Mobile Edition
Print
Get the Mag
Weekly Updates1. INTRODUCTION
The 2004 Asian tsunami was an unprecedented natural disaster in modern times. The scale, timing, and media coverage of the event conspired to create an environment of great philanthropy across the world. A large portion of this financial assistance has been used to undertake re-construction projects. In particular, thousands of damaged and destroyed homes across affected countries have been re-built. Re-construction methodologies have varied from self-build repairs undertaken directly by the home owners, to full commercial style contacting, with multiple variations within each theme. The main stakeholders in post disaster reconstruction projects are commonly the homeowner or beneficiary, the implementing agency (e.g. an NGO) and the national government. Now that re-construction is largely completed, it is opportune to examine the processes used and the outcomes achieved, in part to capture the lessons leant, but also to capacity build for future post disaster reconstruction efforts.
This paper identifies, through the literature, the need for community involvement in post disaster re-construction. It then presents a case study of community involvement in post disaster housing re-construction, with the aim of identifying capacity building opportunities through the successes, failures and lessons learnt of the case study. The case study is the British Red Cross Society (BRCS) Maldives post tsunami recovery program, which comprised the re-construction of 466 houses (216 houses across 4 islands in Phase 1) and (250 houses on one island in Phase 2), together with associated infrastructure. The paper examines the case study through the following:
* Overview of community involvement in the BRCS Maldives recovery program Phase 1.
* Changes made for BRCS Maldives recovery program--Phase 2. and then considers broader issues emanating from the case study in terms of
* Opportunities and risks of community involvement in post disaster reconstruction.
* Skills required to facilitate community involvement in post disaster reconstruction.
* Management structure to promote community involvement in post disaster reconstruction.
2. RESEARCH APPROACH
The case study presentation and research findings are based upon the Author's two years experience as Construction Manager with the British Red Cross Maldives recovery program. They are also based upon extended observation and reference to project documentation where appropriate.
3. COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IN POST DISASTER RE-CONSTRUCTION
The current literature in post disaster reconstruction advocates high levels of community involvement to achieve best value recovery outcomes.
The underlying theorem is that the more the recovery relies upon local resource, the quicker the community will be able to move to self--sustainability, and thus from recovery to normalcy. Sullivan (2003) identifies the link between involvement of the community in post disaster recovery and mental recovery, noting that it (involvement) "alters their status from passive pawns in the process, to once again active and contributing directors of their own destiny" This has been identified as an important element in terms of positive psychological outlook (Raphael 1986; as cited in Sullivan, 2003). Conversely, a reliance on external resources hinders recovery by diminishing the use (and hence recovery) of local markets, thus prolonging recovery, as economic recovery is a key requirement for community recovery (Hass et al., 1977; as cited in Sullivan, 2003).
The requirement for community involvement is recognised by major stakeholders in post disaster re-construction programs. The International Red Cross Code of Conduct for Disaster Relief (IFRC, 1994) recognises the need to "strive to achieve full community participation in relief and rehabilitation programs"; whilst the United Nations (Office of the UN Secretary-General's Special Envoy for Tsunami Recovery, 2006) recognises that 'a disaster's survivors are best placed to design the recovery strategy that best meets their needs. And they should be the ultimate judges of a recovery effort's success or failure"
The correlation between community involvement and best value outcomes of post disaster re-construction programs has become increasingly important for humanitarian Agencies, as greater focus is placed upon the need to measure the overall impact (e.g. benefit to the recipients) of a program, rather than outputs (e.g. the number of houses constructed) (Glasser, 2008). Further, the development of a rights based approach to disaster recovery (Eyre, 2004), requires the involvement of beneficiaries in program design and delivery.
Studies (Barakat, 2003; Barenstein, 2005 and 2008; Thwala, 2005; Fallahi, 2007), identified advantages of community driven reconstruction projects (as opposed to contractor driven approaches) as:
* Being more cost effective.
* Providing a potentially better product quality where technical and supervision skills are available.
* Being more empowering.
* Allowing for incremental re-construction thereby permitting occupancy before the house is fully completed.
* Restoring confidence in those traumatised through the experience of disaster.
* Providing local capacity building and employment.
* Preserving of local cultural heritage through land use planning and vernacular housing style.
Whilst high levels of community involvement are accepted as preferable, there are difficulties in implementing this approach. Barakat (2003) notes that increasing scale and complexity of the proposed re-construction scheme increases the likelihood that a contractor driven implementation model will be used, in turn reducing the potential for community involvement. Lizarralde and Massyn (2008), point out that community participation on its own does not guarantee project success. Rather, it depends upon a complex interaction of components including participants, interests, objectives, resources and processes that go beyond the benefits of the participation of the beneficiaries, not withstanding that this is a requirement. Davidson et al. (2007) elaborate that whilst the paradigm of community involvement and participation in post-disaster re-construction is accepted, the meaning of community and participation are so widely defined that they are difficult to apply in a project concept, due to any given unique characteristics that exist within a given project environment.
Such characteristics may be seen as context specific moderators which will impact upon the implementation of a community participation approach to post disaster re-construction. They may not negate it, but will affect the extent to which it can be implemented, or indeed how it will be implemented. Moderators of implementing a community based approach to post disaster re-construction have been identified as (i) difficulties to integrate the community in the design and management of the project (ii) difficulties in building up mutual trust between Agencies and communities, (iii) reluctance on the part of governments to give power to low-income groups, and (iv) the reduction of participation to sweat equity instead of active participation in decision making (Davidson et al., 2007). Time pressures on Agencies to expend funds and show visible "bricks and mortar" results on the ground may be considered another moderator to more robust levels of community involvement.
Therefore, community involvement is not simply "all or nothing", but rather graded in accordance with the specific moderators and contexts that exist within any given post disaster re-construction project. Recognising this, a "ladder of community participation" has been developed. This model was originally promulgated by Arnstein 1969 within the context of the United States (as cited by Davidson et al., 2007), and then adapted by Choguill (1996) within the context of developing countries. The ladder of community participation identifies levels of involvement with correlated levels of community control over project decision making processes, as shown in Figure 1.
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
The ladder is useful for measuring the level of community involvement that is possible and achievable within a given post disaster re-construction program, and in turn how that is likely to assist or impact upon overall community recovery. Further, humanitarian Agencies are in turn able to identify what capacities exist within their organisations to implement appropriate levels of community involvement in post disaster re-construction programs.
The case study is now presented to assist with identifying strategies for such capacity building.
4. COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IN BRCS MALDIVES RECOVERY PROGRAM--PHASE 1
Involvement of the community was not paramount in the initial stages of the BRCS re-construction program. Rather, it was an issue that evolved and grew as the project progressed. It did, however, become of some importance, particularly as BRCS received criticism from other NGO's for failing to include the community "adequately" in the re-construction process, and also for not seeming to be interested in doing so. So what was the level of involvement in the community in the BRCS in Maldives Recovery program--Phase 1? It could be summarised as "limited"; correlating to levels 3-4 on the participation ladder. There was no real involvement of the community in the beneficiary identification and selection process. This was done on the basis of government assessments of damaged houses. Disgruntlement with the beneficiary identification process was highlighted at the completion of the Phase 1 projects through the housing satisfaction surveys.
In terms of the housing design process, the major design parameters of the houses (size, number of rooms, ceiling height), were decreed by the Government of Maldives, and the detailed design of the houses was undertaken by a consultant, although this did to some extent take cognisance of local norms of house design. Identified beneficiaries were involved in the housing selection process. Through this process they were able to choose:
FEED