Minimizing debris for more sustainable recovery

Minimizing post-disaster debris intended to fulfill the zero-waste principle is achievable if at least 3 parties, i.e., housing recovery actors, environmental agencies, and local government, could collaborate on developing a preparedness plan. Planning to manage debris after a disaster would be too late and could hamper the recovery process and endanger the environment. Massive quantities of debris suddenly overwhelm the local government and the affected people. For instance, Aceh had 10 million cubic meters of debris following the 2004 tsunami. Also, there were 14 million tons of debris waste was generated from the fourteen most affected districts in Nepal following the 2015 earthquake. It took months to clear them. It is also costly; for instance, the cost of handling the disaster debris following Hurricane Katrina exceeded USD 4 billion.

Without a solid integrated plan, all stakeholders tend to work to deliver programs that they feel comfortable about it. Shelter agencies will provide temporary shelters or support to rebuild houses once the government has a clear plan for housing recovery. Then, the progress will be halted at some point due to debris, including hazardous ones, needing to be removed by government-appointed agencies. It might take months due to the debris containing human remains and hazardous wastes such as asbestos, concrete rubble, wood, and many more. All of those may result in delays, will affect costs and lead to inflation, and uncontrolled ruble dumping leads to health problems and environmental issues. 

Hence, shelter/housing agencies, environmental agencies, and local government should develop a plan as a preparedness measure. Shelter/housing agencies should develop plans to maximize the reuse of salvaged material and plan for repair or retrofitting rather than build a new construction. This approach may retain the building material within the area. This will reduce the amount of transportation needed to dump the waste and bring material from neighboring areas. 

The environmental agencies should assist in building the capacity of local entrepreneurs to reuse, reduce, and recycle (3R). Without proper support, people would not have any idea how to manage the pile of rubble and change it into useful materials for reconstruction. Moreover, these activities bring more local income and retain the area's money circulation. If the initiative can be successful, it might bring a multiplier effect beyond economic activities such as providing access to public services such as better education and health facilities. 

The government should endorse those initiatives. The endorsement should be stated in the government policy and budget. Hence, instead of rushing to provide temporary shelter or supporting new house reconstruction, recovery should be planned by incorporating environmental principles to ensure sustainable recovery.

Arwin Soelaksono

Video: Post-liquefaction area in Palu, Indonesia. 2018.