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

In many events, number of houses damage, along with number of casualties are indicating the magnitude of the disaster. Affected people whose houses were damaged tried as soon as possible made makeshift tents or built or find temporary shelter. Shelter is universally recognized as a foundational element of disaster recovery; and while its ability to provide protection from the elements is a core function, it also affords broader social and economic benefits.[i] Many of them are living in temporary shelters. Some of them live with families outside the affected area or dwell in rental houses. Every households have their own pathways to recover.

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

No one was aware of this pandemic when designing the recovery program. It came at a sudden which made every organization has to modify their program. To those who are flexible and have sufficient resources, they can continue and at the same time practice safety measures. They have to work together with the community to break the chain of transmission. As long they can practice physical distancing, always wear mask and the builders and homeowners can wash their hands. Then some organization add hand washing facilities to their shelter and housing recovery program. Hence it is a holistic integrated approach to housing. It is good to have some provision for integrating aspects such as infrastructure, water and sanitation into housing projects as these enhance the quality of settlements in the post-disaster context[vi]

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.

Creating system which would strengthen safety measures should be in place, even it should be provided earlier. Some organization provide thermometer gun to check those with high fever are not be allowed to work or gathered in public meeting. Provision of masks and handwashing station beforehand would encourage builders and homeowners to adapt the new practices. Also setting safe space to ensure sufficient distance during cash distribution or other assistance.

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

People centered housing recovery for comprehensive recovery post-disaster

As house rebuild is the most needed by the disaster affected families whose houses are damaged, house reconstruction become the most captivating topic of recovery. The bigger number of house damage, the pressure for quick rebuild also increase. During the decade it was already proven that people centered housing recovery is the best solution for comprehensive recovery. Moreover community involvement might increase the impact of recovery initiative.

Growing pressure leads to quick solution

The toughest argument of people centered housing recovery is the process is to slow. The obstacle is considerable since there is insufficient capacity of affected people on rebuilding their houses. They might lost their livelihood, therefore their saving would not sufficient for house rebuild. To those who have sufficient saving they might repair or rebuild their houses but for many of affected people they might have conflicting priorities. Their priority is how they daily needs are met. In many events, housing recovery cannot be seen in a short time frame. Therefore setting a recovery program around time might lead to failure.

Market and livelihood both are also affected by disaster. The supply chain and economic system are disrupted. The impact of this condition is more severe if the affected area are in rural sites. There are transportation challenges as bridges or roads were damaged. In many events, earthquake in rainy season might cause landslide. Such as in Nepal following the 2015 earthquake, the roads blocked due to landslide during monsoon[i]. Therefore the construction material prices would increase due to limited transportation.  

The problem continues to grow even more complicated if the local government does not have clear plan on housing recovery. Housing reconstruction is an essential element on the recovery but both strategy and policy are seldom can be found in the contingency plan. This missing part would give way to noise which come from political agenda. As disaster situations always useful for publicity seekers, political elites might use it for making political capital[ii]. It happens worldwide not unique to a particular country.

Over the time, combination of those three above becoming more intricate. The needs of affected people, market still not fully functional and political pressures might leads recovery initiatives to wrong direction. The government might give quick solution but overlook to get buy-in from the affected people.

Dilemma between rapid recovery process and actual people need

It is proven that construction using modular system is faster than using conventional system. Modular or prefabricated construction has gradually replacing the traditional on-site construction due to the benefits provided, notably faster time, reduced costs, better work quality, and less environmental impacts. Prefabricated construction guaranties more control over the quality of components and safety of the construction.[iii]

Government support the earthquake affected people in Lombok, Nusa Tenggara Barat, Indonesia with cash grant to build house through contractors. The contractors provide concrete fabricated columns and skilled labors to construct the houses. The contractor also deliver bricks and other materials. The houses design is uniform to all beneficiaries. But this initiative is not fully accepted by some affected people. Those who are still traumatic with bricks and concrete which collapsed during the earthquake, they are asking for different structure such as timber and bamboo.[iv]  To those who are still in government scheme, still have to top up with their saving since the cash grant is not sufficient to complete a house. The problem then the cost would increase due to high demand. Now they are worry since the contractor have more control on price setting.[v]

