Search results

Natural disasters not only cause dilapidated buildings and damaged infrastructure but also delay crucial aid for those affected in the event of a disaster and post-disaster recovery. An institutionally well-managed post-disaster housing strategy provides opportunities for physical and mental healing of its occupant. The time requires occupiers to remain in the temporary housing varies with circumstances. This paper aims to review post-disaster housing scenarios in India in comparison to two Asian cases from Indonesia and Japan. The study focuses on understanding Indian post-disaster housing strategies through a comparative review.

The research selects coastal cities of Tamil Nadu state, where the post-disaster temporary shelter and rehabilitation was planned and implemented after the Tsunami in 2004. The Tsunami created havoc in Nagapattinam and Kanyakumari district of Tamil Nadu. Nagapattinam district reported 6,051 fatalities and many more homeless people. After the Tsunami, the government took measures to supply safe, secured and on-site shelter provisions. Surprisingly, many such shelters were never occupied. In many instances, people actually preferred to spend years in a temporary shelter rather occupying government housing. This paper evaluates such events and investigates India’s post-disaster shelter strategy against the derived best practices. This study is based on the sequential/logical reasoning and understanding of the facts. Discussions and findings from this study can be further generalised into a comprehensive policy discussion.

The paper finds that the manner of planning and design of post-disaster housing programmes influence medium- to long-term recovery of its occupant. A certain element of trade-off between implementation and quality of habitation results into compromises to achieving the desired outcome. When faced with socio-political, economic and financial constraints, the decision-makers are required to make trade-offs in deciding the manner and quantum of allocating resources. Coordination among these agencies is troublesome. It is true for all countries and there is no distinct answer to it. Public consultation and community participation in long-term rehabilitation are crucial to meet the aspiration of the local people.

The paper contributes in discussing a comparison of post-disaster housing rehabilitation between India and the two cases from Indonesia and Japan. As a review paper, the objective is to highlight the synthesis and overall understanding of post-disaster housing strategies from two cases and compare it with India.

The purpose of this research is to highlight issues related to the management of indigenous and scientific knowledge, and the approach towards transferring these from one community to another, to therefore reduce risk in communities living with multiple hazards and disasters in cyclone, flood, earthquake and drought prone regions of India.

A case study based approach and secondary research have been used to understand the disaster‐related problems and the mitigation strategy. Lessons are drawn from Indian scenarios such as Orissa super cyclone, Bhuj earthquake, etc.

The study highlights a few important points for practising managers/officers. Rural telecentres need to evolve for relief and rehabilitation work. Indigenous knowledge is more in tacit form; therefore, a carefully designed strategy would be needed to manage this.

The study focuses on many practical issues related to disaster management in India. These issues are derived from past experiences.

The research provides insight to researchers and practising officers/managers. Newer insights have been presented on tacit‐knowledge management and use of scientific understanding on the management of natural disasters.

It is well recognized that disasters, whether naturally occurring or the result of human invention, affect a region on many levels. Not only are disasters felt within the painful context of human tragedy, loss of life, and physical suffering, but disasters can also destroy the immediate socio-economic fabric of the affected population as well as the ability of a region to sustain itself during the slow process of recovery and reconstruction. As Newton (1997) notes, “disasters are not isolated from the social structure within which they occur; rather, they are social phenomena” (p. 219).

This chapter introduces the tourism–disaster–conflict nexus through a comprehensive review of the contemporary social science literature. After reviewing conceptual definitions of tourism, disaster and conflict, the chapter explores various axes that link through this nexus. The linkages between tourism and disaster include tourism as a trigger or amplifier of disasters, the impacts of disasters on the tourism industry, tourism as a driver of disaster recovery and disaster risk reduction strategies in the tourism sector. Linkages between tourism and conflict include the idea that tourism can be a force for peace and stability, the niche status of danger zone or dark heritage tourism, the concept of phoenix tourism in post-conflict destination rebranding, tourism and cultural conflicts, and tourism’s conflicts over land and resources. Linkages between disaster and conflict include disasters as triggers or intensifiers of civil conflict, disaster diplomacy and conflict resolution, disaster capitalism, and gender-based violence and intra-household conflict in the wake of disasters. These are some of the conversations that organise this volume, and this introductory chapter ends with a summary of the chapters that follow.

This paper aims to determine household perceptions of disaster recovery plan development and implementation, and to identify groups that may be less aware of the recovery planning process to provide recommendations to officials for improving participation in planning and resident support of implementation priorities.

Face-to-face interviews were conducted with 194 residents of a US Atlantic coast county impacted by Hurricane Irene. Respondents were selected via a two-stage cluster sampling method automated through the use of a Geographic Information Systems toolkit.

