S-curve is commonly used in construction project management tool for planning the work and its milestone and monitoring its progress. S-curve already proven as powerful tool whether in sophisticated construction work also for humanitarian works in rural and remote places. This article offers insight on how post-disaster housing recovery can be improved. It can also be applied in other regions who promote housing recovery with owner-driven setting.
Wednesday, December 9, 2020
Improving post-disaster housing reconstruction based on Nepal recovery S-curve
Creating the S-curve
S-curve is an important project management tool, which allow
the progress of a project to be tracked visually over time and form a
historical record of what has happened to date.[i]
The S-Curve below was created on August 2015 following the Gorkha earthquake on
April 2015.[ii]
Most importantly the S-curve was created based on owner-driven setting recovery
in rural, hilly, and mountainous area.
The steepness of S-curve slopes indicates good condition which
might propel the progress such as presence of technical support and robust
system on cash transfer programming (CTP). Through CTP each homeowner will
receive cash grant in 3 tranches. On the other hand, the flatness indicates
challenges which potentially hamper the progress. It is predicted there are
seasons of festivals such as Dashain and Tihar which celebrate across the
country. During the festivals which almost no one is working, very few number of
house completion is expected and make the slope become flat for around half a
month. Each year. Monsoon and winter also considered as part of challenges.
As mentioned above, the S-Curve plan was created in August
2015, is to track and to develop strategy for more than 3,000 houses rebuild. The
ground-breaking is planned on November 2015 then all houses expected to be
completed in June 2018. The green line on the S-Curve indicate the 32 months
construction program.
Unfortunately, the program was started way beyond, due to
substantial government delay. The first tranche of cash transfer which
homeowners received for kick-start the construction was in September 2016.[iii]
Consequently the most optimistic that homeowners started the ground-breaking
was in October 2016. Aware on time limitation, the timeline of 32 months will
not viable anymore. It should be shortened. Therefore, the strategy should be
revised, then in December 2016, the S-Curve was revised. This was to achieve
houses completion still in June 2018. The 21 months program is as indicated by
the brown line at the S-Curve.
Reading the S-Curve, plan vs actual
Every month the number of house completion was reported, and
it is reflected on the black line. Since it is actual number, therefore many
valuable information can be seen. For instance, at point 1, during October 2016
through March 2017, the slope was almost flat. During these months’ homeowners
were not convinced they can rebuild and complete their houses. Almost none who
dare to start the construction since they know the cash grant will not be
sufficient to complete their houses. During that time, government also
struggling to provide engineers[iv]
to monitor the construction and to certify the paperwork prior to releasing the
second and third tranches. During that time seems all construction stuck due to
unclear government policy on how much money that the homeowner can receive as
the second tranche.[v]
At point 2, a slight jump on houses completion above the
revised S-Curve projections from April 2017 to August 2017. The systems were in
place and helped the homeowners to have enthusiasm and confidence to build. In
my working area in Thulogaun, Rasuwa, community practice of working in turn,
locally named alo palo, encouraged to be used by groups of homeowners in February
2017. This initiative also replicated in other area i.e. Kaule and Balche in
Nuwakot. But it was not worked well in Gogane, Makwanpur. Due to scattered houses
location, this approach of community work is not practical.
At point 3, I had no idea there will be general election when
creating the S-Curve. These were the first elections of the local and national
body to be held in nearly two decades[vi].
There was huge public participation in campaigning and many people who usually work
for construction, worked as temporary support for the police force during
elections. Hence, it was difficult to have enough masons and carpenters. Therefore,
the flattening slope can be seen as a combination of monsoon, festivals and
general election. During August – November 2017, only a small number of
homeowners started the construction.
Point 4 and point 5, during November 2017 to June 2018, was
the window of opportunities. The weather was good, and systems are in place which
were reflected on the steep slopes. Right after the festivals, the homeowners
were in the spirit of getting the job done before monsoon and government deadline.
It was series of government deadline[vii],
shown below, that the homeowners can access their government support otherwise
they will loosed it.
