Wednesday, December 9, 2020

Improving post-disaster housing reconstruction based on Nepal recovery S-curve

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.

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

[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)


Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)