School of Global Health, Department of Public Health University of Copenhagen

U N I V E R S I T Y O F C O P E N H A G E N

Post-disaster in Nepal: On the threshold of reconstruction - coping capacity and perception of risk and danger in hill

communities in Nepal

Photo Linda Nordahl Jakobsen Tanglichowk Nepal 2016

Linda Nordahl Jakobsen, journalist

Master’s thesis 2016. Master of Disaster Management

Supervisor Tania Dræbel, PhD.

Submitted: 11-07-2016

ii

Abstract

This study explores how marginalized hill communities in the Gorkha District in Nepal perceive risk

and danger and how they cope with disaster. It analyses the perception of risk and danger and self-

efficacy from a phenomenological approach. On the basis of the findings it discusses vulnerability

and risk from a predominantly anthropological perspective of disaster as a social construction. It

questions the huge gap, there is between the perception of risk and danger among local people –

and outsiders that tend to understand vulnerability differently. It also argues that true disaster risk

reduction can be accomplished and risk measures sustainable if the root causes of vulnerability are

addressed – which is a highly political issue.

The study has been conducted as a retrospective case study in Nepal almost one year after the

massive earthquake that struck Nepal in April 2015. The earthquake contributed to a sad record in

Asia that bore the brunt of being the region most frequently affected by natural disaster over the

last decade.

Disasters takes a toll in human lives and in the social and economic development. The earthquake in

Nepal is estimated to have set back Nepal´s economic and social development at least a decade.

Some of the households living in marginalized hill communities in Baguwa and Dhawa that were

affected by the earthquake with destruction of their homes and their livelihood have participated in

the empirical data collection for this study. In the study, the model of open-ended, semi-structured

interviews guided by research questions has been used, while the theoretical framework for the

analysis of the data collection is phenomenological sociology described as “the every-day

sociology.” This mean that it´s a study with empirical data on a micro-level, which is accounted for

in the discussion and throughout the study regarding its´ limitations and challenges.

Key words: Vulnerability, risk, disaster, perception, coping capacity

iii

Acknowledgement

To all my friends, my network, my colleagues, to fellow-students, lecturers and people I have met

on this long, instructive and so mind-blowing journey to Nepal and through complicated landscapes

of disasters, conflicts, rights and wrongs, and the exquisite disciplines of methodology and

theoretical frameworks.

To Shreya Singh, Binod Bhattarai, Aasish Devkota, Ayush Prad and not least my key informants in

Nepal in Baguwa and Dhawa. You made it happen and you made me wiser.

To my neighbor friends, you gave me inspiration and support.

To my husband Mike and daughters Steffanie and Klara - you have supported me all the way

through this long journey of learning and studying at the Master of Disaster Management. You

have observed and endured everything from volcanic eruptions to me hibernating at home and

ensconcing myself in the process of writing this Master´s thesis with the ever soothing and

convincing words “take it easy, it´s going to be all right”.

To my supervisor Tania Dræbel, you helped me, kicked me - in your own gentle way - into the

phenomenological world, and supported me to let my mind free, let the thoughts flow and to stay

on track in this process.

From the deepest of my heart, I want to say to all of you – NAMASTE – thank you.

iv

Acronyms and abbreviations

CEO – Chief Executive Officer

CBS – Central Bureau Statistics

DDC – District Development Committee

DCA – DanChurchAid (Folkekirkens Nødhjælp)

GAR - Global Assessment Report

GDP – Gross Domestic Product

GoN – Government of Nepal

IFRC – International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent

INGO – International Non-Governmental Organization

NCARD - National Coalition against Racial Discrimination in Nepal

NGO – Non-Governmental Organization

NPR – Nepalese Rupees

NRA – National Reconstruction Authority

NRCC – Nepal Risk Reduction Consortium

OCHA – United Nation Office for Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs

UN – United Nations

UNISDR – United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction

US – United States

VDC – Village Development Committee

1

Introduction

Disasters in a global and regional context

Over the last decade Asia remains the continent most frequently affected by disaster with 40.5% of

the 518 disasters reported in the world (2014), while Africa comes second with 24.1% of all disasters.

(IFRC, World Disasters Report 2015: 216) Disasters in the IFRC-report refer to those with a natural

and/or technological trigger only; it does not include war, conflict-related famines, diseases or

epidemics like the Ebola crisis. The Asia-Pacific region has over the past 45 years recorded more than

5,000 disasters that affected 6 billion people causing over two million fatalities and costing $1.15

trillion1 in economic losses. (ESCAP, 2015)

Disasters have taken a huge toll in terms of the social and economic development in the region. The

range of disasters (and the most deadly ones) that affected the region include earthquakes in Nepal,

Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Pakistan, and tropical cyclones that struck countries like Myanmar in South-

East Asia and Vanuatu in the Pacific. From the same reason the countries in Asia and the Pacific have

identified disaster risk reduction as one of their core priorities and as an integral part of achieving

sustainable development and build more resilient societies in the region.

The need for greater resilience to disasters on a global level is encompassed in the Sendai Framework

for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-20302, which was adopted at the third UN World Conference on

Disaster Risk Reduction in March 2015. The Sendai Framework does not only set up targets and

prioritize actions that are focused on disaster risk reduction, it also emphasis that disasters shall cease

to be seen as “sectoral issues” and instead become integrated into development policies and plans

and fiscal budgets. (ESCAP, 2015)

1 Counted in 2005 US Dollars 2 The Sendai Framework was adopted at the UN-conference in Sendai in Japan March 2015. It sets seven global targets; a) reduce disaster mortality, b) reduce the number of people affected, c) reduce direct disaster economic losses, d) reduce damages to critical infrastructures and disruption of basic services, e) increase the number of countries with national and local disaster risk reduction strategies, f) enhance international cooperation, g ) increase the availability of and access to multi-hazard early warning systems and disaster risk information and assessments.

2

Definitions and main concepts

Community – is a group of households living in the same location, in this study also referred to as a ward.

Coping capacity – the ability of people (community, organizations or systems) to use available skills, knowledge and resources to manage disaster, emergency or slow-ongoing events. (UNISDR, 2009: 8)

Disaster – a serious disruption of the functioning of a community or society with widespread human, economic, material, environmental losses and impacts that exceed the ability of the affected community or society to cope by its own resources. (UNISDR, 2009: 9)

Disaster Cycle – in disaster management it will be: disaster preparedness, relief and emergency, recovery and reconstruction, mitigation and prevention (disaster risk reduction measures) (Annex A)

Disaster risk reduction – to reduce the risk of disaster through systematic efforts to analyze and manage the causal factors of disasters, e.g. to reduce exposure to hazards and lessen the vulnerability of people. (UNISDR, 2009: 10-11)

Humanitarians – disaster managers and humanitarian agencies

Marginalization – when specific groups in society are relegated to the lower or outer edge of society economically, socially, culturally and politically following a policy of exclusion, where groups or sections in the society e.g. are denied equal access to productive resources and to realize their productive human potential and capacity. (Sociology Guide)

Reconstruction – is part of the recovery and rehabilitation process after disaster but is when society or a community starts to rebuild psychically.

Resilience – is the ability of a social system to response and recover from a disaster, includes the inherent systems that allow the system to absorb impacts and cope with an event as well as to develop post-event adaptive processes to facilitate the social system to re-organize, learn and reshape in response to a threat. (Cutter et al. 2008: 599)

Risk – the combination of the probability of an event and its negative consequences: Risk = hazard x vulnerability / capacity (UNISDR, 2009: 25)

Self-efficacy – the judgement or perception of own ability

Vulnerability – represents the physical, economic, political or social susceptibility or predisposition of a community to damage in the case a destabilizing phenomenon of natural or anthropogenic origin (Bankoff G. et al. Mapping Vulnerability 2004: 38) Vulnerability is embedded in complex social relations and processes see The Crunch Model (Wisner B. et al. At Risk) where the progression of vulnerability to disaster is explained – Annex B)

3

Background on Nepal

Nepal was one of the first countries to endorse The Sendai Framework, disaster risk reduction has

been high on the official agenda in Nepal ever since the Nepal Risk Reduction Consortium was

launched with the so-called Flagships program in 2009.

The NRRC and the Flagships bring together GoN, a range of international and national humanitarian

and development partners, financial institutions, private busyness to advocate and coordinate

disaster risk reduction under the five Flagship programs that among others encompass making

schools in Nepal, and major hospitals in Kathmandu earthquake-safe and support the GoN in

developing of capacity within disaster management and in coordination of disaster risk reduction.

In Nepal major earthquakes are historically known to recur every 80-120 years. The big earthquake

in 1934 (of magnitude 8.4) resulted in more than 10,000 deaths in the Kathmandu Valley. Since then

there have been earthquakes causing severe human and physical losses in 1980, 1988 and 2011

(PDNA_Summary 2015). Multiple hazards such as floods, drought, landslides, hailstorms and

wildfires, among others, are recurring events that mostly affect the livelihoods of the poor in Nepal.

Around 25% of the population of 28,120,740 is living below the national poverty line – living on less

than 1.25 US$ a day3. The figure for poverty increases to 45% in the Mid-Western region and 46% in

the Far-Western region (Map of Nepal, Annex C) Almost 80 % of Nepal´s population live in rural areas

on subsistence farming for their livelihood with 70% of households having less than 1 hectare of land

to cultivate, many depend on plots that are too small to meet their subsistence requirements.

Household food insecurity, poor nutrition with are part of the chronic poverty. (Rural Poverty in

Nepal, IFAD)

The earthquake

On Saturday 25 April 2015, at 11:56 local time, a massive 7.8 magnitude earthquake struck Nepal

with its epicenter in the Gorkha District about 78 km northwest of Nepal´s capital Kathmandu. More

than 300 aftershocks greater than magnitude 4.0 followed. On 12 May, another earthquake of 7.3

magnitude struck at 12:50 local time with its epicenter northeast of Kathmandu in the

3 The percentage of the population living below the national poverty line is estimated from the national poverty headcount ratio, where national estimates are based on population-weighted subgroup estimates from household surveys (http://data.worldbank.org/country/nepal).

4

Sindhulpalchowk and Dolakha Districts near Mount Everest. The two earthquakes – in this study

referred to as “the earthquake” – left Nepal with huge losses and damage. 31 of the 75 districts were

affected while 14 districts and the Kathmandu Valley area were declared “crisis-hit”. (OCHA, Nepal

Earthquake 2015) The impact of the earthquake was devastating, more than 8.700 people were

killed, 14.409 were injured, and more than 600.000 homes were destroyed or so damaged that they

are deemed unfit for human habitation (Ibid.). Nepalese newspapers estimate that economic losses

from the earthquake have set back the economy of Nepal by at least a decade, and that the

earthquake and an Indian-supported blockade of cross border transport from India to Nepal (from

October 2015-January 2016) may have pushed up to one million more Nepalese below the poverty

line.

