Search results

This chapter introduces Building Back Better Libraries (BBBL) as a critical concept for improved library planning both prior to and following a disaster or other emergency. Building Back Better, an idea widely discussed in the disaster recovery literature, seeks to use the difficulty of a disaster as an opportunity to go beyond the status quo and to promote changes that result in stronger, more resilient communities. The authors will define BBB elements and frameworks, building upon those to create a model for library disaster planning and recovery, and applying it to cases involving space and facilities, collections, services, and people.

Literature on the Building Back Better concept and frameworks, as well as library emergency response, was reviewed. This source material was used to develop a modified framework for improved library disaster planning and recovery. The Building Back Better Libraries framework is discussed and applied to cases involving library facilities and spaces, collections, and services, and its implementation through a disaster planning team is reviewed.

Though all libraries hope to avoid disaster, few succeed. One survey found that as many as 75% of academic library respondents had experienced a disaster or emergency. Evidence also suggests that few libraries are prepared, with as many as 66–80% of libraries reporting that they have no emergency plan with staff trained to carry it out. Even when plans are in place, the rush to respond to immediate needs following a disaster can overwhelm the ability to pursue effective long-term planning. Building Back Better, when framed for libraries, provides a planning tool to balance short-term response with long-term recovery and resilience. The Building Back Better Libraries framework focuses on the areas of risk assessment for library collections and spaces; recovery and rejuvenation for facilities, collections, and services; and implementation and monitoring, with particular discussion of the human element and the role of a library disaster planning team.

The proposed framework, Building Back Better Libraries (BBBL), can be used to strengthen disaster planning in a manner that balances meeting immediate needs with implementing longer term plans to create stronger and more resilient libraries.

Although aspects of BBB ideas are present in existing library literature, the concept is not formally defined for the library context.

Disasters are increasingly depicted as unique opportunities to ‘build back better’, to make communities more ‘resilient’ and to address pre-existing ‘vulnerabilities’. This has seen international disaster risk reduction (DRR) and recovery frameworks attempt to link short-term relief efforts with long-term development objectives while at the same time ensuring active community participation, local knowledge inclusion and ownership. This chapter looks at how ‘build back better’ – which became institutionalised through the 2015 Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction – attempts to reconcile normative concepts of ‘better’ with diverse place-based needs, interests and knowledge. Through an analysis of three United Nations DRR frameworks from 1994 to 2015, the chapter tracks how disasters have been constructed as opportunities for development, and asks whether the post-disaster context is the right time for implementing development agendas given the potential for recovery to be co-opted by dominant development ideologies.

In the aftermath of the Eastern Japan Earthquake in 2011, the Sendai Framework for Action introduced a new task called ‘Build Back Better (B3)’. This study discusses this new task and proposes an extended framework which strategically includes a pre-disaster period. This extended framework is named ‘Build Back Better, even Before Disaster (B⁴)’. The following points are observed:

SMART Governance under Persistent Disruptive Stressors (PDS) proposed by Okada offers an effective new methodology for systematically studying B⁴ problems.

For the purpose of actual practice and social implementation, we need to set up, then foster and repeatedly activate a communicative place, where participants meet openly, plan and act together step by step.

The place can be very small in size, particularly at the start but needs to be adaptively designed and recreated though a communicative process.

Yonmenkaigi System Method (YSM) serves as a useful media and tool for place-making and process design for involving stakeholders in making collaborative action development towards win–win solutions.

Finally, we consider the Case of the Merapi Volcano region in Indonesia to establish the above points.

In 2004, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in Bangkok, Thailand, and UN-HABITAT collaborated on an eco-housing project in the Asian region (UNEP, 2010). The aim was to promote eco-housing as a key disaster preventive measure in the Asia-Pacific region. Eco-housing is an evolving concept that applies sustainability principles into the entire lifecycle of a housing project: from design, through construction and maintenance to the “end of life” activities. The concept applies environmentally friendly and sustainable approaches to the design, site assessment, material selection, energy management, water management, and waste management to the household and community level. The project addressed four key areas: (1) knowledge building, (2) educational initiative, (3) networking, and (4) implementation. The eco-housing project involved countries such as Australia, China, India, Indonesia, Thailand, and Sri Lanka. It was implemented in the 2004 tsunami-affected areas in Banda Aceh and Calang, Indonesia. As part of the tsunami recovery projects, an “eco-village” was established in Lagoswatta, located in the Kalutara district near Colombo in Sri Lanka. It was supported by Sarvodaya, one of the local NGOs. UNEP and UN-HABITAT initiated the eco-housing project in 2004 to build capacity and to increase awareness on this issue. A Regional Expert Group on eco-housing was established to provide technical input and train national architects on this concept. This study was focused on the eco-village project in disaster recovery from the Indian Ocean Tsunami in 2004. In particular, it focused on the case study in Sri Lanka: “The project has implemented passive cooling techniques, solar panels on houses, segregation of waste, composting of bio-degradable waste, recycling of inorganic waste, sub-terra system for recycling waste water, and roof top water harvesting. Site layout and landscaping has been done to minimize disturbances to site, provide shading and improve indoor ventilation” (UNEP, 2010).

This chapter focuses on policy intervention that has grown in popularity in the UK since the financial crisis of 2008. The focus is on inclusive growth and more specifically, community wealth building. The concept has been picked up by institutions and think tanks at multiple scales from the OECD to local government. We aim to address the tensions in community wealth building and in particular how local authorities in the UK are adjusting their procurements strategies to increase the tendering capabilities of SMEs in their political geography.

