Saturday, June 23, 2018

No one left behind in house reconstruction post-disaster in owner-driven setting

The need for recovery is always our human nature once people recover after shock following the natural disaster. Natural disasters are generally considered as a coincidence between natural hazards (such as flood, cyclone, earthquake and drought) and conditions of vulnerability.[i] But how fast and to what extent the recovery outcome might be different for each affected people. To those who have sufficient resources and capacities they might bounce back within certain times. But to those who unfortunately live in vulnerable condition they might feel helpless. There is a high risk of disaster when one or more natural hazards occur in a vulnerable situation.[ii] For vulnerable people, other than food, medical and other item which needed to continue for their survival, the need of having safe shelter are also crucial. Particularly in owner-driven setting, this might be a big challenge to those who are most vulnerable due to build a robust and safe structure are considerably expensive.


More on the vulnerability issues, people with certain social characteristics are more likely than others to be affected by lack of access and lack of resources. Other type of vulnerability also can be seen at the effects of age (very young and very old), gender (including complications of pregnancy), and disability[iii]. For these people even to access their livelihood has already quite challenging. As they might perceived the shelter is beyond their capacities, therefore fulfilling their basic needs such as food become the only thing they could pursue.
The most vulnerable on house rebuilding – they are at risk of being left behind

Further discussion among the government and humanitarian agencies is to what extent the most vulnerable people might get help on house rebuilding. Because their self-capacity – even might be very small – could not be undermined. They might have relatives who are willing to support. Or there are some salvage material still can be used from the ruined house. But to give similar support as other affected people received from recovery program might not be effective. Their ability to fit in the recovery program is far below from their neighborhood.

Other factor that those vulnerable people still have capacity is they still have neighbors which might help them. The community contribute their resource such as construction material or labor to support their neighbor. This is social capital might vary. Stronger social capital might ensure there will be no-one left behind on rebuilding their houses. But depend only on social capital still not adequate. Social capital helps groups to overcome collective action problems, but there is no guarantee that in doing so they will produce public goods available to people outside that group.[iv]

For vulnerable people having a safe land to build their houses has already quite challenging even before the disaster. Other than the land rights issues they might live in vulnerable land. Landslide prone, riverbanks which disaster might occur at any time or season. Their economic condition hampers them to own land with safe environment.

Even they have safe land to rebuild their house they have to compete with their neighbors when the government launch the recovery program. Tens or even hundreds of thousands houses will be rebuild in certain period of recovery. After a large-scale disaster, housing reconstruction projects are susceptible to numerous resource bottlenecks inherent in post-disaster circumstances, such as a lack of suitable resources and alternatives[v]. The vulnerable families will have to wait since the builders will prioritize them who can pay them according to the market wage. If the time to wait might be prolonged other imminent problem is the inflation. The inflation is very common due to supply and demand, the longer the reconstruction period the prices tend to increase. This is due to a great amount of money pour in this construction sector and for many people increase their purchasing power.

Supporting the most vulnerable for house reconstruction

Even there are some weaknesses on social capital but still social capital is highly influential for how much and how fast societies are able to recover, rebuild, and sometimes even improve after having been hit by a disaster.[vi] Since the vulnerable families live in the community most possible of the support is from within. In some cases support from the neighbors is needed if there is external assistance from the government or humanitarian agencies. Their support are any means that might increase their access in recovery program. For instance more affordable construction material which usually come as discounted price. Since this kind of support might be limited, therefore support from the community is needed since this kind of assistance should be agreed for only the most vulnerable families. 

The government should take lead on helping the most vulnerable. The government obviously develop the policy and strategy on recovery but supporting the most vulnerable should be clearly mentioned. The policy might open access for humanitarian or development agencies to support the most vulnerable. From this policy the agencies can provide various direct intervention such as technical assistance or cash grant as additional to the government support. These assistance should be perceived as closing the gaps as the most vulnerable might be left out. Reconstruction processes should be considered as a redevelopment opportunity, with environment protection a priority on the sustainability agenda.[vii]

Helping the most vulnerable should be the call for humanitarian agencies. The effectiveness mostly depends on the resources are available within the organization. This kind of assistance needs special skills from the design until the implementation. The program should be designed to match and complement the government plan. Specifically for house reconstruction understand of adaptable construction technology is the key of successful implementation. The recovery program should maximize local resources, the construction material, equipment and builders. The implementation should abide with the code but still open to new practices as long as scientifically approved. Therefore within the organization there should be qualified team to handle this responsibility.      

Arwin Soelaksono



[i] Maskrey, A., Disaster Mitigation: A Community Based Approach.  Development Guidelines No. 3.  Oxfam, Oxford (1989).
[ii] Maskrey, A., (1989).
[iii] Wisner, Ben. Marginality and vulnerability. Why the homeless of Tokyo don’t ‘count’ in disaster preparations. (1998)
[iv] Aldrich, Daniel P. Building Resilience: Social Capital in Post-Disaster Recovery. (2012).
[v] Chang, Yan, et.al. An integrated approach: managing resources for post-disaster reconstruction. (2011).
[vi] Aldrich, Daniel P. (2012)
[vii] Chang, Yan. (2011).