Accountability in disaster management

Natural disasters and corruption are both perceived as continuous threats to the people of Indonesia. Natural disasters occur in many and various places, and some occur at the same time and even repeatedly. On the other hand, corruption also occurs in many places. However, if the funds devoted to natural disaster management are stolen by corruption, the impact of the disaster will be multiplied.
Indeed, the Corruption Act threatens severe punishment for corruptors of natural disaster funds. But corruption still exists. The latest from several cases is the Kejaksaan Negeri (Kejari) Kudus, which on Thursday (22/5) named former District Disaster Management Agency (BPBD) Kudus, SG, as a suspect in the alleged misappropriation of funds in 2012. (Suaramerdeka.com 22 / 5/14).

The threat of severe punishment does not necessarily remove people's interest in corrupting disaster management funds. Opportunities exist because in disaster events, the funds need to be treated as special in urgent settings. So, the treatment that generally requires a long process under normal circumstances can be excluded. In disaster relief, help needs to be provided quickly because every hour is meaningful.

Ease of access to large funds can tempt the authorities to misuse them. However, preventing corruption by returning the process of disbursement of funds according to normal procedures is certainly not applicable in such a situation. Instead of pursuing proper financial management, it would slow down the swiftness of action. Therefore, there should be a system to ensure the distribution reaches the targeted beneficiaries.

Guarding the accountability

Countering corruption in disaster management has become an important issue for disaster-prone institutions. One recommendation is community involvement. According to Transparency International, the involvement of affected communities and vulnerable groups in every level of preparedness planning will provide two additional benefits. The first is the minimization of the risk of corruption and the subsequent establishment of a sense of ownership of the group (International Development Committee, 2006).

Disaster-affected communities are often only seen as parties that need help. But in fact, they have the potential as a guardian of transparency and accountability. Although they are laymen by building systems that encourage their involvement, corruption loopholes can be closed.

Community involvement will prevent asymmetric information in disaster management. All parties need to know and monitor damage data and losses of public property and public infrastructure. Thus, manipulation by inflating the value of loss can be prevented. Communities need to know the parties involved in disaster management and post-disaster recovery. So, the public can monitor the parties who get the tender for the rehabilitation of public infrastructure or the distribution of aid. Violations in the form of markups, kickbacks, and extensions of economic rent will become noticeable.

Local authorities need to publicly disseminate disaster-related information in easily accessible locations. Shops, markets, shelters, and places adjacent to places of worship are ideal locations. On the other hand, community institutions need to encourage these initiatives to be realized.

In addition to information disclosure, communities need to be trained and empowered. Various disaster preparedness trainings have been conducted during this time. It would be better if the community were also trained to play a role in the accountability function. This training will enable the public to assess the appropriateness of the rules and forms of assistance provided.
Furthermore, a complaint mechanism should be strengthened. A good mechanism can be identified if there is evidence that people, both individuals and communities, can report on misappropriate practices. On the other hand, the speed of responding is also a part that needs to be developed in order to encourage more public participation.

Accountability and disaster preparedness

One of the difficulties in disaster management is the apprehensiveness of the authorities in disbursing emergency funds. Mismanagement will lead to serious problems for the authorities. The common question is who can keep the funds being used in accordance with the applicable rules. Therefore, it should be a space where people contribute to oversight. Many parties can participate in keeping the process will be executed according to the procedure.

So, in addition to the disaster preparedness community, society has to be strengthened with accountability. This capacity needs to be built in vulnerable areas. Although this is not easy, ultimately, the affected community can benefit from swift government actions.

Arwin Soelaksono

Photo source: http://images.solopos.com/2016/06/antarafoto-logistik-korban-longsor.jpg

Recovery on post Mt. Sinabung eruption

Last February –5 months after living in the evacuation – 17,150 IDPs went back to their homes. Mt. Sinabung eruption had destroyed their houses and livelihoods with volcanic ash and stones. Almost 51,000 hectares of rice paddy field covered by volcanic ashes. Currently the local government and people who lives in 3 villages which located 3 kilometers from the crater are facing difficult problem, relocation.

Relocation is needed to help affected people rebuild their lives. New houses and new agricultural land. But everyone should be aware, residential relocation from affected areas to new areas is not a sprint, it's a marathon. It’s a long road with a variety of policy barriers and the pitfalls of social problems. The most basic question for those 1,255 people are their hope for the future. Will they be fully recovered? What it will look like and when.

Recovery on economic and resettlement 

Recovery post disaster always challenging and takes time due multi dimension aspects need to be covered. For instance the economic aspect which is recovery of livelihoods in agricultural areas affected by the volcanic ash. The government should organize supply chain and supported with comprehensive policies. New paddy field development should not stop at the construction of irrigation channel.  The government needs to provide assistance to farmers so that the crop cultivation system is suitable with the new land. Government support during early recovery period is needed on planting, growing, harvesting and selling activities to minimize potential losses of farmers.
On dwelling subject, it is challenging for the survivor that can immediately to occupy the residence as before the disaster. Post-disaster housing reconstruction is a process that is the interaction of complex social, technological and economic factors and actions (Baradan, 2006). The policy chosen by government to support one aspect will affect the other.