We introduce a UK-based study utilising an ESRC-funded case study, desktop research and semi-structured interviews to investigate how well the region of Greater Manchester (GM) ecosystem was equipped to prepare small firms to learn how to compete for public contracts with evidence applicable to other large-scale tenders.

Overall, at the time of writing business support across GM does not create the value proposition of enabling small firms to be capable at tendering and thus undermines community wealth building (CWB) efforts. The advice on offer is sparse; it offers partial or no advice about different capabilities and is often limited to simple guidance stating procurement rules and compliance demands. Information is often abstract and technical support is also fragmented, making it unlikely that small firms will find resources. Advice fails to engage with evidence on how small firms learn and to provide a learning process. In particular, support to raise absorptive capacity and strategic commitment to tendering, build basic tender readiness and develop and refresh tendering capability is not evident. Training, coaching and peer learning are largely absent.

UK appears to be an experimental ground for CWB with dedicated think tanks and several examples such as the ‘Preston Model’. GM is a suitably sized and comparable region to offer transferable knowledge and indicators to support regions to innovate. We offer a ‘Dashboard of Priorities’ to enhance business support to SMEs so they can win at tendering, thus strengthening CWB policy and impact. Furthermore, we are adding clarity to a fuzzy definition of CWB and define inclusive procurement. We assist global policymakers to answer the fundamental question; are we doing all that we can with these significant resources to create an economy which truly benefits the people? By examining the ideas of community wealth building and inclusive procurement from a local authority and SME perspective, we can extrapolate finings for international comparison and offer an in-depth look at how the execution of this policy can be strengthened to deliver maximum benefit to their communities. The implication is to focus attention on how institutions (public or private), by way of better execution, can enhance the economic resilience of their own local ecosystems/places.

International humanitarian assistance usually arrives quickly following a catastrophic disaster, although it may be slower to remote locations. The international community has developed guidelines to reduce the social and cultural intrusiveness of the aid, assuring that local priorities are followed and the aid facilitates long-term recovery. However, the aid missions are under pressure to act quickly and withdraw because of the expense of operations, and thus, they are less sensitive to local culture and priorities than they might be. This chapter looks at the political context of international humanitarian assistance, including the Hyogo and Sendai Frameworks and humanitarian standards, and the experience in several catastrophic disaster responses in Asia. Levels of satisfaction with recovery, particularly housing recovery, were related to the affected communities’ participation in the decision-making process. Humanitarian aid standards also encourage attention to issues of security, displaced populations, equity in the distribution of aid, the safety of women and children, and other disaster impacts.

Nepal is confronted by an increasing number of natural- and human-induced disasters, making it the most disaster-prone country in the world. Landslides, floods, droughts, fires, thunderbolts, blockades, and earthquakes, among others, occur frequently. All these disasters take a high toll on people and cause heavy damage to physical properties worth billions of dollars every year. One of the recent examples in the history of disasters was the devastating earthquakes that struck Nepal in 2015 taking away human lives, destroying physical infrastructures, altering cultures, challenging institutions, and devastating the hope and ambitions of people. Thirty-three of the Nepal’s 75 districts were affected, at different degrees, and 14 out of 33 were badly damaged by the two major earthquakes on the 26th of April and the 12th of May 2015. This chapter provides a reflective dialogue on the current state of the disaster-recovery process with a focus on the delivery of recovery services aiming to (1) understand how key actors are responding to disaster-recovery works in Nepal and (2) identify knowledge gaps in the disaster response policy and research arenas in managing future disasters in Nepal.

The occurrences of disasters have become a common phenomenon in the world and there is evidence that the frequency and intensity of disasters are increasing. There have been more than 7,000 disaster events and around 265 million displacements in the period from 2008 to 2018, which constitutes more than three times of conflict and violence-related displacements (Disaster Displacement – A global review, 2019). Natural disasters are responsible for nearly 60,000 deaths per year on average and are responsible for 0.1% of global deaths. Various forms of natural disasters pose significant threats to lives, livelihoods, economic development, and ecological diversity around the world. Similar to the world scenario, Sri Lanka has a similar situation. Sri Lanka has been identified as a drought hot spot. Nearly, 15,000 people per million are at risk of disaster-induced displacement every year in Sri Lanka. During the Tsunami, in 2004, 31,000 human lives were lost, and more than a million people were displaced. Thus, natural disasters cause a huge negative impact on society and the economy in Sri Lanka. In this context, the main objectives of this study are to overview the disasters and displacements that have occurred during the last two decades and to explore the livelihood activities of the affected people and their best practices of disaster resilience. Secondary data were used to overview the disasters and displacements of the last two decades and the related policy framework of the country. Primary data were used to identify livelihood activities and disaster-resilient strategies of the affected people. In-depth interviews were conducted with an unstructured questionnaire from 15 recovered families who have been affected by Tsunami and landslides that occurred in the country. The purposive sampling method was used to select families from the most disaster-affected areas. Descriptive methods were used to analyze the data. The study revealed five recovery strategies followed by displaced people from tsunamis and landslides. Those are continuing with the previous livelihood activities as much as possible, moving to different livelihood activities, moving to different areas to find better jobs, attaining external assistance, and self-management on household finance. Finally, policy guidelines for building resilience in communities that will help to enhance their capacity to cope and recover from vulnerability are proposed in improving their lives.