Finally, indicators to measure changes in the components of the resilient systems will need to be developed, so that the overall impact of efforts to strengthen resilience can be measured. Other significant disincentives include the lack of a natural or centralised 'home' for risk management in partner government structures, the lack of absorption capacity of government structures (particularly at the local level), fragmented legal and legislative structures, local cultural factors, problematic access to risk information, insecurity, and economic barriers. The way donors plan and implement programmes can also create powerful disincentives, including uncoordinated planning cycles between the donor and partner governments, centralised decision-making, the separation of humanitarian and development programming, a perception that risk is 'complicated', fragmented risk management approaches spread across different institutional divisions, the lack of penetration or risk management and resilience into quality control, evaluation and administrative/funding processes, contradictory career incentives, and risk aversion in donor investments.