Literature review

Main literature for this study is global history analyses and perspectives of disaster, risk, coping

capacity, vulnerability and the social-cultural and economic history of Nepal: Perspectives of social

inclusion and exclusion in Nepal by Om Gurung et al. At Risk: Second Edition, Natural Hazards,

People´s Vulnerability and Disasters by Ben Wisner et al, Mapping Vulnerability, Disasters,

Development & People by Greg Bankoff et al. The Angry Earth by Anthony Oliver-Smith and Susanna

Hoffmann. Pedagogy of hope, Relieving Pedagogy of the Oppressed by Paolo Freire.

Main literature for qualitative research, methodology, and phenomenological sociology is

Hverdagslivets sociologi by Alfred Schutz, Doing Interviews by Steinar Kvale, and Qualitative Research;

standards, challenges, and guidelines by Kirsti Malterud. Books have been borrowed at the Royal

Library in Copenhagen, bought from publishers in Denmark or on the net like Waterstones

Marketplace and Amazon.com or found on the Internet. Furthermore, academic journals or papers

found on e.g. Researchgate, rex.kb.dk or from the CC4.

Rationale for the study

This study is conducted one year after the earthquake in Nepal to explore how the earthquake has

impacted small and marginalized hill communities, and to learn how local people cope with disaster

and perceive vulnerability and risk in the aftermath of the earthquake. The study also wants to

examine if local people are involved in and participating in recovery and reconstruction. All though

5

it´s not the focus of this study participation and inclusion are seen as determinants for a successful

recovery and rehabilitation, and in the long term to build more resilient communities where disaster

risk reduction is an integrated part of the development.

Aim and objectives

Aim: To explore the coping capacity and perception of risk and danger among marginalized people

in a post-disaster setting in Nepal one year after the earthquake.

Objectives:

1. To explore how marginalized people in a hill community in Nepal cope with earthquake.

2. To analyze how marginalized people in a hill community in Nepal perceive risk, danger and

self-efficacy.

3. Based on the findings to discuss the discourse on vulnerability and coping capacity, and the

dilemmas and challenges that emerge for risk reduction approaches.

Study area and population

Nepal is located between India and China with a total area of 147,181 sq. km. There are three

geographical regions: The flat river plain in the south, the central hill region and the rugged Himalayan

Mountains in the north. The 75 districts of Nepal are divided into District Development Committees

(DDC). The DCCs are further divided into village development committees (VDC) and municipalities,

which make up the lowest level of administrative and government units (A guide to Government in

Nepal, 2012: 58).

6

The VDCs are divided into wards, which are the lowest level of service delivery, e.g. regarding schools

or health posts. The field study for the data collection was conducted in very small hill communities

(wards) in Baguwa and Dhawa, two VDCs situated in the Eastern part of Gorkha District, the fourth

largest district in Nepal.

Map of Nepal

The field visit was conducted Thursday 31 March – Sunday 3 April 2016 in the Western Region of

Nepal, in the VDCs of Baguwa and Dhawa in Gorkha District. (Annex C)

The communities where the study population lives are Pipalthok (ward 6, Dhawa), Chautara

Bhanjyang (ward 3, Dhawa), Baramgaun (ward 7, Baguwa), and Lamachaur (ward 5, Baguwa). The

communities visited have from nine to 29 households.

7

Poverty and subsistence agriculture

81% of the population in the district are dependent on agriculture, which is the main source of

income, and 33.6% of the population in the district live below the poverty line. Around 80% of families

own at least a small piece of land while landless families usually work in the fields of others to earn

money, or they may hire land to grow crops. (District Gender Profile Gorkha, 2016)

Many hill and mountain communities in the District of Gorkha are marginalized people4. In the

Nepalese context, this means that people are poor not only in a socio-economic sense but they are

deliberately kept out of political and societal influence because of their caste and/or ethnicity. E.g. if

they are Dalits (formerly referred to as “untouchables”) or they belong to ethnic/caste population

groups like the Barams, they are inherently marginalized or historically denied access to influence.

(Gurung O. et al, Perspectives on Social inclusion and Exclusion in Nepal, 2014: 1, 21).

In the communities of Baguwa5 and Dhawa6 where the study population for this data collection lives

there is a demographic composition with 90% of the population being Dalits and other marginalized

ethnic/caste groups like the Barams (ECO-Nepal). There are schools in the two VDCs and one police

post in Dhawa, but no health posts or hospitals in the area. Most people here live in Kutcha Houses,

which are houses built of local materials and with outer walls and foundations made of mud-bonded

stones or bricks. They are very susceptible to earthquake damage (Report of immediate assessment,

20: 8) but also affordable for the people to construct because they are made of local materials.

With casualties of 470 deaths and 952 injured (District Gender Profile Gorkha, 2016) and with huge

losses and damages to house structures, Gorkha District was one of the severely affected districts

after the devastating earthquake of 7.8 magnitude struck Nepal on 25 April 2015 at 11:56. This

earthquake had its epicenter in Barpak of Gorkha District. In Gorkha District, the quake affected

almost 90% of the house structures with over 60% of the houses heavily damaged or destroyed.

(District profile of Ghorka, 2015).

4 According to Gurung O. et al, Perspectives on Social inclusion and Exclusion in Nepal, 2014, large sectors of the population in Nepal are inherently marginalized like Dalits, historically denied access to influence like Nepal´s adivasi-janajati also called “indigenous nationalities” or they are not considered full citizens of Nepal like madhesi or people of the Southern plains. 5 Baguwa has 1,965 inhabitants 6 Dhawa has 3,570 inhabitants

8

Demographic profile of Gorkha District

Total Population 271,061 (55.3% female) Population Growth Rate 0.66% Maternal Mortality Rate 190 (per 100,000 live births) Total Fertility Rate 2.5 Female Life Expectancy 69.6 Male Life Expectancy 67.5

Religion

75.14% Hindu, 19.09% Buddhist, 3.26% Christian, 1.12% Muslim, 0.63% Bon (ancient religion of Tibet, also called Bön) (CBS Nepal 2011 and Gorkha Gender profile, UN Women, 2016)

Study design

This study was conducted as a retrospective case study in a post-disaster setting in Nepal at the end

of March/beginning of April 2016, almost one year after the earthquake hit Nepal on 25 April 2015.

The local NGO ECO-Nepal, a partner-organization of the Danish NGO DanChurchAid (Folkekirkens

Nødhjælp), facilitated the field study, which was conducted from 31 March-3 April 2016. ECO-Nepal

was established as an NGO in 2000 and works with awareness and capacity building in disaster risk

reduction, environmental protection and climate change adaption.

Before and after the field visit in Gorkha District interviews were conducted in Kathmandu with the

CEO of the National Reconstruction Authority and with representatives of two Dalit-organizations

and networks. The focus of these interviews was to get background information on the national

perspectives on reconstruction and on how poverty and marginalization is framed in a post-disaster

setting and reconstruction phase in Nepal.

In order to be well prepared for the field study, the researcher went with more partner organizations

of Save the Children and DanChurchAid to visit other small earthquake affected communities in

Lalitpur, and in the districts of Gorkha and Dolakha before the data collection for this study was

conducted.

Qualitative research

This study is based on qualitative research methods and a phenomenological and inductive approach.

The analysis of the data collection has partly been done as “bricolage”, which has given the researcher

9

the possibility of having free interplay of techniques during the analysis of the data collection, also

described as “an eclectic form of generating meaning” (Kvale S., Doing interviews 2007: 115). Modes

of analysis of the data collection have been to focus on meaning, meaning condensation, and

meaning interpretation (ibid, 104). Among analytical tools have been coding and categorizing into a

more systematic structure, based on guidelines in the coding manual from Saldana J, (The Coding

Manual for Qualitative Researcher Sage Publications, 2009: 1-20 Introduction to Codes and Coding).

The analysis process has been a continuous circular process extracting themes from categories and

codes, unfolding the themes by rereading and reinterpreting the raw data collection – to

decontextualize and re-contextualize bits from the data collection in order to be able to study

patterns and unique features. Then to reorganize, compare and validate different interpretations

(Malterud, K. Qualitative research: standards, challenges and guidelines, 486-487) to be able to

extract findings as themes and subthemes.

Reflexivity and ethical considerations

The researcher sees herself as an explorer not only during the data collection in Nepal but also in the

whole process of doing the Master Thesis and not least the analysis. Metaphorically as “a traveler on

a journey to a distant country” (Kvale S. Doing interviews 2007: 19) with “a researcher’s backpack”

filled with her own personal and professional experiences and previous beliefs of what things are and

what needs to be investigated – what´s it all about. (Malterud, K. Qualitative research: standards,

challenges and guidelines, 483-484). Finding these expressions very much in accordance with the

researcher´s own lived world and life experiences she has had a thorough commitment to reflexivity

during all steps of the research and in the analysis process regarding own preconceptions and bias

(ibid). This will be accounted for in the theoretical framework and in the description of limitations

and challenges e.g. with bi-lingual research.

Consent and confidentiality

A statement of consent and confidentiality was presented orally when introducing the researcher

and the purpose of the interview before every interview in the hill communities in Nepal. The advice

from the facilitating NGO ECO-Nepal was not to bring a statement of consent in print for practical

and courtesy reasons, as all the interviewees were illiterate in Nepali, their main language, and in

English.

10

In order to respect and not bring the interviewees in an awkward position when asking for their

names and noting these in the researcher´s notebook, the translator would agree every time with

the individual interviewee to help write the names, location and other family names in the notebook

in English. Every interviewee (and wife/other companion) has agreed to the interview and was

guaranteed full anonymity when the research is published. All interviewees have given consent orally

and with accepting nods in the Nepalese way – shaking the head from side to side.

Data collection and method

The researcher has chosen to use qualitative research and a phenomenological approach to analyze

the data collection to be able to describe the experiences of more individuals of a phenomenon –

e.g. how is the perception of risk or danger, or how was the experience of the earthquake. Before

the field study, an interview guide was made and split in two with the research questions as the

overall thematic questions guiding the interview (Kvale S. Doing interviews 2007: 37-45).