At point 6, the slope became flat again. It was due to
monsoon and continued with festivals. But the situation was different, even the
government had extended the deadline, not all who were eligible to the grant
could finished their houses. Even the technical support and community messaging
already given, the recovery program of Nepal Red Cross Societies supported by American
Red Cross, there are people who could not completed the houses. Even some of them
had no willingness to participate to rebuild their houses. By March 2019, the
program which covers Kaule, Balche, Thulogaun and Gogane completed 2,885 out of
3,031 homeowners who had received the first tranche[viii].
The gap of actual S-curve and the planned one is 5%.[ix]
The lessons learned and recommendation
This is owner-driven recovery program. The bright side is the
homeowners take the lead and for sure, the ownership. They can have their
houses based on their preference, on the design also selection of construction material.
It is different with donor-driven program which there are potentials of houses
are not occupied and have one-size-fits-all house design. The owner-driven
setting gives homeowner freedom including the timeline. Those who live abroad
and have different priorities always difficult to find themselves fit to the government
timeline. The extended deadlines might have no impact to them. Therefore, the
message should be changed from deadline to the limited opportunity. The
homeowners have the freedom on when they could join the recovery program. It is
also good vibe for the government and partner organizations. As opportunity has
time limitation, they must work at their best to formulate the strategy and
build cooperation with any institution to implement their program.
The most vulnerable should be served at the earliest of the
recovery program. They have different timeline with their neighbors. They are
slower due to lack of capacities and resources. Even they have difficulties to
kick-start the construction. They do not have enough money or manpower to
remove the debris or clear the construction site. Therefore, on starting the
recovery program this kind of people had to be helped. It is good to use their
houses as the showcase of robust constructed house which local labours and other
homeowners an learn. Their houses can be used for masons training for newly
constructed house or retrofitted. At the earliest, the reconstruction policy
should allow them to have additional grant from government or partner organizations
that might cover their lack of resources.
It is understandable that the recovery takes time. It is
across the globe. But preparing the system should be taken as a crucial disaster
preparedness initiative. Cash as modalities is well-proven in many regions but how
to make it effective in the field, need to be prepared accordingly. Partnership
with local bank, post office, mobile money provider and even with the cooperatives at village level
need to be strengthened. Streamlining supply change should be set and can be easily
activated when the disaster event occurs. The construction material needs to be
ensured can be transported to the most remote area. But on the other hand, local
government at the village level need to promote reuse of salvage material in
order to reduce the dependency on imported material. This is also good to
protect their environment, since imported material usually linked with new
material which they need to harvest from local forest.
Retrofitting should be in the highlight following the
disaster. In many disasters rebuilding new houses always in the main media
coverage. It is also pressurizing many governments to rebuild as fastest as they
could. This condition put retrofitting initiatives are left from the recovery
plan. Then people who have the possibility on retrofitting start thinking to
demolish their houses to have a new one. The message of recovery should start
from the other way around, retrofitting should be ahead of the building new
houses. Since it is cheaper and more environment friendly.
Arwin Soelaksono
[ii] I
was posted in Nepal following the April 2015 Gorkha earthquake, and worked for
the American Red Cross as Shelter Delegate to support Nepal Red Cross Societies on recovery program. My role was managing housing reconstruction
program with owner driven setting. The responsibility encompasses setting up
strategy to support more than 3,000 households to rebuild their houses with
cash transfer programming and technical assistance. The program started by
builders training, setting up cash disbursement mechanism through local banks
and lastly ensure build back safer can be achieved. The project went well and
checked with the S-curve which designed 3 years earlier and received
acknowledgment by the government.
[iii] The
Himalayan Times. Quake-hit to get first tranche of grant by Sept 18. August 16,
2016. https://thehimalayantimes.com/nepal/quake-hit-get-first-tranche-grant-sept-18/
[iv] Keshab
Sharma, Apil KC, Mandip Subedi & Bigul Pokharel (2018) Challenges for
reconstruction after Mw7.8 Gorkha earthquake: a study on a devastated area of
Nepal, Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 9:1, 760-790, DOI:
10.1080/19475705.2018.1480535. https://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2018.1480535
[v] January
12, 2017. The Steering Committee of the National Reconstruction Authority (NRA)
recently approved the increase of the housing reconstruction grants to
NPRs.300,000 (about USD3000). The Committee also decided that NPRs.25,000 from
the third instalment must be mandatorily used to build toilets, install biogas
plants or solar systems. https://www.nepalhousingreconstruction.org/news/government-nepal-approves-increase-grants-subsidy-nrp-200000-npr-300000
[vi] BBC.
