South Asia earthquake 2005: learning from previous recovery operations

This briefing gives an overview of some of the main lessons drawn from recovery and relief programmes. The brief targets individuals heading or working in relief/recovery, particularly in South Asia, as well as operational decision makers.

Some of the lessons summarised in this briefing come under the following headings:

• Targeting. The author points out that the poor are especially highly impacted in the aftermath of a disaster due to their limited access to resources and fewer recovery options. Disasters however affect every social group. The brief also state that the timeline for recovery projects are often unrealistically short due to governments’ need to pay attention to project time tables set by donors.
• Participation. The brief also advises that recovery programming needs to provide more support for, and encourage women’s participation in decision-making processes, especially poor women. Another way of encouraging participation in relief/recovery programming is through broad communication, outreach and dialogue activities.
• Assessment. In order to better monitor changes in livelihood and other material concerns, assessment should be ongoing and coordinated among actors. This also allows populations affected to give input regarding the recovery programs as the progress.
• Shelter and housing. Issues of land ownership and land rights must be addressed early and forcefully. Furthermore, where possible, land titles should be regularised, or a functional proxy for land titles provided. Other assessments also show that already degraded environments in rural areas are being further exploited, especially in terms of timber for housing. The brief also points out that to promote gender equality, joint titling for women and men should be considered.
• Risk Reduction. Aftershocks from quakes, as well as other hazards often put already affected communities at significant continuing risk. The brief also notes that schools and providing schools and hospitals does not just provide essential community services, but can also act as important gathering places for rural communities. These therefore need to be adequately reconstructed or upgraded for safety and to withstand future disasters.
• Livelihoods. It is important for recovery programming to incorporate livelihood support because it recognises affected people as actors, rather than passive recipients of aid; and it can support strategies already in use by marginalised groups, which have proven successful.
• Policy. Because recovery by nature multi-sectoral, new disaster management institutions need to have the authority to coordinate reconstruction efforts by sectoral ministries and agencies. Furthermore, consideration should be given to how recovery policies weave into existing development plans.

[Adapted from author]