The interview guide (Annex D) was formulated as semi-structured and exploratory questions (open-

ended) to let the interviewees be able to describe their experiences, self-understanding and

perspectives in their lived world. This method also allowed to improve the questions continually

during the interview and to set the stage with the researcher seeking knowledge and learning from

the interviewees and thus create space for digressions and follow up questions (Kvale S. Doing

interviews 2007: 50-66). Part of the interviews were conducted as narrative interviews that focus on

the stories the key informant tells about specific events or actions that are essential for the life story

as a narrative. (ibid, 72-74) Each interview would take 1½-2 hours, and the field trip lasted 4 days

with 2-3 interviews a day. Participants in the field trip were the researcher, the driver and the

translator. ECO-Nepal´s program officer had briefed the researcher and the translator before the field

trip.

Selection of key informants

Nine key informants, six men and three women, aged from 27 to 73 years, were interviewed. They

were randomly selected in the sense that there was no prior agreement with anyone in the locations

when the study group arrived. In two of the communities of Dhawa and Baguwa where the interviews

were conducted, a local social promoter accompanied the researcher and the translator. The group

11

would walk through the community, passing house by house and greeting people, then ask to talk

with the head of the household as local culture prescribes. The social promoter would then ask if the

head of the household or a representative of the family would have time to spend and felt like being

interviewed.

All interviews were conducted as face-to-face interviews sitting outside close to or inside the house

of the interviewees. No electronic devises were used for the interviews from several reasons;

Due to the bilingual interview situation – accounted for in the discussion chapter - with a

translator translating questions and responses from English to Nepali and vice versa in

sequences, the researcher preferred to use this situation with “small pockets of time” to use

only hand written note format, which gave the opportunity to be more observant during the

interviews as well

The researcher´s experiences from previous interview situations in hill communities in Nepal

where electronic devices were used for interviews was that it is easier to establish a trustful

ambiance and a more direct face-to-face dialogue in the interview situation without such

devices.

There would only be very limited or no access to electricity to recharge electronic devices

during the 4 days of field visit.

Gender perspectives

Because of the above-mentioned partly random selection of key informants, and because men are

traditionally seen as the head of the household, it would be men who would volunteer for an

interview when we asked. Having this in mind, also from previous research, the researcher would ask

specifically for the possibility to meet female interviewees, so three of the nine key informants are

female. The female key informants are women whose husbands, for different reasons, were not

present: Khalma is a 70 years old grandmother whose husband migrated to India to work 20 years

ago and never came back. Parbibi is a 27 years old woman whose husband migrated to Saudi Arabia

to seek work two months ago. Bimpara is a 36 years old woman whose husband was out ploughing

the fields when we came by and asked for an interview.

Although not having equal gender representation may be seen as a limitation for the data collection

in the study, it does not mean that there are no female voices or perspectives represented in the

12

case study. Four of the male key informants are accompanied by their wives during the whole or part

of the interview; the daughter-in-law accompanies one, while one male key informant is alone during

the interview. At certain times during the interview, the wife would correct or help the memory of

the male key informant and thus make it a richer narrative. Therefore, the researcher has included

the companions´ statements and comments as part of the data collection where relevant. (Example

of interview with Babim, key informant 6 Annex E)

Potential bias

Potential bias can be that the researcher has previously worked for 14 years as a press and

communication officer at DanChurchAid´s (DCA) headquarters in Copenhagen. However, nobody has

tried to influence the research, the interview-guide or the field study that has been made

independently from organizational interests except that the locations visited were selected by ECO-

Nepal. The study was facilitated through DCA´s office in Kathmandu for the logistic parts and for

connecting to ECO-Nepals office in Gorkha City.

Theoretical framework

The researcher has chosen a phenomenological approach as the overall theoretical framework for

this study. From a phenomenological perspective, it is the importance of the “live-world” and the

everyday “being in the world” that is essential. (Overgaard S., Zahawi D. Phenomenological Sociology,

the Subjectivity of Everyday Life, 2008: 1, 6). Among the key concepts that are unfolded from the

data collection analysis in this study, are concepts of people´s lived world, their lived experiences

from everyday life, from disaster, and their individual perception of risk and dangers, of self-efficacy

and of power structures.

The researcher finds that phenomenology as a grounded philosophy of existence7 and as a method

of describing or meeting “the thing in itself” – ergo the phenomenon – is well suited to explore and

understand how people construct meaning of their lives, how we experience the world and perceive

7 The German philosopher Edmund Husserl, 1859-1938, was the founder of the transcendental phenomenology. A new research method that would investigate “the things in itself” – the phenomenon (from Greek; fainomena) – in the different stages of consciousness, e.g. experiencing, thinking, dreaming.., his hope was that Philosophy would be considered as “hard core” science.

13

phenomena8 differently. Furthermore, it is essential to have a perspective on how people interact

and engage in social relations, in a community, and how they perceive the social structures of their

world.

Therefore, the main inspiration for the theoretical framework of this analysis stems from

phenomenological sociology from Hverdagslivets sociologi9 by Alfred Schutz10 (the book is hereafter

referred to as Schutz A. 2005: …) and his theories on the constitution and construction of social

meaning, the understanding of common sense, and the life-world. E.g., how we perceive, experience

and understand in accordance with normal and typical structures and patterns in everyday life “take

the world for granted”, and how these structures and models prescribe what we should do in a

particular situation – as how we act in disaster – or how to construct meaning after a disaster. We

communicate with others in everyday life in such a way that they respond meaningfully and we act

towards things and change them in a way that is predictable by experience (Schutz A. 2005: 108-111)

(Knoblauch H. Metaphors, Transcendence and Indirect Communication, 1999: 7-8).

Schutz also speaks about our life as “finite provinces of meaning” – understood as multiple realities

where e.g. our dreams when we sleep constitute one province of meaning as do our imagination,

expectations or religious beliefs, but it is our everyday life and work life that constitute the essential

province of meaning – the archetype of our life-world. It is the meaning of our experiences that

constitutes realities and not the ontological structures of the objects that constitute realities. (Schutz

A. 2005: 108-111) (Knoblauch H. Metaphors, Transcendence and Indirect Communication, 1999: 7-

8). Within this theoretical framework it is also interesting to understand knowledge, assumptions and

expectations as social constructions where the socialization of human knowledge is understood as a

social genesis and as socially distributed (Schutz A.2005: 27-37) (Phenomenological Sociology, the

Subjectivity of Everyday Life, 2009: 14). Knowledge as a social genesis means that it is built knowledge

8 The plural form ´phenomena´ is used here for phenomenological language reasons as, in this paper, phenomena are understood as facts, events or perceptions that are of scientific interest and susceptible to scientific explanation or description. (merriam-webster.com/dictionary). 9 The book Hverdagslivets sociologi by Alfred Schutz was published in Danish in 2005 by Hans Reitzels Forlag, translated from English from Alfred Schutz´ “Collected Works” (Volume 1, 1972). 10 Alfred Schutz (original surname Schütz) was born in Vienna 1899-1959. Schutz is considered among the key figures in phenomenological sociology. Schutz was inspired by Max Weber´s interpretive sociology and Husserl´s phenomenological methodology, which he combined with Henri Bergson´s concepts of consciousness and cosmic time (Hverdagslivets sociologi, 8).

14

or experience transmitted from others; we have learned it from others, from grandparents, teachers,

friends, parents, and they have learned it again from their predecessors and so on.

The social distribution of knowledge means we all know something about certain things, and we all

know less or very little about other things, but most of us have sufficient knowledge to come by and

cope with every-day life – a knowledge which the researcher feels free to describe in plainer words

as “socially inherited knowledge”. E.g. A farmer in the hill community in Nepal who cannot read or

write knows how to climb the steep hills when she or he has to plough the field or carry water or

rocks. The researcher who can read and write does not know how to climb the same steep hills in

Nepal or how to carry bricks or water but knows how to fill gasoline on a car.

In this paper, the researcher seeks throughout the process of analysis “to bracket” her preconception

or preunderstanding. Within the universe of Husserl and Schutz this is described as exercising

“epoché” or suspending our common sense as a scientific method (Schutz A. 2005: 9) in order to

observe the social world, and then through reflexivity to give a neutral description of what we have

experienced as researchers. The researcher finds this approach a highly valued analytical ideal to

pursue. But the researcher finds the description by Kirsti Malterud more apt and all-embracing for

the analytical process of this paper: “A researcher´s background and position will affect what they

choose to investigate, the angle of investigation, the methods judged most adequate for the purpose,

the findings considered most appropriate, and the framing and communication of conclusions.”

(Malterud K. Qualitative Research: standards, challenges and guidelines, 2001: 484).

Profiles of key informants and their families

Names are pseudonyms in order to respect the ethical guidelines about anonymity to private persons

interviewed for this data collection.

Mithbi is 52 years old (key informant 1) – according to his birth certificate. He says that his parents

got it wrong so actually he is only 48 years old. He is married to Maku who is 47 years old. The couple

has two sons and one daughter: 27, 22 and 26 years old. Oldest son is married and lives far away

(migrated), youngest son is studying in Kathmandu, the daughter is married and lives in Kathmandu.

He is a skilled copper smith and makes pots for water and wine containers. His family lives from his

skills and from subsistence agriculture.

15

They grow corn, rice and millets, and have some goats. The couple can provide food for the family

for three months from what they grow but they have to buy food for the rest of the year. Mithbi was

born and bred in Pipalthok (Dhawa, 6 Ward), his wife comes from a neighboring community. He says

with a smile that it was an arranged marriage when he and his wife married more than 27 years ago,

but that he himself went to ask for her hand.

Parbibi is 27 years old (key informant 2) Her husband is 39 years old and migrated to Saudi Arabia two

months ago to seek work. They have borrowed 100,000 Rupees from the neighbors in order to send

him to work abroad for two years. All members of the family are working to grow small pieces of

land with millet and maize, and they have some goats and two cows. Parbibi lives with her mother-

in-law, one sister-in-law and the husband and their children in the house in Pipalthok (Dhawa, 6

Ward) where Parbibis husband was born and bred.

Parbibi has given birth three times but all children were stillborn. She was pregnant six months when

the earthquake came, and her third child was stillborn. She feels a lot of distress, because her

husband is gone, she can´t get children, and her mother-in-law wants Parbibi´s husband to marry

another woman.

Bimpara is 36 years old (key informant 3) Bimpara is married and her husband is 40 years old. He was

born and bred in Piptaltok (Dhawa, 6 Ward). Bimpara comes from another community nearby. Her

husband is out working in the field, but he is still ill after a surgery, he has stomach problems. She has

given birth to five children, but one child passed away. The four children are a 16 years old daughter,

a son of 14, a daughter of five and one of three years old. Bimpara is very worried about the youngest

daughter´s condition after the earthquake. She fears that she has mental problems, because she

faints a lot and “looks dead sometimes”.

Bimpara wants to have an operation so she can´t get pregnant again, but she cannot afford to miss

labor in the fields, as long as her husband is ill. They do not own land but provide labor in the fields

for others in the community and grow some crops on the land of other people which can provide

food for the family for three months, the rest of the year they have to buy food.