Nepal election: First poll since civil war ended. November 26, 2016. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-42126210
[vii] Subedi, Sugandha et. al. Impact of Government Tranche Deadline in Housing Reconstruction: A Case Study of Nepal http://nra.gov.np/uploads/docs2/upcoming_events/Sugandha%20Subedi%20et%20al_Impact%20of%20Government%20Tranche%20Deadline%20in%20Housing%20Reconstruction_%20A%20Case%20Study%20of%20Nepal.pdf
[viii]
Nepal Earthquake Recovery Program – Utthan | End of Program Evaluation Report.
July 2019.
[ix] For
comparison on number, the completion of houses supported by Nepal Red Cross Societies in
partnership with American Red Cross is 95%. The number from NRA statistics
across the country in June 2019, the first tranche received is 669,147 and
house completed is 388,395 i.e. 54%. (House Construction Statistics NRA,
CLPIU-GMALI 2019)
Friday, October 30, 2020
Build Back Circular is the newest approach for climate friendly housing recovery
The slogan Build Back Better introduced on 2006, on housing recovery following the Aceh tsunami. However, now the jargon seems insufficient with the current challenges. In every post-disaster reconstruction, the process is always followed by the potential of environmental degradation. From the perspective of the climate crisis, this process is exacerbated by increasing pollution. Therefore, nowadays the approach being offered for housing recovery is Build Back Circular.[i]
Difficulties in implementing Build Back Better
Under the principle of Build Back Better (BBB), all new
house rebuilds, must be safe from disasters. Moreover, it includes efforts to
prevent re-creating or exacerbating pre-disaster vulnerabilities in the process
of reconstruction. By strategically embracing and optimizing institutional,
financial, political, and human opportunities, positive externalities are
believed to arise from disasters, which can lead to safer and more resilient
communities.[ii]
But, it is difficult for affected people to perceive the
goal of BBB. Many experiences show there was communication gap and different
expectation inhibit people to understand the essence of BBB. Larger parts of
affected communities assumed that BBB means more aesthetically or bigger
houses. Learned from Aceh recovery, the builders, which are the government,
donor agencies and humanitarian agencies, they mostly used contractors. This
situation is understandable since it is exceedingly difficult for people to build
their own houses with concrete and brick walls and at the same time, fulfilling
quality requirements. In fact, not all contractors have sufficient capacity.
This condition also weakens the community's ability to carry
out the so-called owner-driven recovery. From donor driven perspective, the
builder provides housing solution. Start from planning, design, constructing
and the homeowner will receive a house such as turn-key project. Many builders
provide only single design but was expected to fits all. Moreover not only one house
design, the construction material are similar for each beneficiary. But, not
everyone wants a house with building materials or designs as provided by the
aid provider. Because every family tends to choose building materials and
designs as they think are suitable and comfortable with.
Owner-driven recovery and Build Back Safer
Aceh was special case in post-disaster recovery. It was the
biggest funding ever committed for the relief effort with total commitment of
USD 7.7 billion.[iii]
During its peak time there were 124 International NGOs, dozens of United
Nations organizations and 430 local NGOs[iv]
with more than 5,000 international humanitarian workers.[v]
This massive support is heavy with donor driven initiatives.
But on many post-disaster recoveries, 85% recovery done by
the homeowners themselves without humanitarian or governmental shelter
assistance, with little understanding to build a robust structure. They built
houses with their traditional practices which made them still in vulnerable
state. To reach and support homeowners in self-recovery processes, there is a
need to develop an adequate understanding of how knowledge exchange and
adoption in such interactions can be more effective[vi].
Therefore, the concept of Build Back Safer (BBS) was
introduced to educate homeowners on rebuilding their houses properly. It is a
knowledge transfer process with training, messaging, and technical assistance
to ensure informal recovery can also achieve safer recovery.
