This system map uses data from the Fifth Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment (RDNA5) of Ukraine, published by the World Bank to show how conflict damage translates into losses, reconstruction needs, financing pressure, and delivery constraints over time. Unlike the core Fiscal Hydraulics Scan, Diagnostic, and Workshop offers, which focus on specific parts of a sovereign system and test bounded flow constraints within them, this work operates at the level of the wider reconstruction system. It brings finance, readiness, coordination, capacity, and execution into a single picture so that the broader effects of conflict on recovery can be visualised and diagnosed.
What connects this conflict system map to the sovereign diagnostic services is the underlying way of thinking and doing: tracing how resources move, identifying where they slow, and testing what is shaping delivery under pressure. This makes it useful for supporting governments, donors, and private-sector partners to understand system bottlenecks, visualise reconstruction dynamics, and work through practical solutions together. For more focused diagnostics of specific sovereign-system pathways and constraints, view the products page.
This diagram draws on the same RDNA data series alongside UNHCR reporting on displacement and population outlook to propose a three-dimension framework for reconstruction prioritisation. Socio-economic losses now exceed the headline reconstruction needs estimate. Infrastructure alone cannot close that gap. The diagram shows how targeting the intersection of damage, losses, and demographics can improve the long-term impact of reconstruction investment.
The Fiscal Hydraulics approach traces how resources move through systems under pressure, identifies where they slow, and tests what is shaping delivery. In a sovereign crisis finance context that means following emergency funding from activation through to last-mile delivery. In a conflict reconstruction context it means following reconstruction finance from commitment through to executed projects.
The Ukraine analysis above illustrates the approach for a conflict setting. The system map shows where reconstruction finance stalls and why. The prioritisation framework shows how investment allocation can be improved by expanding the analytical frame beyond damage magnitude alone.
Both forms of analysis can be applied to other conflict-affected and post-crisis contexts — as a standalone commission, as part of programme design, or as a diagnostic input to investment targeting and recovery planning.
If you are working in a conflict or post-crisis setting and want to understand how resources can be better targeted, contact Sam for an initial conversation. Get in touch.
The same diagnostic thinking underpins the core Fiscal Hydraulics products — structured, evidence-bounded assessments of how crisis finance moves through sovereign systems, and where it is most likely to stall. If your focus is on crisis finance readiness rather than reconstruction specifically, the products page sets out what is available and where to start.