16

Thadur is 60 years old (key informant 4) lives in Chautara Bhanjyang (Dhawa, 3 Ward). He is married

to Chapa and they are six family members living in the house. The couple has two daughters 40 and

35 years old, and two sons 30 and 25 years old. The eldest son has married cross-caste and lives with

his wife in Kathmandu. The youngest son lives with his wife and one child in the house. The oldest

daughter also lives in their house. Since she was 15 years old she has been partly paralyzed after she

was caught in a forest fire. When the incident happened Thadur was working in India, so his wife

could only bring the girl to hospital two days later where she was treated for her burn wounds and

the family spent 100,000 Rupees for treatment, they say it did not help her. The family has very little

land, they live from subsistence agriculture, and they all provide labor for other people in the

community, Thadur also sews clothes for other people. “We are a Dalit community, and I tailor, that´s

what we Dalits do.”

Premai is 73 years old (key informant 5) lives in Chautara Bhanjyang (Dhawa, 3 Ward). His wife Kauda

is 70 years old, and they are ten people living in the same house: Four grandchildren, two sons and

their wives. Another two sons live separately. Premai was born and bred in the community, he is a

tailor, and his wife is from another community nearby. The family live from subsistence agriculture,

they grow millet and maize they have goats, two buffaloes and hens. Kauda takes care of the cattle

and the hen. The couple have some pieces of land down the hill slopes, but it is no good soil because

it is dry and they do not have access to irrigation. Earlier Kauda fetched the drinking water, but she

says she is too weak for that now, so Premai does it.

Babim is 57 years old (key informant 6) He was born and bred in Baramgaun (Baguwa, 7 Ward), and

his wife Mayda is probably around 45 years old, she is not sure, she says. She comes from another

community around four hours walk from here. The couple has been married for 32 years and have

two sons living in Kathmandu, probably around 18 and 22 years old, they are not quite sure of the

age of the sons. They have a 30 years old daughter, married and not living here, another daughter

has migrated to Korea for work. One of the sons has also been working in Dubai. The remittances

made it possible to build the house, which was reduced to rubble by the earthquake. They do not

have the money to build a new house and have to wait for the government to provide money and

support for reconstruction: “There is very little money in Nepal but we have a lot of hopes and

wishes…(smiles). ..My hope is just to make a new house, a big house that shall not be destroyed by

earthquakes.”

17

Khalma is 70 years old (key informant 7) She lives in Baramgaun (Baguwa, 7 Ward). She was born and

bred in the community. Her parents came from the mountains to settle here many years ago. She

lives with her son, her daughter in law and the four grandchildren.

Her deepest sorrow is that she does not know the destiny of her husband and she wipes away the

tears in her eyes when talking. The family lives from subsistence agriculture and has small pieces of

land where they grow maize, millet and potatoes – the potatoes only grow good if there is enough

rain. Her son has been working in India, but is now back in Nepal and works occasionally as a mason.

Khababu is 53 years old (key informant 8) He lives in Lamachaur (Baguwa, 5 Ward) where he was born

and bred. He lives with his son and his daughter-in-law and their baby who is 11 months old. His wife

is out working in the field. The family lives from farming and has some pieces of land and some goats.

They labor for other people ploughing the fields because they also have a buffalo. They grow maize,

millet and have some rice paddies. The family can grow enough crops to provide food for the family

all year round. The temporary shelter the family lives in stands on the edge of a steep slope on

government land. Khababu´s house lies in piles of mud and stones. The family does not have the

money for reconstruction.

Sukoti is 70 years old (key informant 9) He has lived in Lamachaur (Baguwa, 5 Ward) 25 years, and is

from the neighboring village. His wife Bidati is from another community three hours walk from here.

Bidati is probably 65 years old. She does not know exactly, and she leaves us during the interview,

she has to go working. The couple has four sons and one daughter. Youngest son is working in India,

the daughter lives in Kathmandu. Sukoti and Bidati live together with the three sons, two daughters-

in-law and six grandchildren.

The family has small pieces of land and live from subsistence agriculture, but has to buy most food

from the shop. Sukoti and his wife work as porters; they carry bricks from one place to another,

collect some firewood, carry stones, cement, or they go for work in a house. He is paid more than the

double of what his wife is although they carry the same amount of wood or bricks. “It´s tradition

here” he says when asked why.

18

Findings

The findings from the research and analysis of the data collection from the field visit are presented

as main themes with subthemes and narrative descriptions of common patterns or unique features

for the key informants or for a group of them. A description of the living conditions in the field study

area is supported by some of the narratives from the key informants in order to frame the themes

and findings and to offer the reader a deeper insight in the general living conditions of the study

population in the small hill communities visited in Dhawa and Baguwa.

Living conditions, livelihood and losses in the hill communities

The communities visited in Baguwa and Dhawa are located in the hilly areas of Gorkha District at an

altitude of 400-1,000 metres. Although, on the map, Baguwa and Dhawa are located only 20 km and

40 kilometer from Gorkha City, they belong to some of the remoter parts of Gorkha District because

of very bad infrastructure with small dirt or sand roads that sometimes change to mere tracks made

of rocks and sand on the hillside. Further up the hills and in the mountain region stretching towards

the border to China/Tibet, communities can only be reached by foot or by helicopter.

The study population are Dalits11 and Barams12, who belong to some of the marginalized hill

communities in this part of Nepal. In the study area, most houses are built of local materials with

walls and foundation of mud-bound stone or bricks and wood. The families who have cattle or goats

have a shed built close to the house, made of wooden beams and a roof of branches or corrugated

sheet, a weaved basket will serve as the hen house.

All the key informants and their families had lost their homes and essential parts of their livelihood

because of the impact of the earthquake in April last year. E.g., one family lost two goats, others tell

that the scarce water resources were impacted by the earthquake so they could not grow their crops

11 Dalits represent 19% of the population in Gorkha District (Gorkha Gender Profile, 2015). At a national level, Dalits may comprise from 20-25% of the population, even though the official estimate puts this figure at only 15%. (Rights within Reach, 2010). 12 According to the Central Bureau of Statistics, 2001 the total population of the Barams in Nepal is nearly 7,400, most of them living in Gorkha and Tanahun Districts. Barams are among the smallest ethnic populations in Nepal and constitute 0.01% of the total population. Their language belongs to the Tibeto-Burman family of languages. The popular myth of origin connects them with Sunuwars, Surel, Jirel and Limbus, other indigenous nationalities of Eastern Nepal. (NCARD, National Coalition against Racial Discrimination)

19

on the fields. “..The seeds of the rice paddy dried up, because there was no water for irrigation. No

food to eat, there were not any sources of food…” (Bimpara, key informant 3).

The families of the key informants had no human losses or serious injuries, however some of the

women tell about mental shocks or distress that the earthquake and the following aftershocks have

generated, that they feel nervous, weak or irritated. ”Now I´m afraid when things happen, when

things fall down. I got shocked in the earthquake,” Bimpara (key informant 3) recalls.

The families visited were all living in temporary shelters built as semi-structures of houses of mud-

bound stone and corrugated iron or plastic sheets as roof or walls. They are all subsistence farmers,

some of them landless and others who own small pieces of land scattered down the steep hill slopes

where they grow millet, maize, and a few of them also potatoes and rice. Only one out of the nine

families is able to provide food for the family for the whole year from their farming. The rest can only

provide food for the family for three months from their agricultural activities. All family members

work in the fields when necessary, and most of them provide income from other kinds of work like

tailoring, carrying, forging or masonry, or they provide labor in the fields of others.

Migration as a coping mechanism for poor people - before and after disaster

Although this research and findings are not generalizable for a population at large, there is one

common pattern in the data collection that is a general trend at a district as well as a national level

in Nepal: Outward migration is a coping mechanism to create better livelihood both before and after

disaster. There is a strong tradition for outward migration of young males in Gorkha District (District

profil of Gorkha, 2016) which is also, why the demographic gender profile shows that there are

24,744 female-headed households (37.2%) out of the 66,506 households in the district. (Gorkha

Gender profile, UN Women, 2016). External migration to find work is an important livelihood strategy

in Nepal as such; 32% of all households in Nepal would have one or more family-members working

abroad in 2011. (Note on Migration and Remittances, 2015)

For decades, migration has been a coping mechanism for poor families in Nepal to improve livelihood

and cope with the lean season when scarcity of food can be overcome through remittances13 from

13 Remittances – is the money that migrant worker send home. In Nepal, the official flow of remittances count for an estimated 30% of the GDP. According to the GoN the poverty incidence would increase from 19% to 35% if remittances stopped. (Note on Migration and Remittances, 2015)

20

family-members sent abroad to work. Of the nine key informants, six have one or more family

members who have migrated abroad to find work to support the family and several of the male key

informants have been migrant workers in India when they were younger. The husband of 27 years

old, Parbibi (key informant 2) left two months ago to Saudi Arabia where he is looking for work.

Parbibi hopes that he will find some work soon, because they have taken out a loan: “There is a big

loan that we have from the neighbors…14120,000 Rupees we have to pay back, that is the amount of

money we have borrowed from neighbors to send him to Saudi Arabia.”

One family has a son who worked in Dubai and a daughter still working in Korea. The remittances

helped the family build their house which was destroyed by the earthquake. Although a well-known

coping mechanism, migration is also a forced necessity because of poverty and marginalization.

Especially the women become more vulnerable. 70 years old Khalma (key informant 7), whose

husband went to India 20 years ago and never returned, is in a state of chronic grief because she

does not know if he is dead or alive. She says several times during the interview that she wishes she

were dead. Parbibi (key informant 2) whose husband left two months ago for Saudi Arabia tells that

she feels disempowered because she is left alone: “This little room belongs to me. I have my mother-

in-law at this side (points at one wall) and I have my sister-in-law at the other side (points at the

opposite wall). I decide nothing and I must wait until my husband comes home again after two years.

I feel it´s a very difficult situation for me...no one is here to help me.”

Strong coping capacity after disaster

The expression that survivors or local people are the first responders in disaster can be taken for

granted in the small hill communities where this data collection has been conducted. The research

shows that community members, neighbors, friends who happened to be visiting e.g. from the

capital, and family members were acting and coping during and in the aftermath of the earthquake.

They acted to save their lives and adapted their strategies to deal with the destruction and losses.