After the 2009 West Sumatra earthquake, the term BBS, became
popular. The community has more role and opportunity in owner-driven setting.
Recovery is in accordance with their needs, abilities, and time. The role of
the government and humanitarian agencies are to help by providing some amount
of funding and technical support. The assistance is to ensure that the house
being repaired or built meets the requirements for earthquake safety. Because
the amount of funding assistance is only some part of the cost to build a
complete house, people need to add from their savings. The result is that
people are wiser and eventually maximize with what they have. This includes
using reusable of building materials. The more homeowners to reuse the wooden
door frames, also doors and windows to their repaired or newly built house, the
more environmental-friendly recovery they will get.
Then it is realized that saving the environment is as urgent
as self-recovery. If it is not carefully monitored, there will be massive usage
of forest products in the form of wood or its processed products. Then illegal
logging could occur which can lead to other disasters such as landslides and
flash floods.
In previous recoveries some agencies were using fabricated
product to form house structures, which those brought from other cities and
even other islands. The use of building materials imported from big cities,
which are expected to accelerate the reconstruction process, was also not the
best option. There are at least two concerns in these initiatives. The more sophisticated
the building technology used, then less space for self-recovery will be. The
homeowners and local builders with no experience in the technology have to give
the job to those who have sufficient experience. These people usually from
outside of the affected area, also it might be from other islands. Moreover,
transportation of construction material between provinces and even shipment
between islands will increase CO2 emissions into the atmosphere.
Realizing a Back Build
Nowadays BBS concept seems not sufficient anymore. Due to
climate crisis we need to press on to achieve lower carbon emission from the
recovery process. Build Back Circular (BBC) is a perfect combination of safe
self-recovery and rescuing the planet from climate crisis. From the Circular
Economy concept, materials are used repeatedly until all functions and values
are used up. It is different from the linear concept where material is taken
from the earth, produced, used and finally disposed of as waste. The material
continues to be recycled until the amount of waste produced is getting smaller.[vii]
The current concept of circular economy shown in the graph below[viii]. The circular economy message is that the inner circles demand less resources and energy and are more economic as well. The time the value in the resources spends within the inner circles should be maximized.[ix]
From the BBC concept, the community is encouraged to retrofit or to repair houses by adding earthquake safe attributes to make it earthquake safe. Building a new house is only an option when retrofitting is not possible. Of course, with maximizing the reuse of building materials, such as wood, bricks and other materials.
The BBC is also pushing for local economic recovery. This is
because fewer building materials are used from outside the area, except for
those that cannot be produced locally, such as cement and iron. Instead of
using masons from other area because they use sophisticated building
technology, they use local product so local construction workers have more job
opportunities.
For the BBC to be realized, it is necessary to have policies
from the Central and Local Governments to promote self-recovery. There is no
need to worry if recovery is slow, because basically post-disaster recovery
always takes time. The government needs to be present to strengthen community
capacity in self-recovery through funding support, reconstruction guidance and
monitoring. This approach should also apply to humanitarian agencies who help
the affected people. The strategy is to train masons and homeowners as many as
possible on how to retrofit and to rebuild safer houses. Humanitarian agencies
can be partner with the government by providing technical support due to high
need of post-disaster recovery experts.
Strengthen BBC with Supply and Demand approach
Then how to reuse or remanufacture of construction material
as many as possible. All stakeholders have to work on supply or demand side.
From the demand side, the government need to issue policy on prioritizing local
construction material. The policy should also discourage on using building
material if its component contains mostly imported from other area. The demand
also can be increased through continuous education to homeowners and builders.
One of big issue in the wake of disaster is the debris. Following
the earthquake, the homeowner still can collect salvage material to be reused.
But if the hazard is flash flood or landslide or liquefaction and even tsunami,
debris become more serious problem.