To explain the interrelationship of many aspects, take a look on relocation. We can learn from the experience of landslide victims in Maninjau, West Sumatra. The landslide caused by the 2009 earthquake, they still living in temporary shelter. It is not easy to develop a new residential area, because it means forest clearcutting. There will be series requirements that need to be fulfilled. The mechanism of ownership is also unclear, if a person accepts land in the relocation area then they must relinquish the original land rights. If the previous land is their family inheritance, it is unlikely to release. If the relocation area away from their livelihood it will be difficult to convince them to be relocated. Relocating means moving the entire economic infrastructure to the new area.

It is almost impossible for immediate rehabilitation and reconstruction in relocation area. Let us look at Mentawai tsunami 2010 survivors. They have to wait for about 3 years for this work to begin. This waiting period made the vulnerable from the political and security aspects. Strong leadership is needed to integrate and make the most of the smallest resources available for recovery. The affected people – especially those from the villages of Sukameriah, Bekerah and Simacem - must continue to be empowered. Even they are affected people, they have to proactive and have involvement on recovery process.

Leadership on recovery

Leading 389 families from all three relocated villages would be a daunting task. That's why they need strong leadership to support of the citizens but also attract other elements of the outside community to help. Multi-stakeholder support is necessary because recovery will be too much to bear by the community and government.

The support could come from business institutions, if they might see economic prospect that can develop over the long term. Business entities also require the legal certainty and fair policy so that the business can be beneficial for them and the society. Support might also come from non-governmental organizations as can be seen on their humanitarian and development program.

The recovery leaders must have innovative method and solution in post-disaster recovery. Replicating those that have been successfully applied in other areas will not have necessarily can be implemented in Sinabung. Indonesia is a country rich in diversity. Each community has its own uniqueness. No size fits all. The recovery initiative should come from the uniqueness of society. They can use their local wisdom as the fundamental elements of the recovery. If the recovery effort proven successful then it can be expected the community could be more resilient.

Arwin Soelaksono

Photo source: https://img.okezone.com/content/2015/06/14/340/1165299/bnpb-kerugian-erupsi-gunung-sinabung-mencapai-rp1-49-triliun-DKYecxvKf0.jpg

This publication is available in Bahasa Indonesia

Indonesia Bangkit! 
Transformasi Masyarakat Rentan Menuju Tangguh Bencana dengan Dukungan Program Humanitarian

Buku ini memaparkan kegiatan pemulihan pasca bencana yang tantangan-tantangannya diungkap secara gamblang dan sulit anda temukan dalam literatur manapun. Persaingan antara NGO, gejolak inflasi, konflik dengan regulasi serta penghentian program merupakan bagian dari kenyataan pahit. Para penulis mengalami langsung pengalaman tersebut  sehingga buku ini lebih dari sekedar teori.

Tak berlebihan bila buku ini sebagai berbagi pengalaman antara para professional humanitarian sekaligus masyarakat umum pemerhati bencana.

___________

Dengan membaca buku ini, saya percaya pembaca akan semakin mendapat penjelasan bahwa program "early recovery" atau pemulihan awal harus mendapatkan penanganan serius (DR. Syamsul Maarif, M.Si. Kepala Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana)

                                        ___________

Buku ini bukan hanya mengajak kita berbagi pengalaman dan belajar bersama; tetapi buku ini juga mengajak kita untuk "melawan lupa" atas kesalahan dan keburukan yang kita lakukan; sehingga kita selalu berusaha untuk semakin baik. (DR. Eko Teguh Paripurno. Geohazard & Disaster Researcher).

                                       ___________

Penulis dalam Indonesia Bangkit memberikan tauladan tentang bagaimana bekerja bagi keabadian, memitigasi kehilangan pengetahuan yang datang dari penderitaan dan keajaiban survival komunitas. (Jonatan A. Lassa PhD. Institute of Resource Governance and Social Change, Kupang) 

                                       ___________

Bangkit untuk membangun ketahanan bukan semata ditujukan kepada penyintas, namun haruslah menjadi cara pandang kolektif semua pihak, sehingga bencana bukanlah menciptakan siklus baru kerentanan dengan kebergantungan, tetapi inspirasi bagi konstruksi masyarakat baru dunia yang tahu apa artinya berbagi demi kebaikan bersama. (Victor Rembeth MA. National Manager, Disaster Resource Partnership of World Economic Forum).

                                       ___________

Harga Rp. 36.000,-. Dapatkan di toko Gramedia terdekat, atau hubungi Vica Nalura HP: 0813-8057-5370 email: vicanalura@gmail.com