Every one of the key informants tells how they worried about their closest family and their destiny

during the earthquake. How they all acted to save somebody else´s life: their wife, mother-in-law,

children or other close family members, from the collapsing houses and from death. Khababu (key

informant 8), who was out grazing his cows, sitting under a tree, tells about his reactions when the

14 120,000 NPR is equal to 1,112 US$

21

earth started shaking: ” I heard people screaming, I saw dust flying up in the sky, I ran back to see if

everybody were o.k.…I ran, and I felt the earth shake. God helped us, the house was collapsing

downward the hills (he points down the slope where we are sitting at the edge...) But nobody were

inside the house…I won´t tell lies, nothing happened to my family.” (Key informant 8)

Collaboration in the community

In Khababu´s case, they were eight households that stayed together in an empty building for a poultry

farm down the hills. They stayed there 8-9 days and then they helped each other to make shelter:

“After these days we started to make a temporary shelter for each of the families, everybody helped.”

(Key informant 8). More key informants describe how they collaborated after the earthquake and

helped each other make temporary shelter, get food or things out of the rubble of mud and stones

where their houses had collapsed, or they exchanged labor for support. Like Bimpara (key informant

3) who does not own any land and whose husband is ill from a surgery. She tells that the neighbors

helped her and her husband to rebuild the walls with “tinplates” (corrugated sheets), and in return

she ploughed their fields with oxen.

The descriptions that the key informants unfold in their answers in this data collection tell that they

themselves are the first and foremost responders to disaster; they know how to respond and

collaborate after disaster.

“Yes, Nepal is a poor country, and we are helped by the international community, and we are also

helping amongst us…helping each other too (proud voice) yes, indeed we are...We have cooperation

and mutual understanding between members of the community, neighbors as well,” explains Mithbi

(Key informant 1). He explains his perception of the community: “One cannot stand without the

support from others. A house is made of both stones and mud - the two are intertwined and cannot

been seen separately, no one can be left alone…” (Waves his hand and points to his house).

From a phenomenological perspective, this can be described as the intersubjectivity – or how a

community of “we” is constituted, and how we as subjects perceive, understand and experience

other subjects around us. (Schutz A.: 80). Learnt through transmitted knowledge from ancestors and

from their own experiences from their life-world, people act and cope to construct meaning, and

they support each other in a situation where help or aid seems very far away. They know that they

can count on “the social reality” in the community, that it is reliable and that their neighbors

22

experience and comprehend the same reality. (Overgaard S. Zahawi D. Phenomenological Sociology,

the Subjectivity of Everyday Life, 2008: 13) They also know they cannot rely on assistance from the

government and they are used to coping with multi-dimensions of risks in everyday life and to

developing coping strategies for survival through experiences and calculated actions and risks. Like

Parbibi´s family (key informant 2) who has borrowed 100,000 Rupees from their neighbors to be able

to send her husband to Saudi Arabia for two years to work. This is a coping strategy with a calculated

risk for all involved; Parbibi, who is left by herself and feels very vulnerable; the neighbors that have

lent the money; Parbibi´s family that has to pay back the money to the neighbors, and the husband

who has left his wife and family and does not know if he will be able to find work in Saudi Arabia.

Perception of risk is strongly rooted in everyday life and in work life

All of Nepal is a high-hazard earthquake zone. Most territory of the country is an active seismic zone,

experiencing low-level tremors on a regular basis although people often do not perceive them. (IFRC,

Nepal Case study, 2011; 20-21). Disaster Risk Reduction has been high on the agenda in Nepal since

2009 when the Government of Nepal (GoN) launched the Nepal Risk Reduction Consortium (NRCC)

with the support from the UN. At least it has been high on the agenda at a central governmental level

and among INGOs working in urbanized and hazard-prone areas in Nepal.

This research shows that earthquake risk or disaster preparedness has not been an issue or discussed,

not even perceived as an essential risk or danger among the study population in Baguwa and Dhawa.

Only one or two of the key informants describe earthquake as something they fear, but they do not

relate earthquake to “risk” or “danger”, which the following extract from the interview with Parbibi

(key informant 2) illustrates. Parbibi has just described how she reacted when the earthquake came;

she ran out of the house with one child under each arm, everything was destroyed, and she got so

frightened: “I was thinking, now we will die, I will not live anymore, but at least we will die together

with our family…my relatives (laughs out loudly and smiles)…”

(Q) How do you perceive – or understand risk – or danger? Can you describe what you are afraid of?

“I felt the earthquake, so this frightens me very much. In the days after the earthquake, when we were

under the tarpaulins, I felt the shaking in my body. I have never experienced such a thing …and we

have never discussed the risk of an earthquake. I still fear that an earthquake may come back.”

23

(Q) Can you describe what risk or danger means to you? “I do not know anything about dangers or

risks”. (Parbibi, key informant 2)

However, all key informants relate risk or danger to something they can comprehend from their own

life-world – phenomena they perceive in every-day life and work where risk and danger is an integral

part of their life-world. Their practical “know-how” is to understand and deal with their reality that

they are familiar with and have previous experiences with – both by their own experience and as

experience transmitted by others, what we call socially distributed knowledge. (Schutz, A.; 27-30)

Like Parbibi (key informant 2) who provides labor for others in the community, e.g. by working in

their fields. The fields are situated in steep hill slopes constructed as small terraces and only

connected by narrow tracks: “I feel fear when it storms, and when I have to go down the steep slopes

to grow the land, I feel at risk when I go there and I might slip, and then my legs are shaking, because

I get afraid.” If Parbibi falls down the slope and e.g. breaks her leg, she knows that it will cost her

dearly. She cannot afford to be ill or to go to hospital, which is far away. Still less, she can afford to

be a burden to her mother-in-law, who wants her son to marry some other woman, because Parbibi

has given birth to three stillborn babies.

Some key informants mention that they have experience with and/or are afraid of hazardous weather

conditions and the built environment in the mountains and the hills like landslides, droughts and

forest fires. E.g. 60 years old Thadur (key informant 4) says that he sees hailstorms, thunder and the

big trees close to his house as dangerous “..if they fall, lots of risks.”

Perception of danger or risk is founded in cultural and religious beliefs

Religious and cultural beliefs are very deeply rooted in Nepal, which has a stunning ethnic and

religious diversity stemming from historical flows through centuries of migration into the country.

Perception of danger and risk also seems deeply founded in religious and cultural beliefs or what

from a phenomenological aspect can also be described as a social genesis – a knowledge that has

been transmitted through generations (Schutz, A.: 35) as “inherited experience and knowledge” from

ancestors. Mithbi (key informant 1) who declares himself a devoted Christian, states that he perceives

the earthquake as an act of God: “It was all by the creator. God was directing, everything he wished

for will happen, although the scientist have explained about the tectonic plates and lava eruptions

inside…, but it happened because of God.”

24

Three of the key informants (6, 7 and 8) who belong to the ethnic population of Barams15 very

explicitly express fear of wild animals. When asked how he perceives or understands risk or danger

57 years old Babim (key informant 6) explains: “The dangers and risks are from wild animals, tiger

and bear.” He corrects it when asked if there are bears here. “No, no, not bears, not tiger, but

leopards. Yes, we can find them up in the hills here, if not, they will find us, I have seen a leopard

around 20 meters from my person…Dangers here are wild animals and snakes we can see too. They

are not poisonous but we are afraid of them…”

Khababu (key informant 8) answers very briefly when he is asked to describe if there is anything he

is afraid of: “Tiger and storms.” He expresses fear of attack from tiger, when he is out grazing the

cattle in the forest or collecting firewood. Once he saw a tiger in the jungle when he was there to

collect grass. 70 years old Khalma (key informant 7), who is also a Baram, tells she is frightened of

ghosts at the small river-streams where the women collect water. “I am frightened if ghosts may

attack me and I may die before my time is. The ghosts come from the small river-streams, like the

rainbow that comes from the river-streams, the ghosts come from there.”

(Q) Why is it? “If one´s shadow is walking light the ghosts may attack us more…I know that one day I

shall die, but I rather die where the God of death will take me with – rather than the ghosts take me

before.”

The key informants perceive risk and dangers as an integral part of their everyday life and work in a

rough environment. It´s dangers that can physically harm them like a lightening when out working in

the fields, or wild animals that can attack them when grazing the goats or collecting wood in the

forest. It also can be the ghosts at the small river-streams where the women daily collect water

climbing down the steep slopes that can mean death to one.

An earthquake that happened one year ago and maybe will happen again in 20, 50 or 100 years seems

to be an intangible phenomenon - it´s not perceived as a present threat, danger, or something seen

as a relevant risk in their everyday life-world or daily work life.

15 The Barams still have their own original culture and they are animists or worshippers of nature although influenced by Hindu religion and culture. (NCARD, the National Coalition against Racial Discrimination in Nepal).

25

Unequal power structures affect self-efficacy

Despite of the strong coping capacity and strategies that the key informants display when asked

about the earthquake and how they come along in every-day life, almost all of them express feelings

of despair, distress, distrust, and of being left alone by central government. They have all lost essential

part of their well-known life-world when the earthquake destroyed their homes last year. They still

live in temporary shelters, and they don´t get any information about, when they will be able to

reconstruct their homes, and who will support them in this. They all refer to rumors or hearsay

regarding the support from government to reconstruct after the earthquake. None of them know

about the 16National Reconstruction Authority (NRA), the central authority established by GoN. NRA

is responsible for a reconstruction plan and for channeling international funding and money to the

earthquake affected districts in Nepal. “I don´t know who will help. I think foreigners will help…People

say foreigners...” (Khalma, key informant 7).

More of the key informants mention “foreigners” as from where help can be expected when talking

about reconstruction. Some of the key informants do not relate at all to the word “reconstruction.”

It seems as it´s not part of their life-world where they already have constituted meaning by building

temporary shelters that function as their home although these are much smaller and more primitive

build from wood, corrugated iron, plastic tarpaulins and stones. Mithbi (key informant 1) explains

when asked to tell how he understands reconstruction: “I see it as a thing that must be finished”.

The key informants seem like strung between different worlds: From the phenomenological aspect

they are strung in the world within reach (here and now) in the world within restorable reach (the

past) and the world within retainable reach (the future) (Schutz A., 2005: 101-104) (Psychology,

phenomenology and Chinese Philosophy, 1994: 80).

Lack of communication and information - a lot of rumors and hearsay

Most of the families in the small hill communities where the data collection was done waited from 3-

4 days up to several weeks before some kind of humanitarian aid like food items, tarpaulins and

16 NRA was established at a central level in December 2015 after six months with internal political struggle and disagreement in the GoN and Congress about electing a CEO for the NRA. In April 2016 the GoN begun the process of distributing 200,000 Nepali rupees ($1,900) to construct houses but the money has yet to reach the majority of affected people. Due to the lack of clear government policies on rebuilding the houses, even the people who can afford to rebuild have not started the process yet according to Nepalese newspaper reports in July 2016.