The 2004 tsunami left an estimated 10 million cubic meters of debris in Aceh, most of it washed into the ocean and left Banda Aceh with mountains of debris up to 6 km inland. At first, many survivors simply burned wood and other garbage. But authorities discouraged them from doing that because it polluted the air and could expose them to harmful toxins. Three months after the tsunami, the UNDP started a USD 40.5 million recycling programme that employed 400,000 temporary workers to pluck wood and stone from the rubble and use the materials to rebuild roads and houses and to make furniture. The recycled waste was used to reconstruct 100km of roads and manufacture 12,000 pieces of wooden furniture.[x]
Hence, there are a lot of opportunities on managing debris
and turn it to construction material to support recovery. For instance,
combining livelihood program with housing reconstruction by provision of
funding for construction material workshop. This kind of workshop can recycle
building materials. The community can repair or trade used building materials
so that they can be reused. This kind of workshop will reduce the production of
new building materials which means that it is also more efficient in CO2
emissions. The more building materials provided locally, the more irrelevant
the dependence on building materials from outside the area. In the end people
can be left in a safe house and the climate can be maintained.
Education to homeowners and local builders also important.
They need to salvage the material as soon as possible. From Yogyakarta
earthquake 2006, on the first month, some of the survivors cleared their houses
from debris and collecting bricks and wooden material which they thought still
can be used.[xi] This
will be the first message of recovery to the affected people. As they will lead
their own recovery, this effort will help the to realize what kind of recovery
they might expect. Once the assistance from government or NGO present in their
area, they can decide to repair or rebuild their houses according to what they already
have or might receive.
 |
| Lombok homeowner salvage his house material following the earthquake 2018 |
Build Back Circular is achievable
Then at least there are three initiatives to ensure BBC can be implemented.
Firstly, policy from the government to encourage retrofitting and maximize the usage of reuse material. Provision of funding and training to the local building material workshop to turn debris to construction material. Lastly education to reuse as many as possible the construction material.
Combination of those three will bring benefit not only to the affected people but also protecting the climate from excessive use on provision of new construction material which have impact on CO2 .
Arwin Soelaksono
[i] IFRC
- Shelter Research Unit. Humanitarian Circular Exchange - Making space for
makerspaces in the Circular Economy of post-disaster shelter and
reconstruction. Presentation on Climate Red 2020
[ii] Fernandez,
Glenn. Ahmed, Iftekhar. “Build back better” approach to disaster recovery:
Research trends since 2006. (2019)
[iii]
Jock McKeon, “Aceh Reconstruction Expenditure Update June 2007 data” The World
Bank, November 2007
[iv]
Amir Sodikin quoted John Clark from World Bank, “Sia-sia Rekonstruksi Jika
Tanpa Rumah”, Kompas Cyber Media, December 24, 2005
[v]
Carsten Völz, "Koordinasi kemanusiaan di Indonesia: dari sudut pandang
LSM" Forced Migration Review Edisi Khusus Agustus 2005, Refugee Studies
Centre, University of Oxford, pp.26
[vi] Hendriks,
Eefje et. al. Knowledge exchange and adoption to enable safer post-disaster
self-recovery. Journal of Integrated Disaster Risk Management. 2018.
[vii] Korhonen,Jouni.
et. al. Circular Economy: The Concept and its Limitations. Ecological Economics
143 (2018) 37–46
[viii]
Mihelcic, J.R. et. al. Sustainability science and engineering: the emergence of
a new metadiscipline. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2003 (37), 5314–5324
[ix] Korhonen,Jouni.
et. al. Circular Economy: The Concept and its Limitations. Ecological Economics
143 (2018) 37–46
[x] South
China Morning Post 21 December 2014. Indonesia's Banda Aceh, 10 years on, is
clear of tsunami debris, but environmental hazards may remain. https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/article/1667595/indonesias-banda-aceh-10-years-clear-tsunami-debris-environmental-hazards
[xi] DW.
Sebulan Setelah Gempa Yogyakarta. 28 June 2006. https://www.dw.com/id/sebulan-setelah-gempa-yogyakarta/a-2958069
Tuesday, June 30, 2020
Shelter recovery assistance amid the Covid-19 pandemic
Following a disaster which causes house damage, homeowners always want to repair or rebuild their houses according to their own recovery pathways. In some recovery, non-governmental organizations supporting homeowners with various assistance in order they can rebuild safer houses more sustainably. Unfortunately, amid the pandemic, size of assistance are decrease due to limit of staffs movement in the field. Consequently Build Back Safer (BBS) would be difficult to achieve due to lack of technical assistance. On the other hand, there are organizations who had invested on developing capacity of builders and homeowners also adding health and safety measures. They might expect to achieve both, the community might build back safer and improve protection from Covid-19.