The idea is to speed up the reconstruction process should be appreciated but there are missing pieces should not to be overlooked. We have to realize that affected people have their own plan. Disaster will not undermine their ability to recover and on the other hand they know their limitation. The community should be consulted from the earliest phase of recovery of what is their perception on recovery path. They need support for sure but what kind of support would be the best for them. For those who have land title they would rebuild their houses[vi]. Then what kind of house they want to build; their answer will be many according to family size, land typology and their construction material preference. Therefore there will not be one solution fits for all.

Since in every disaster event there will be political pressure, the noise should be reduced. The government should have housing recovery strategy beforehand. The strategy document will be a reference which can communicate government plan clearly to the affected people, potential donors and humanitarian organizations. The spirit of the recovery plan is to put the affected people at the center. It is important to get community participation to develop a permanent housing recovery plan based on two ideas. The unique needs of the residents and the natural hazards they may experience[vii]. It is more important than build back safer as people centered housing recovery could represent a more detailed way to consider the varied aspects of housing recovery projects. [viii]

The recovery plan should promote housing owner driven reconstruction post-disaster. The homeowner should participate since the early stage of the project. There are important decisions to make, for instance house designs, choice of technologies and procedures.[ix] Then the role of local government, donor agencies and humanitarian organizations could provide support for proper funding mechanism and safer construction.

Beyond the house build

Then if people already at the center of housing recovery is the speed of recovery can be improved? Actually there is no guarantee that people centered housing recovery can make the recovery faster. But there are several things which lead to comprehensive recovery are noticeable. Since the house owner take the lead, there will be no rejection as it happened in Lombok. They choose the design, type of material and also the construction pace. It helps the local business since local builders will use mostly local material. This construction work can give multiplier effect for other economic activity in the area. More job and new business are open, which all of these are to fill the demand from the construction work.

Since the construction will use technology which quite familiar to the local builders, there is no need to bring builders from outside. But local builders still need external support to improve their skills to meet the build back safer requirement. In this part, government and humanitarian agencies can provide funding and technical assistance. Local builders need to be trained properly and continuous monitoring for sometime to develop their skills. It takes time but it is part of the process to change the old practices to the new custom on constructing safer structure.

Arwin Soelaksono

---

[i] McAdoo, Brian G. & Quak, Michelle & Gnyawali, Kaushal & Adhikari, B & Devkota, Sanjaya & Lal Rajbhandari, Purna & Sudmeier-Rieux, Karen. (2018). Roads and landslides in Nepal: How development affects environmental

[ii] Bose B.P.C., The Politics of Disasters, The Indian Journal of Political Science, Vol. 55, No. 2, 1994

[iii] Molavi, Jeffrey and Barral, Drew L. A. Construction Procurement Method to Achieve Sustainability in Modular Construction, Procedia Engineering 145 ( 2016 ) 1362 – 1369, 2016

[iv] Trauma Rumah Beton, Sebagian Korban Tolak RISHA https://radarlombok.co.id/trauma-rumah-beton-sebagian-korban-tolak-risha.html   . Accessed June 16, 2019.

[v] Pembangunan risha di lombok barat terkendala bahan. https://mataram.antaranews.com/berita/38552/pembangunan-risha-di-lombok-barat-terkendala-bahan .

[vi] This article is not cover those who do not have legal land that they can build house upon.

[vii] Cantrell, Randall A. et.al. Pre-Disaster Planning for Permanent Housing Recovery VOLUME 2: Planning Strategy. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Policy Development and Research. 2012.

[viii] Maly, Elizabeth. Rethinking “Build Back Better” in housing reconstruction: A proposal for “People Centered Housing Recovery”. 2016

[ix] Lyons, Michael; Schilderman, Theo; Boano, Camillo. Building Back Better: Delivering People-centred Housing Reconstruction at Scale. 2010