Although few households reported participation in the county’s recovery planning process, a majority felt that the plan would be better if it incorporated input from a wide range of stakeholders. The number one reason residents did not participate was the lack of knowledge that they could. Some vulnerable populations were less aware of the recovery plan, including the elderly and those living in poverty, while others were more aware, including those with children and those without access to a working vehicle. Respondents prioritized recovery activities around infrastructure and public safety, yet ranked activities related to public information and housing as less important.

This paper highlights potential successes of emergency management outreach and identifies groups that are not being reached during recovery planning. The paper provides insight on resident priorities for recovery after disaster.

There has been little research on the implementation of recovery plans and few studies that have examined the behaviors and opinions of households with regard to recovery plan development and implementation.

The impact of disasters caused by natural hazards on people in affected communities is mediated by a whole range of circumstances such as the intensity of the disaster, type and nature of the community affected and the nature of loss and displacement. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the need to adopt a holistic or integrated approach to assessment of the process of disaster recovery, and to develop a multidimensional assessment framework.

The study is designed as a novel qualitative assessment of the recovery process using qualitative data collection techniques from a sample of communities affected by the Indian Ocean tsunami in Eastern and Southern Sri Lanka.

The outcomes of the interventions have varied widely depending on such factors as the nature of the community, the nature of the intervention and the mode of delivery for donor support. The surveyed communities are ranked in terms of the nature and extent of recovery.

The indices of recovery developed constitute a convenient tool of measurement of effectiveness and limitations of external interventions. The assessment used is multidimensional and socially inclusive.

The approach adopted is new to post-disaster recovery assessments and is useful for monitoring and evaluation of recovery processes. It also fits into the social accountability model as the assessment is based on community experience with the recovery process.

This paper aims to propose a set of principles for implementation of successful post-disaster social recovery in-line with the concept of “building back better” (BBB).

A set of preliminary principles for post-disaster social recovery was established from literature review. The 2009 Victorian Bushfires was chosen as a case study to examine the implemented social recovery approaches and impacts.

Analysis of the literature and case study have led to the creation of a set of modified BBB principles for social recovery under two categories, first, community support and, second, community involvement. Key principles under first category include: providing personalized support for affected families, specialized support for vulnerable groups and improved psychological support; building community cohesion; and keeping the community informed. Key principles under second category include: involving the community in designing and implementing recovery projects; providing support to the community; and maintaining full transparency.

This study focusses on one case study. The appropriateness and applicability of the proposed principles can be further tested using a range of different case studies in both developed and developing countries.

The principles presented should be incorporated into post-disaster social recovery programmes implemented by governments.

This research takes a unique look at drawing from international experiences to form a set of practical and universal principles to aid post-disaster social recovery as an important part of BBB.

The purpose of this paper is to look at the role of community participation in reducing anxiety and trauma in communities during two New Zealand earthquakes: the 1987 Edgecumbe and 2003 Te Anau events and explore the effectiveness of various approaches in providing information, reducing stress, and facilitating a recovery process.

The principle methods of data collection were semi‐structured interviews were undertaken between October 2006 and March 2007 with key agencies and individuals involved in the response and comprehensive analysis of papers, reports and articles in newspapers. The research was undertaken prior to the 4 September 2010 and 2011 earthquakes in Canterbury, New Zealand, and therefore community recovery from these events are not discussed in this paper.

Effective survival and recovery from disasters depends not just on people's abilities to cope with the physical impacts of the event, but also on how the societal environment complements and supports the complex and protracted processes of community recovery. Central to recovery is how society organises, mobilises and coordinates the diverse range of organizational and professional resources that can be called upon to assist recovery.

The paper offers insight into the effectiveness and benefit of incorporating of community participation in reducing anxiety and trauma in communities during earthquakes.

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.

To assess which partnerships were most critical during the recovery planning process following Hurricanes Maria and Irma. We discuss the roles and impact of different types of partners, barriers and facilitators to partnerships and lessons in collaboration during the development of the economic and disaster recovery plan for Puerto Rico.

The Homeland Security Operational Analysis Center (HSOAC) was tasked with assisting the Puerto Rican government with an assessment of damages from Hurricanes Maria and Irma and the development of the Recovery Plan. During the process, a small team compiled and coded a database of meetings with non-HSOAC partners. The team was divided into sector teams that mirrored FEMA’s Recovery Support Functions. Each sector completed two surveys identifying high impact partners and their roles and contributions, as well as barriers and facilitators to partnerships.

A total of 1,382 engagements were recorded across all sectors over seven months. The most frequently identified high impact partners were federal and Puerto Rican governmental organizations partners. NGOs and nonprofits were noted as key partners in obtaining community perspective. Sector teams cited a lack of trust and difficulty identifying partners as barriers to partner engagement. Given the expedited nature of disaster response, establishing partnerships before disasters occur may help facilitate community input. Early networking, increased transparency and defining roles and responsibilities may increase trust and effectiveness among partnerships.

To our knowledge, this is one of the few studies that quantifies and illustrates the partnerships formed and their contributions during recovery planning, and lessons learned.