Shelter
self-recovery and pandemic
Learned from
the hard way from Aceh, Indonesia, post-tsunami recovery which was heavily
donor driven. It was housing recovery led by agencies with little participation
from the homeowners. The participation even became lesser due to competition
amongst NGOs[ii].
But during last decade the approach has changed. Government and NGOs are more
aware on self-recovery. It is an inevitable process. Following a disaster,
populations never remain passive[iii].
Most disaster-affected families rebuild their homes relying on their own and
local resources, with little or no external assistance[iv].
Even it will take months or years. Hence the role of government and NGOs on providing
assistance is to complement the needs of self-recovery. The assistance should
be supportive, focusing primarily on enabling and assisting household
self-recovery and strengthening systems towards more sustainable outcomes and
processes[v].
Nowadays
there are various program are currently implemented to support the recovery.
For instance, supporting the homeowners with cash-based program. Depending on
the program, the cash can be delivered in stages or just in one time. Even the
amount only 20% - 40% from the needs, but the cash can be used as a stimulus to
kick-start the repair or rebuild houses. Other NGOs currently support on BBS
initiatives through builder and homeowner training. Other helping the builders
through mentoring to ensure all builders are familiar and can apply the safe
structure attributes. Therefore, the presence of engineers, trainers and
skilled builders are essential to empower homeowners and their builders.
Unfortunately, due to the Covid-19 pandemic, many agencies have to limit their staffs’ presence in the field. Even they might aware that without sufficient support, local builders and homeowners might turn to old practices which result to unsafe structure. Also, there are still people in tents or other cramped spaces which make the risks become higher. It is a dilemma for the organizations. They need to protect their staffs’ but it might leave the homeowners become more vulnerable to the pandemic.
Adaptation
through setting example and system
Aside on technical
assistance, setting an example become essential. Some organizations are quite
strict on imposing physical distancing. When receiving cash assistance, the
beneficiaries have to maintain certain space. They require all beneficiaries to
wear mask. All these safety measures are new; therefore homeowners and builders
are not used to it. They need to be educated that wearing mask is to protect
themselves and their society. Therefore, community leaders have to give example
that they themselves willingly practice it. They have to wear masks and mandate
others to wear masks. In their area should be widespread mask-wearing which might
be a very effective complement to hand-washing, physical distancing and other
measures to mitigate the pandemic[vii].
Community leaders have to utilize social capital which is function of social
norms, participation, and network[viii]
in order every member in the community would internalize these safety measures.
Therefore, wearing mask is people solidarity to protect their neighbour.
From project management side, homeowner can be advised to limit the number of their builders otherwise physical distancing cannot be met. Limiting the presence of builders is much better rather stopping the construction. The shelter program needs to continue because it is related to the builders’ livelihood. But unfortunately, those measures mentioned above are too luxurious to settlement with dense population and difficult to have sufficient clean water.
Future of
shelter recovery assistance
This covid-19
pandemic gives us time for us to pause and reflect, on what will shelter
recovery assistance in the future. No one knows when this pandemic will be
over. But we know there would still a need to support shelter recovery. Since
both pandemic and shelter post-disaster recovery are across the globe, there
should be reshaping on type of assistance. Safety and health measures should be
taken into account which should be reflected on the planning and budgeting. Therefore,
shelter assistance should be redesigned. It should consist the most essential
part which can meet the need of owner-driven recovery strategically. At least
there should be three measures in place on recovery assistance can be described
below.
Support
owner driven recovery using technical assistances. Government and non-government
organization should invest on developing homeowners and builders capacity.
Training on BBS should be provided. They
may do so by bringing specialist builders in, by imposing standards, or
providing assistance[ix].
Provide mentoring for local builders also smart investment in order they can
adopt safer construction standards. Messaging on BBS also important. Every
post-disaster recovery is unique. Hence all organization should find how to
help the builders and homeowners on understanding the principles of BBS[x].
