the transition period in disaster recovery pdf
TRANSCRIPT
The Transitional Phasein Disaster Recovery
David AlexanderUniversity College London
Recoveryand
reconstruction
Mitigationandresilience
Preparationandmobilisation
Emergencyintervention
Quiescence
Crisis
The disastercycle
The trans-itionalphase
PhilippinesMarch 2014
House occupiedby a family
Dangling pieceof concrete
Vulnerability
Collapsedsports arena
Transition to what?We conducted 160 interviews withsurvivors (a 97% response rate).
"Good morning - may weask you some questions?"
"Was your house damaged by thecyclone? ... It was destroyed."
"Did you build this shelter yourself? ...You did. Did you receive any help? ...No."
"Did anyone tell you how tobuild a safe shelter? ... No."
"Did you buy the materials?... You found them."
"How many people in your family? ...11 before the cyclone, 6 afterwards."
"Did you receive a warning? ... Yes.Did you evacuate? ... Women andchildren, not men. They drowned."
"Your employment situation? ...Husband was a rickshaw driver beforethe cyclone, you are unemployed now."
"Did you receive help fromthe Government? ... 15 kilosof rice. Is that all? ... Yes."
"From NGOs? ... 12,000 pesosfrom Tzu-Chi Foundation."
"What did you use it for?... Building materials."
"Were they more expensivethan usual? ... Yes, 30%"
"What do you know about thereconstruction? ... Nothing."
Some conclusions on Tacloban
• men were more likely to die, womenbore greatest burden in recovery
• cash distribution saved the day forsurvivors but contributed to inflation
• transitional shelter was poorlyconstructed and not hazard-proof
• links between emergency, transitionalphase and reconstruction were very poor
• opportunities to lift people out ofpoverty and destitution not taken.
Simple, existing knowledge was not widelyutilised to make life safer for survivors.
The transitional phase between emergencyand reconstruction remains controversial.
Beached ships
Sea
Village
Tacloban,Philippines
Kesennuma,Japan
• sea walls an impedimentas much as protection
• lack of local involvement in planning
• remote, top-down strategies
Problems on the Sanriku coast
• lack of sensitivity to gender issues
• warning and evacuation need specificlocal plans, not top-down ones.
Massive destruction requires transitionalhousing, services and infrastructureto ensure the area does not sufferabandonment anddoes recover.
• civil protection managedtransitional phase
• political considerations made thetransition phase extremely expensive
• functionality not restoredto city or its region
• slow, heterogeneous recovery.
L’Aquila, central Italy, April 2009, M6.3
• initial response was both good and bad
• no clear ideas about the long termare present in the public domain
• the survivors: lack of trust inauthority; sense of abandonment
• the authorities: variousabuses and much negligence
• the situation: the firerevealed a massive riskscape.
Grenfell Tower, London, 14 June 2017
Things there weren't:-• sprinklers• non-flammable cladding• fire barriers• functioning alarms• better escape routes• emergency vehicle access• helicopter water bombing• extra-long ladders• fire-resistant gas distribution• safe electrical wiring• functioning building regulations• adequate inspection and approval regimes• functioning local emergency plans• communication• inclusiveness.
• the risk landscape is revealed:what will happen now?
• public outrage vs political unconcern
• safety and morality versusderegulation and negligence
• governments do not bother tolegislate to protect the poor
• Grenfell Tower is foretold inthe people’s history of Britain.
Great tensions in the transitional phase:-
Conclusions
Routledge, 2015
ORGANISED RECONSTRUCTION
with permanent reurbanisation of the site
RECONSTRUCTION PLANS, HEARINGS, APPEALS
REDEVELOPMENT NEW DEVELOPMENT
ORGANISED FIRST-AID
TENTS MOBILE TRAILERS HOTELS SPONSORED OUT- MIGRATION
INFORMAL SHELTER PUBLIC BUILDINGS
SPONTANEOUS SOLUTIONS
BUSES AND AUTOMOBILES
ORGANISED RESETTLEMENT
with temporary urbanisation of the site
PREFAB CONTAINER HOMES PREFAB CHALET-STYLE HOUSING UNITS
EVACUATION
PRECAUTIONARY
pending survey
PERMANENT
pending resettlement
SEMI-PERMANENT
pending repair
DESTRUCTION OF HOUSING
RECOVERY
PRE-IMPACTEVACUATION
RESTORE
REBUILDIN SITU
RELOCATEPRECAUTIONARY
EVACUATIONPENDING
STRUCTURALSURVEY
DAMAGEDSTRUCTURES
IMPACT
(EVACUATE)
REPAIRABLEBUT NOTUSABLE
DEMOLISHAND
REBUILD
DEMOLISHAND NOTREBUILD
REPAIRABLEAND USABLE(REOCCUPY)
Historical
Economic
Political
Cultural
Social
The contextsof shelter
Cultural
• good sharing of information
• a clear, simple, robust plan of action
• a well-defined end envisaged forthe transitional phase - with dates
• serviceable transitionalhousing and facilities
• it does not have to be an overt pact.
A successful transitional phase requires apact between government and survivors:
Recoveryafter disaster
Physical recoveryBuildings, infrastructure, transport, agriculture, etc.
Reducing post-traumatic stress
Re-establishingproduction and
economic activities
The recovery triangle
Political,cultural andenvironmental
context.
EVENT(impact) Participation
Governance
Unclearobjectives
Clearobjectives
SOLIDRECOVERY
PERMANENTPRECARIOUSNESS
Repeatedimpacts
Earth-quake
Politicalresponse
National
Regional
Local
Permanentreconstruction
Bad(functionalproblems)
Good(functionalitymaintained)
Elections
Amelioration
Political impact on reconstruction
Suff-ering
Reco-veryTransitional
housing and settlement
Public imageof politicians
A reconstruction model
Varying context:• political• economic• social
STAGNATION RECONSTRUCTION
EMERGENCYRESPONSE
SHORT-TERMRECOVERY
MEDIUM-TERMRECOVERY
LONG-TERMRECOVERY
IMPACT
P E S
P E S
P E S
CULTURALCONTEXT
Root causes: the politics of engineering