26

blankets was distributed in their community. None of the key informants knew what kind of

humanitarian organization distributed relief items in their community. However, all the key

informants tell that their families did receive money from the winterization program for earthquake

victims who had lost their homes. They all received 15,000 Rupees to build a temporary shelter and

10,000 Rupees for clothes before the winter season, some of them do not know from where they

received this help – maybe from the local VDC, or Nepalese organizations, or “from government.”

Thadur (key informant 4), whose wife Chapa is accompanying him during the interview, tells about

what happened after the earthquake: “After 20 days, I think it was after…some came with some

mattresses, blankets and some food, I can only remember that it may be from Save the Children

(Chapa: “some foreigners it was”). They were not asked what kind of help they might need in his

community, although they do have a system of communication among the small hill communities, as

Thadur explains: “It´s a Sarki – a caller or a messenger, a Katuwal17. He goes up to a hill top and shouts

out several times, also when there is relief aid to the community, or when we shall have community

discussions…not only these nine households, but also in the two neighboring wards, sometimes we

gather 2-400 people for a meeting”.

This research shows that the key informant and their families feel left in liminality18 – they are in a

prolonged transitional phase of great uncertainty. Their perception is that there is no one there (from

the outside of the community) to support them or include them in decisions or information on how

to rebuild their lives - which essentially means their homes. “I know nothing; I hear a lot of rumors. I

have heard we have to make our houses according to guidelines government will give us, and

government will give some amount, and if we do not follow the design from government, government

will not provide the full amount.” (Premai, key informant 5)

From their experiences in their life-world from which they have constructed their reality – or their

“province of meaning” (Schutz A.: 108) – they know that government is far away and outside of their

life-world, and for that sake they know that they are not counted as part of the government´s social

world. Illustrated by the answer from Mithi (key informant 1) when asked about his hope for the

17 Kathuwal is a Dalit surname and a Dalit caste-based occupation, Kathuwal is a Government´s messenger to inform community people by playing Dhol, a traditional drum. (Caste-based discrimination in Nepal, Working Paper Series, Volume 3, 2009) 18 Liminality from the Latin word ´limen´ which means ´the threshold´

27

future: “I expect pension from the government. But the government does not listen to our voices –

they turn the deaf ear on us…We are marginalized people”.

Hope for the future is to have a new home

The level of self-efficacy among the key informants seems very high regarding both their coping

abilities, collaboration and how they perceive, understand and experience other subjects around

them. How they construct a community of “we” (Schutz A.: 80) when coping with disaster. They are

also very clear in their perception of self-efficacy – their judgement of own capacity regarding building

a new home on their own, like Khabubu (key informant 8): “I wish I would have a good home, I have

no more wishes. I wish I would have it, but I can only make a cow shed myself, I can´t construct a new

house myself.”

They know they lack money and skills in construction work, and that they are dependent of support

from “others” from outside their community. However, they seem engaged in an ongoing process

of making sense of their world – with their close family and within the community. “We have no way;

we have to wait and see…so. We don´t have money for reconstruction, we just have to keep our heads

up – people say they will provide,” says Parbibi (key informant 2).

Parbibi uses the expression “they” as do the other key informants when referring to the GoN. This is

how the key informants perceive the unequal power structures and the distance between their social

world and the central government both physically, mentally and metaphorically. Constituting a “we”

as a group or community also means constituting a “they” – something or somebody who is a third

party and outside of their common sense world (Schutz A.: 37-38) – or what we can call the known

social structured world of the key informants. All key informants express very strong hopes for the

future when talking about building a new home – a new house for the family and a home where they

can have visits from relatives or where the son can live with his wife when he gets married. Babim

(key informant 6) says, “A big home – not only for me but for all in the village. I wish I could see the

village grow up again and a house before I die. If I could see it, I would die happily.”

Discussion

The aim of this field study was to explore how marginalized people in hill communities in Nepal

experience self-efficacy and coping capacity after the earthquake, how they perceive risk and danger

28

from their life-world perspectives, and which implications and challenges this may have for the

discourse of coping capacity, vulnerability and risk reduction. For the discussion of the findings, the

researcher will lend some anthropological lenses to look at how risk and vulnerability is framed in

“the disaster world”, and discuss some of the limitations, challenges and dilemmas that emerge from

the study.

Limitations and challenges

The number of key informants interviewed can be challenged – are nine key informants too little or

too much? As the focus in this study is on qualitative issues - on phenomenona19 perceived and

experienced by individuals in everyday life and told from each individual´s perspective in their lived

world, the researcher finds the number of key informants sufficient within this study and its

framework. A research study with as little as only one unique interviewee can be

“phenomenologically informative” about human being in general and tell about the nature of human

being as such, though the findings may not be generalizable. (Hycner R.H. Some Guidelines for the

phenomenological analysis of Interview Data, 1985: 295) Time was limited for conducting the data

collection in the field, mainly because of very bad infrastructure, the translator was a local teacher,

and he could only spend a limited amount of days in the field with the researcher.

The researcher does not consider the findings in this study as applicable to a larger population. The

study is made with a theoretical framework based on “every-day sociology” which is

phenomenological sociological perspective or approach that specifically talk about individuals´

(subject´s) own life-world which limits the study to a micro-level. More stakeholder interviews at the

community-level and at a central level with humanitarians and government representatives

potentially could have lifted the study to a macro-level and thus created basis for discussion of

unequal power structures and marginalization in Nepal in a post-disaster setting and reconstruction

phase.

19 From Greek - the singular form is `phenomenon´ - the plural form ´phenomena´ is used here from phenomenological language reason as phenomena in this paper are understood as facts, events or perceptions that are of scientific interest and susceptible to scientific explanation or description. (merriam-webster.com/dictionary)

29

Bi-lingual dilemmas and language power

The data collection was conducted in English and Nepali with a local teacher from Gorkha translating.

The bi-lingual process for the data collection raises certain dilemmas and challenges regarding the

epistemological position of the researcher and issues of language power and hierarchy. (Temple B.,

Young A. Qualitative research and translation dilemmas, 2004: 161-165) Throughout the data

collection process, the researcher has tried to be aware of the bi-lingual dilemmas and challenges,

e.g. that both the researcher and the translator form part of the process of knowledge production.

There is no neutral position from which to translate or to be the researcher whose questions are

formulated from the researcher’s position within her social world and preconceptions.

One example of “language power and hierarchy” is that during the interview, when asked to describe

how she perceives her community, one of the key informants responds: “Tell something about us,

teacher, I do not know much of the community…” (key informant 2). She being illiterate, he being a

teacher, and me – the researcher – being a foreigner, exposes a language power and hierarchy.

Although writing in general terms when describing some of the findings and the conclusion, and

although this research has found patterns and common features among the key informants in their

environment, these findings cannot be taken as “results” from which any generalized conclusions or

recommendations can be made.

Having said this, the findings and research show that the local people in hill communities are first

responders in disaster; they do have a great coping capacity, they adapt and cope, and find new

strategies, they collaborate in the community and have a high self-efficacy. They have clear

perceptions of what risk mean to them, which may not be consistent with the view of vulnerability,

and perception of risk set by “outsiders”.

Outsiders mentioned in this context are e.g. government experts, humanitarians, INGO´s – while the

expression local people and local communities embrace the study population in the communities and

their collective narratives, experiences and memories from the data collection as analyzed and

interpreted by the researcher. Additionally the researcher can be seen as an outsider, as she brings

her own preconceptions borne in the questions about, how poor people cope with disaster and how

they perceive risk and danger.

30

Major discrepancies in perception of risk and danger

This research and the findings raise the question if vulnerability measured and determined from an

outsider´s view is the same or corresponds with how local people articulate experience and perceive

risk or exposure to danger. Outsiders generally refer to local people´s perception of risk or possible

exposure to danger as vulnerability. (Bankoff G. et al. Mapping Vulnerability 2004: 120)

There seem to be a huge gap between what is local people´s perception of risk and danger and the

outsider´s view, that seems focused on the hazard event itself: earthquake and consequently on risk

reduction measures as technical solutions like how to build earthquake safe houses. Local people

perceive their every-day life and circumstances beyond the disaster and emergency paradigm. Poor

communities impacted by a disaster see disaster preparedness, emergency response, recovery,

reconstruction and mitigation as integral part of their survival and development process (Bankoff G.

et al. Mapping Vulnerability 2004: 126), and not as parts of their lives that are spread out in a disaster

cycle.

From this research emerge the question how sustainable and inclusive risk reduction approaches are

if local people´s perception of risk and danger – i.e. their vulnerability and their skills and knowledge

about how to cope with risk – is not recognized, and shared with outsiders and included in the future

plans for development in local communities.

What is vulnerability

There is a common understanding that poor people or low income household and communities or

vulnerable people/groups suffer a disproportionate share of losses and impact from disaster

(GAR_2015: 189). However, to understand disasters we need to know not only about the different

types of hazards that may affect people we must also know the different levels of vulnerability of

different groups. Vulnerability is about people, their perception and knowledge. Their ideas about

risk and their practices constitute the sextant and compass with which they measure and chart the

landscape of vulnerability. (Wisner B. et al, At Risk, Second Edition, 2003) (Bankoff G. et al. Mapping

Vulnerability 2004: 5, 132)

In the “disaster lingo” and since the development of the so-called Disaster Crunch Model (Annex B)

hazard, risk, vulnerability and people´s capacity to respond in disaster is seen as intrinsically

connected and is even formulated as an equation:

31

Risk = Hazard x vulnerability / capacity

The relationship between vulnerability and capacity is used in risk assessment methodologies, and

the literature offer a range of broad perspectives on the understanding of disaster and vulnerability

- humanitarians tend to use the term vulnerable or vulnerability at random in the sense, that there is

not one common definition of the term.

Disaster as a social construction

Disaster can also very plainly described be understood as unsolved development problems. A disaster

is not an event of nature per se but situations that are the product of the complex processes and

relationships between the natural and organizational structure of a society. (Bankoff G. et al. Mapping

Vulnerability, 2003: 49)

We talk about natural disaster, and disaster is often considered an event rather than a process.

However, disasters do not just happen like “a bolt from the blue.” A society´s pattern of vulnerability

is shaped and produced through history and is a core element of a disaster. (Oliver-Smith A., Hoffmann

S. Catastrophe & Culture 2002: 10, 11, 23) The limitation for the study when using the

anthropological lens is that the focus on the hazard: The earthquake and the seismological and

scientific explanations regarding earthquake-risk are not unfolded. However, for this study, the

anthropological perspective to disaster and vulnerability offers a holistic approach to frame disasters

within the cultural, social, political, economic and environmental relationships that constitutes a

society. In this case-study it may be considered as a society at a micro-level in the shape of the hill

communities visited in Nepal - and from there to look at vulnerability and risk from a holistic

perspective. Disasters display people´s ability to constitute meaning and mobilize resources in

stressful conditions. Disasters offer a lens through which to view the relationship between the

ideological and the material. (ibid).