They should have the confidence that they can rebuild their houses properly. All
of these are intended to build internal capacity within the community. At some
point the external support could be disrupted or ended, but they still have the
ability to continue their recovery process.
Connect
shelter recovery with livelihood.
Shelter and housing recovery post-disaster in many occasions viewed as overly
time consuming and costly. The bigger the gap between available resources to the
needs, it could be more sensitive to inflation and speculation. Bricks, cement,
timber, steel rebar, masons and carpenters scarcity happened many times along
with the size of the recovery. Therefore, shelter and housing construction work
should be complemented with creation of market and strengthening supply chain. In
this view, lockdown to an area to protect the community from Covid-19 would not
be the best solution. Builders and supplies from outside cannot reach the
affected community and at the end would affect local livelihood. As written
above reducing the number of builders to maintain physical distancing is still an
option. Even it would slow down the construction pace, the builders still can
work and earn their income. The market still survives.
Link
construction work with hygiene promotion. In many shelter recoveries there are initiatives to
give the homeowners access on clean water and sanitation. Some organizations
provide toilets as part of the shelter program. But seeing from this pandemic
there should be upgrade on the assistance. Hygiene promotion become essential
part of the shelter recovery. Provision of handwashing facilities and education
on proper handwashing should be part of the service to the community. It does
not mean that the shelter organizations have to provide all assistance in one
package. Partnering with organization who are expert on hygiene promotion will
be one of the solution.
Arwin
Soelaksono
Photos:
Top: Courtesy of Arsitek
Komunitas (Arkom) Indonesia
Middle: Courtesy of Catholic Relief Services
Bottom: Courtesy of Wahana Visi Indonesia
[i] Opdyke,
Aaron. Resilient and Sustainable Infrastructure Systems: A Comparative Analysis
of Post-Disaster Shelter Coordination, Stakeholder Participation, and Training.
ProQuest LLC. 2017.
[ii] Soelaksono, Arwin. NGO and Donor Coordination to Speeds up Reconstruction and Avoid NGO Competition. 4th Anual International Workshop & Expo on Sumatra Tsunami and Recovery in Banda Aceh. Proceedings. 2009. https://www.scribd.com/document/60616872/NGO-and-Donor-Coordination-To-Speeds-up-Reconstruction-and-Avoid-NGO-Competition
[iii] Schofield,
Holly., Barriers to urban shelter self-recovery in Philippines and Nepal:
lessons for humanitarian policy and practice
[iv] Twigg,
John., et. al. Self-recovery from disasters. An interdisciplinary perspective.
Working paper 523. Overseas Development Institute 2017
[v] Humanitarian
Shelter and Settlements Guidelines. DG ECHO Thematic Policy Document n° 9. 2017
[vi] Hidellage,
Vishaka., and Usoof, Aziza. Scaling-up people-centred reconstruction: Lessons
from Sri Lanka’s post-tsunami owner-driven programme. Building Back Better
Delivering people-centred housing reconstruction at scale. Practical Action
Publishing Ltd. 2010
[vii] Manjoo,
Farhad. It’s Time to Make Your Own Face Mask. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/31/opinion/coronavirus-n95-mask.html
[viii]
Nakagawa, Yuko., and Shaw, Rajib. Social Capital:A Missing Link to Disaster
Recovery. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters. 2004
[ix] Schilderman,
Theo. Putting people at the centre of reconstruction. Building Back Better
Delivering people-centred housing reconstruction at scale. Practical Action
Publishing Ltd. 2010
[x] Shelter Cluster with some
organizations develop key messages on Build Back Safer. The key messages are
principles which is very concise and expected to be easy to memorize by the
builders and homeowners. For instance following the earthquake in Central
Sulawesi in Indonesia the key messages can be downloaded at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aYNaRQcWBZlyg3GBa1g02N4F6To623gY/view . Another key messages was from
Gorkha Nepal earthquake which BBS key messages can be downloaded at https://www.sheltercluster.org/sites/default/files/docs/english_151124_10_key_messages_0.pdf
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)