number of small recovery pooled funds into a smaller number of larger pooled funds to create a critical mass of resources that can coordinate recovery interventions across humanitarian, development and climate adaptation assistance; and iii) coherence - promoting a common theory of change across recovery efforts, and incorporating these efforts into a broader resilience framework where appropriate.