Disasters reveal power structures - i.e. the linkages between local communities and larger structures,

and pick to the bone how society is constructed within class, gender, ethnicity, caste or race and

where unequal power structures are seen as a fabric weaved through history.

32

How can local people capitalize from their coping capacity and strategies

It´s highly relevant to understand how local people articulate their own coping capacity and strategies

and how they manage to adjust these strategies when disaster like an earthquake strikes and tear

away their home and undermine their livelihood. The coping strategies are result of a process of

experiments and innovation through which people build up the skills, knowledge and self-confidence,

necessary to reshape their social world and respond to their environment. Usually, almost everyone

has some kind of self-protection and group action, when needed. (Bankoff G. et al. Mapping

Vulnerability 2004: 119-120) (Wisner B. et al. At Risk 2003: 14) The issue for discussion is how local

people can capitalize from their own coping capacity and from the strategies and the knowledge,

they develop and how they can be supported in this, so they themselves can build more resiliency.

Marginalization and uncertainty undermine self-efficacy

Almost one year has elapsed after the earthquake in Nepal. The expression of being left in liminality

comprehends this transitional phase of great uncertainty for the local people; no information, no

efforts or actions from VDC, community-leaders or from the GoN to include them in future plans of

reconstruction and development. Only that they have heard some rumors that they have to build

earthquake safe houses, and if not they will not be supported from government.

The coping capacity in the aftermath of the earthquake seem high among the study population, but

their feelings of being dis-empowered and not included is striking and may undermine their self-

efficacy. For many disaster survivors the recovery and rehabilitation turns raveled, debilitating and

sometimes stalemated (Oliver-Smith & Hoffmann, The Angry Earth 1999: 148)

People who are marginalized economically and politically and have low or no access to resources

from outside like raw materials for rebuilding, information etc. are more likely to stop trusting their

own capabilities and methods for self-protection and to lose their confidence in local knowledge,

(Wisner B. et al. At Risk 2003: 53) thus making them more vulnerable and retard recovery processes.

It´s not only the self-confidence that local people may lose when put on hold and kept in Limbo after

disaster like the local hill communities in Nepal. To retain hope they need to see some action or be

involved. Because hope is an ontological need that demands an anchoring in practice as explained by

the Brazilian educational philosopher Paulo Freire. His experiences and theory from educational

33

praxis among marginalized people in Latin America is that the mainstay of people´s self-efficacy and

coping capacity is hope – to have something hoped-for.

The hoped-for is not attained by dint of raw hoping. Hopelessness and despair are both the

consequences and the cause of inaction or immobilism. (Freire P. The Pedagogy of Hope, 1994: 2, 3)

Conclusive remarks

The earthquake in April 2015 has picked to the bone the unequal power structures in Nepal, as it

happens in many disasters where the construction of meaning, interpretations of different social

worlds, the nature of existence and the very skeleton and complex structures that builds a society

come to the fore. As do the vulnerability – or risk – local people, live with in every-day life.

The perception and understanding of vulnerability as complex social processes is key term when

discussing how poor communities can build resiliency and be included in disaster risk reduction

measures as part of their development process.

However, addressing vulnerability is a highly political issue, if we understand vulnerability

fundamentally as a political ecological concept that encompasses people´s relationship to their

environment and to political and economic power structures and characteristics in the society. In

addition, disaster risk reduction can only be sustainable and durable, if the social and political origin

of disaster is addressed.

Local people are aware of unequal power structures in the sense that they articulate the huge gap

between their hopes and expectations for building a new home – and the lack of actions, planning

and communication not least from the GoN regarding the reconstruction plan for the earthquake-

affected districts. Though they do hope that GoN will support them, but they also adapt their

expectations to government in tune with the world they know. As one of the key informant says....”

the government does not listen to our voices – they turn the deaf ear on us…We are marginalized

people.”

Making local communities aware about root causes of vulnerability and what they can do about it,

how they can use their own skills and knowledge, and organize themselves with other local groups

34

to advocate for justice, rights and responsible government require local people´s participation and

inclusion in every tiny step in the development towards building more communities that are resilient.

Disaster vulnerability can only be reduced if local communities are organized, conscious and aware

about their rights and can advocate for social and economic changes through addressing the

government structures (Bankoff G. et al. Mapping Vulnerability: 10, 127).

Local people can play an active role in data gathering about themselves and their community, instead

of this researcher coming from outside and gathering data collection. Local people can articulate and

learn how to analyze factors that generate their vulnerabilities and search for root causes (Report to

DFID, 2003), they can identify their resources and strengths; their skills, experiences and knowledge

with which they normally deal with when responding to crisis or disasters or in periods with stress,

e.g. draughts or crops destroyed by weather conditions.

To benefit the communities and people at risk and to find common ground on who defines what

vulnerability is, it may be a good starting point as suggested by Annelies Heijmans (Mapping

Vulnerability, 2003: 126) to shift the focus and the way outsiders frame and manage disasters as a

temporary interruption to development - towards linking poverty, disaster risks and vulnerability to

development.

This study and its´ findings can be seen as snapshots taken at a given time, at a given location, and

with a given number of human beings – the key informants - who kindly tell their story from their

lived-world perspectives. Although being a small reflection in the big kaleidoscopic picture of how

poor people in hill communities in Nepal cope with disaster and hope for the future – this study

hopefully can contribute to bring fore local voices from the hill communities in Nepal.

“There is very little money in Nepal. But we have a lot of hopes and wishes.” (Babim, key informant 6)

35

Annex A - Disaster Cycle (UNISDR)

36

Annex B – The Crunch Model – the progression of vulnerability

37

Annex C

38

Annex D

INTERVIEW-guide for field study in a local community in the Gorkha District, Nepal:

*Introduction to the interviewee and a briefing

Presentation of my person:

Interviewer:

Namaste, I am Linda Jakobsen, I am from Denmark and I am in Nepal to do a study about Disaster Preparedness and Recovery for my Master Thesis at the Copenhagen University. I am in your community with EcoNepal to talk with you and other families to learn more about the impacts of the earthquake last year.

I am very grateful if you will share your story with me and take your time for this interview.

Presentation - the translater presents him self: Namaste, Ramesh Bista, I am a local teacher in English from Gorkha, I am here to help with the translation.

Consent and anonymity:

Interviewer: The data that I will collect in your community and through the interview with you will not be published with your name or personal information, you will be given full anonymity if/when the data collection is published in English.

Please feel free to withdraw at any time from the interview, if you want to do so or if you feel uncomfortable with my questions or any other reason – this will have no consequences if you do so. ……..I will like to ask you if I have your consent for the interview ?

Interview questions:

Opening questions:

Can you please state your name, your age and your family members and their age – please write it here – in my notebook….(…in the case of illiteracy…) Or maybe the translater can help you write it here in my notebook?

Can you please tell me about your family?

F1 - What do you and your family live from?

F2 – Have you lived here all your live?

Can you please describe what happened last year when the earthquake came?

F1 – Please tell me what happened to you – and your family?

F2 – Please describe what did you think when the earthquake happened?

Can you describe how you perceive – or understand risk (danger)?

F1 – Can you describe…what are you afraid of ?

F2 - Can you describe what risk or danger means to you?

Please tell me about the days or weeks after the earthquake?

F1 - Did you get any informations about help?

F2 – Please describe which kind of help you received – if any ?

Almost one year has gone now after the earthquake. Can you please describe what reconstruction means to you?

F1 – Can you please tell me how you understand reconstruction?

39

F2 – Please describe who is helping with reconstruction?

15 (these two last questions would depend on the interviewee´s earlier description of his/her life situation..)

Can you please tell me how you perceive your community?

Can you please describe your hope for the future?

**Winding up

Interviewer: I want to say thank you – dhanyabaad [danjirbad] - for using your time with us and sharing your thoughts and story with me, and I also want to express hope for you and your family and also your community that you will be able to rebuild and to provide for your families and I will wish you good luck. Namaste.

Not to disturb you, but I want to repeat that the data that I am collecting in your community, and also the interview with you will be given full anonymity when published in Denmark. I will wish you good luck. Namaste.

Annex E

Babim (Key informant 6)_Interview Saturday 2.April 2016 – from Gyampesal where we slept at a road guesthouse and to

Baguwa to visit a Baram community where there are 29 households, while at the other side of the hills it will be a Dalit

community.

6BBB – Baguwa 7, Baramgaun (community)

Can you please state your name, your age, number of

family members, their age ? (Please write it here – or

maybe the translater can help you)

The translater writes it – they cannot read or write in

Nepali nor in English..

6BBB – he is 57 years old and his wife DMB maybe….45

years old

(she does not really know, she says when asked..)

We have two sons in Kathmandu 18 and 22 years old),

one daughter, she does not live here, she is married and

is around 30 years old, the one son in Kathmandu will

be back and then live here.

We do not know the excact ages of our sons..

(..then later when talking about the earthquake..)

Deliniation:

He is Illiterate and wife too, they don´t know her age

and are unsure of the age of the sons

Two sons and four daughters, one son has worked in

Dubai, one daughter is working in Corea

40

I have four daughters, one is working in Corea and we

built this house for the money she sent back (points at

the ruins of the house collapsed during the earthquake)..

What do you and your family live from ?

I do farming, my younger son is also working with

farming, when he is here.

We have some land just around here (points out at

some of the small terasses of fields) and a little piece of

land also down the road, we grow maize and millet.

But the farming does not give us meals the whole year.

Nothing else will grow here than maize and millet,

maybe some garlics..

Nothing else will grow here.

Dal: Because the earth is dried up, it is no good

environment, it is all dried up.

.Can you please describe the water situation?

We have a water tap and a water project in the

community..

(we are interrupted by the translaters phone, which he

answers, and leaves us to chat in the phone....it was the

second or third time I experienced it during an interview)

We have to pay for the water, 600 Rupees and 300

Rupees is the minimum charge per month.

So people do not have the money also to use water for

irrigation, because the water lift system needs that we

pay every month.

Here are 17 water committee members in the

community regarding the water project, and 3 people

are here to monitor and watch the system.

Some foreigners have given this – if it was government

who had provided we should not have to pay

Have you lived here all your life?

BBB: I am an inhabitant here

DM: I am from Aappipal, that´s is four hours walk from

here

I do farming, we have some land, but the farming does

not give os meals for the whole year

Nothing else will grow here than Maize and millet,

maybe some garlic

Because the earth is dried up, it´s no good

environment, it´s all dried up

A water project in the community.

Everyone has pay a minimum charge of 300 Rupees

for the water per month, people do not have the

money to use for water for irrigation.

Some foreigners have given this, if it was government

who had provided we should not have to pay

41

We have been married for 32 years

Can you please describe what happened last year when

the earthquake came?

(She laughes with a horse voice, he shrugs his shoulder)

We had losses, huge losses, the house we lost was

made by our son who had worked in Dubai and sent

money back home to build a house..

The cattle were safe, only the house was destroyed, the

four walls collapsed, they were destroyed and the roof

remained..

Is this your old house you have rebuild?

No, it was at this side (points at a pile of stones and

dusty mud ruins..behind me)..

Everything was lost, we took the things we could find in

the broken house and brought them here.

Some people came to help us reconstruct this and to

carry things from the old house.

Can you please describe what happened to you and your

family?

We were at a meeting in the water committee

I grabbed at something, a pole or something, everything

was shaking..

DM: (Laughes) I was also at the meeting, but my

mother was inside the house

BBB: (waving his arms to describe how it was shaking

and him holdning to something during the shakes)..She

could not come out of the house, she stayed in it, but

nothing happened to her..

What did you think when the earthquake happened?

Had huge losses, lost the house

Everything was lost, we took the things we could find

in the broken house and brought them here

Some people came to help us reconstruct this and

carry things from the broken house

42

DM: When I was there I could see the mud and stones

falling down from the houses, we were all scared..

Bim: No place to live, we lived in the cow shed, some

slept under tarpaulins in the following days…after the

shaking..

--------------------------------------------------------------

How do you perceive – or understand risk – or danger?

We do not know of earthquakes, we had heard about

the great earthquake (in….??), and we have only felt

some shakes sometimes, some small shakes…

What do you think of it ?

People say different things. People talk about the

epicenter was here in Gorkha, but I do not know where

it started

..

One day we all have to die..

Can you describe what you are afraid of?

The dangers and risks are from wild animals; tigers and

bears…

Do you have bears here?

No. no not bears, not tiger, but leopards.

Yes we can find them up in the hills here, if not they

will find us. I have seen a leopard around 20 meters

from my person (he points as to show how close the

leopard was to him..)

Can you describe what risk or danger means to you

Dangers here are wild animals, and snakes we can see

too. They are not poisonous but we are afraid of them.

Why is it?

The leopard will kill our goats, but if we kill the leopard

we will be arrested..

No, we have not had leopards here in the community,

but they are a hazard when the goats are out grassing in

the jungle and there have been several cases, where

the leopard has taken goats.

I could see the mud and the stones falling down

We were all scared

No place to live, we lived in the cow shed..after the

shaking

We don´t know of earthquakes, we have only felt

some shakes sometimes, some small shakes.

People say different things, people talk

The dangers and risks are from wild animals..like tigers

and bears, Not bears, not tigers, but leopards up in the

hills

Dangers here are wild animals and snakes, we can see

too. Not poisonous but we are afraid of them.

43

But if we take the leopard and cut its four paws off and

kill it, skin it, then we will be punished by the police..

The leopard will kill their goats, but they are not

allowed to kill the leopard, then they will be arrested.

Haven´t had leopards in the community, but they are a

hazard when the goats are out grassing in the jungle

References

Main literature, academic journals and articles:

Gurung O. et al, Perspectives on Social Inclusion and Exclusion in Nepal, 2014, Central Department of Sociology/Anthropology, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal http://markturin.sites.olt.ubc.ca/files/2014/04/PSIEN.pdf - accessed February and June 2016

Hycner R. Hum Stud. 8: 279-303, Some Guidelines for the phenomenological analysis of Interview Data, 1985, published by Martinus Nijhof Oublishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands http://rex.kb.dk/primo_library/libweb/action/search.do?vid=KGL&reset_config=true - accessed 20-06-2016

Knoblauch H. Metaphors, Transcendence and Indirect Communication, 1999, http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-7530 - accessed 01-07-2016

Kvale S. Doing interviews 2007, The SAGE Qualitative Research Kit, SAGE Publications Ltd. London

Malterud K. Qualitative Research: standards, challenges and guidelines, 2001; 483-488), Qualitative research series, The Lancet, Vol 358, august 11 (paper from CC4 course)

Oliver-Smith A. and Hoffman S. The Angry Earth, Disaster in Anthropological Perspective, 1999. Routledge, London.

Oliver-Smith A. and Hoffman S. Catastrophe & Culture, The Anthropology of Disaster, 2002, School of American Research Press, Santa Fe.

Overgaard S. Zahawi D. Chapter 3, Phenomenological Sociology, the Subjectivity of Everyday Life, 2008, http://philpapers.org/rec/ZAHPS – accessed 20-06-2016

Saldaña J. The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researcher, Sage Publications, 2009, Introduction to Codes and Coding and http://www.slideshare.net/mrsnazlan/johnny-daldaa-the-coding-manual-for-qualitative-researchers-2009 - accessed June 2016

Schutz A., Hverdagslivets sociologi, 2005 by Hans Reitzels Forlag, translated from English from “Collected Works” (Volume 1, 1972) by Alfred Schutz and Klüwer Academic Publishers

Shen V. et al. Phychology, phenomenology and Chinese philosophy, 1994 - accessed 29-06-2016

Wisner B. et al. At Risk: Second Edition, Natural Hazards, People´s Vulnerability and Disasters, 2003, by Wisner, Blaikie, Cannon and Davis - www.preventionweb.net/files/670_72351.pdf

Temple B., Young A. Qualitative research and translation dilemmas, Qualitative Research, 2004, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249731128_Qualitative_Research_and_Translation_Dilemmas - accessed March and July 2016

Websites, news and reports

A guide to Government in Nepal, Structures, Functions and Practices, 2012, The Asia Foundation, http://asiafoundation.org/publication/a-guide-to-government-in-nepal-structures-functions-and-practices/ Studies_75 [1] – accessed: 14-10-2015, 26-06-2016

Analysis of legislation related to Disaster Risk Reduction in Nepal, 2011 www.ifrc.org/PageFiles/41170/NEPAL-report.pdf - accessed February and June 2016

Cutter et al. 2008, Global Environmental Change, 18, Disasters and communities: vulnerability, resilience and preparedness - www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1108/EUM0000000005930

District Profile Gorkha, Nepal Earthquake Assessment Unit, OSSOCC, 2015: https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/operations/nepal/assessment-working-group - accessed 09-05-2015, 28-06-2016

ESCAP, 2015, Economic and Social Commission for Asia and Pacific, Committee on Disaster Risk Reduction, http://www.unescap.org/official-documents

GAR2015, Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction, UN, 2015 http://www.preventionweb.net/english/hyogo/gar/2015/en/home/ - accessed 03-07-2016

Gorkha Gender profile, UN Women, 2016: http://reliefweb.int/report/nepal/gorkha-gender-profile-may-2016 - accessed: 26-06-2016

http://blog.esllibrary.com/2013/08/15/confusing-singular-plural-forms-phenomenonphenomena-mediummedia/ accessed 30-06-2016

https://thehimalayantimes.com/opinion/nepalese-economy-earthquake-blockade/

Himalayan Linguistic, a Sociolinguistic study of the Baram Language, 2011 http://escholarship.org/uc/item/3ch5s7mk#page-2 – accessed 04-07-2016

National Coalition against racial Discrimination http://www.ncard.org.np/categorydetail/barhamu-or-baramu.html - accessed 29-06-2016

Note on Migration and Remittances, 2015, Nepal Earthquake Assessment Unit, http://reliefweb.int/report/nepal/note-migration-and-remittances-24072015 - accessed 29-06-2016

OCHA Nepal Earthquake 2015 www.humanitarianresponse.info/en/operations/nepal/document/nepal-earthquake-2015-situation-report-no20-3-june-2015

Perspectives on Social Vulnerability, 2006, institute for Environment and Human Security - http://www.desenredando.org/public/articulos/2008/tesis/

Report to DFID, 2003, Social vulnerability, sustainable livelihoods and disasters, Cannon T. et al. docview1.tlvnimg.com [PDF] http://scholar.google.dk/scholar?q=linking+disaster+and+vulnerability&hl=da&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiNmtHkm9fNAhWkFJoKHU5pDXsQgQMIHDAA – accessed 03-07-2016

REPORT-OF-IMMEDIATE-ASSESSMENT-Relief-for-Dalits-in-NEPAL-2015[1] “Waiting for Justice in Response” 2015, by Dalit Civil Society Massive Earthquake Victim Report & Asia Dalit Rights (ADRF) & National Dalit Watch Forum & National Dalit Rights Campaign India: www.IDSN.org - accessed February 2016 and June 2016

Rights within Reach, Securing Equality and Human Rights in Nepal´s new Constitution, 2010, Center for Human Rights and Global Justice, NY. http://idsn.org/portfolio-items/rights-within-reach/ - accessed 04-07-2016

Rural Poverty in Nepal, IFAD - http://www.ruralpovertyportal.org/country/home/tags/nepal

Sociology Guide - http://www.sociologyguide.com/civil-society/marginalization.php

http://thediplomat.com/2016/04/the-great-nepal-earthquake-one-year-later/

The Disaster Crunch Model, Guidelines for a Gendered Approach, Oxfam 2012 – http://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/the-disaster-crunch-model-guidelines-for-a-gendered-approach-247511

Turner B. et al. A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science, 2003

Wilson, T.D. Alfred Schutz, Phenomenology and Research methodology for information behavior, Fourth International Conference on Information Seeking in Context, Universidade Lusiada, Lisbon, Portugal, September 11 to 13, 2002. www.informationr.net/tdw/publ/papers/schutz02.html - accessed 06-06-2016

World Disasters Report, 2015, IFRC, www.IFRC.org

www.pnas.org/content/100/14/8074.full?iijkey=290f9b14d21

www.livsverden.dk/emnesider/sociologi accessed 09-06-2016

www.livsverden.dk/grundlaeggerne/husserl - accessed 09-06-2016

www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/phenomenon - accessed 30-06-2016

www.religionfacts.com/bon - accessed 28-06-2016

UNISDR, 2009 www.unisdr.org/we/inform/terminology

un.org.np/maps/nepal-gorkha-district accessed 29-06-2016

www.beyond2015.org/list-17-sustainable-development-goals-sdgs - List of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) | Beyond2015 - accessed: 2016-04-16 15:34:25

www.worldbank.org/en/country/nepal/overview

www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2015/06/16/nepal-quake-assessment-shows-need-effective-recovery-efforts