Research for Haiti

Housing Reconstruction in Post-Earthquake Gujarat: A Comparative Analysis

A study by the Humanitarian Practice Network completed five years after the huge earthquake in Gujarat, India in 2001 entitled “Housing reconstruction in post-earthquake Gujarat: A comparative analysis" is well worth reading. It reports findings from interviews with residents of housing projects that were built through several different management strategies, including contractor-driven (in this case NGOs working with construction firms) and owner-driven approaches.  (See also these other reports by HPN on lessons from other disasters.)

Because each project site was different from the other sites (sometimes in important ways), it is hard to know how much of the resulting differences in satisfaction can be fairly attributed to the management techniques which varied by site. The sample sizes were somewhat small for some cases, too.

Nonetheless, some differences in satisfaction and costs of the reconstruction were fairly dramatic, and the report provides substantial details on each site so that readers can take away their own conclusions. The report’s warnings are especially worth reading for projects that are looking to build housing on new sites. In particular (page 24):

Contractor-driven construction ex nihilo differs from in situ reconstruction in that, instead of rebuilding the village on the same site, the new houses are relocated to a new site. The advantage of this approach is that it does not require the removal of rubble to clear the site, and the reconstruction plan is not constrained by any buildings that survived the earthquake. However, there is a growing awareness that resettlement is a traumatic experience, and may have a
significant negative impact on people’s livelihoods and social relations.

From the conclusion (page 25):

It is perhaps ironic that the project that enjoyed the least appreciation among its beneficiaries was on average by far
the most expensive, costing around three times more than
the non-contractor projects. …

This study provides empirical evidence that the growing
trend towards financial support to owner-driven post-disaster
housing reconstruction is socially, financially and
technically viable. It shows that, in a context where people
are traditionally involved in building their own dwellings,
given adequate financial and technical support they have
the capacity to construct houses that are more likely to
respond to their needs and preferences than houses
provided by outside agencies. The study confirms many of
the drawbacks and risks associated with a contractor-driven
approach: inflexibility, cultural insensitivity, failure
to adapt to local conditions, and a tendency to introduce
external construction materials ill-suited to the local
climate, and which are difficult to maintain and upgrade.

These conclusions are not based on project evaluations by
‘experts’, but on what affected people themselves thought
about different post-disaster housing reconstruction
approaches. The clear conclusion is that the cheapest
approach to post-disaster housing reconstruction was the
most effective in reaching the most neglected communities,
and addressing their housing requirements.
Conversely, the most expensive approach may have made
the rich richer, and the poor more vulnerable. Funding
agencies and NGOs should reconsider their role in post-disaster
housing reconstruction and support people’s own
initiative, rather than providing them with what outside
agencies believe is good for them. Cash-based approaches
are viable in emergencies, are more empowering and more
dignifying. These goals are fully in line with most NGOs’
objectives, but need to be translated into operational
strategies. We hope that this study, by allowing hundreds
of people to tell us what they needed to restore their
livelihoods, will encourage agencies to look again at how
they respond to housing needs after disaster.

Unfortunately, the report provides little detail on the differences across methods in the suitability of the houses for surviving future earthquakes; the author simply states that owner-driven construction appeared safe and that these residents appeared to understand the construction issues at stake.

Overall the report is very favorable to owner-driven programs. However, it is hard to tell if this tendency is a result of their findings or of the author’s pre-existing beliefs. For instance, on the pros and cons of owner-driven processes (page 10) they mention few cons and dismiss what may be a large problem (safe construction):

An extensive review of different post-disaster housing reconstruction approaches by Sultan Barakat points to a number of advantages associated with owner-driven approaches to housing reconstruction.3 The most tangible benefits are that the costs may be lower,building may be incremental, allowing occupancy before the house is fully finished,and occupancy rates tend to be higher. There are also a number of intangible benefits.Encouraging the active participation of disaster affected communities in the reconstruction of their homes may be a useful way of restoring a sense of pride and well-being in people who have been through a trauma. Building activities provide structure to the day, and can keep large numbers of community members gainfully occupied. An owner-driven approach allows people to reconstruct their houses according to their own preferences and requirements, and may strengthen local building capacities. With adequate financial and technical assistance, self-built houses are likely to be more sustainable. People, if given an option, tend to choose building materials and techniques that are familiar to them.Accordingly, they may be in a better position to provide for future additions and repairs. Finally, an owner-driven approach may contribute to preserving the local architectural heritage and vernacular housing styles,features fundamental to a community’s cultural identity. In particular, in relation to the devastating experience of a disaster, it is important to give people some sense of continuity.

An owner-driven approach also entails some risks and drawbacks. It raises questions about the degree of assistance more vulnerable sections of the community should receive to enable them to engage in reconstruction.People may be too busy pursuing their livelihood activities to spare the time to participate in or supervise construction work. Safety may be a concern where traditional construction practices are held responsible for large numbers of collapsed buildings. These risks can be overcome through the introduction of building codes and adequate technical assistance.

Still, even with these caveats, this report looks like required reading.

Cash grants after a natural disaster and for development? Exciting evidence from Oxfam Great Britain projects in Zambia and Viet Nam

Duncan Green of Oxfam Great Britain has posted a blog summarizing and commenting on evidence from Zambia that cash grants can be very efficient and effective ways to provide assistance following a disaster. More details can be found in this report (PDF, 305kb; page three of that course lists the way to get an extended evaluation). The report and Duncan’s blog comment in particular on women’s experiences with the program and with a “complaint box” system that was used. Details on how the grants were spent are in the report, too. Overall, I think this is very exciting, especially as it reduces the need for expensive staff consultants (although oversight is, of course, needed).

On March 15th, the International Herald Tribune also had an opinion piece by Floyd Whaley on Oxfam Great Britain using cash grants in Viet Nam in 2006.  Of course, people are often highly critical of cash grants in welfare states. Responding to this Whaley adds:

“Welfare payments in the U.S. and Europe are long-term, small payments,” he [Steve Price-Thomas, the Vietnam country director of Oxfam Great Britain] said. “This was a large, one-off transfer, which households knew was coming for months in advance so they could plan for it and avoid the windfall effect.”

He also notes the Oxfam program is not meant to replace existing development initiatives. “In the particular case of this program, the lives of a significant number of households have changed for the better and that change is still apparent three years later,” he says. “That doesn’t mean we should stop worrying about education services and women’s political participation and the many other aspects of development assistance. This is a useful tool, but not the only one.”

It’s unlikely that the billions of dollars in development aid that is spent annually will ever be turned over to the poor without conditions, but the Oxfam program deserves a closer look by traditional development organizations.

Here's a guide from Oxfam on cash grants, the link takes you to a page where you can get the guide as a PDF or order it from the UK: Cash-Transfer Programming in Emergencies : A Practical Guide.

There are several organizations in Haiti that could facilitate such a program which could be targeted to families that are housing relatives from the earthquake-damaged areas and which could help ensure that Haiti’s harvest this year excels. It sounds as if the largest grants in the Vietnam case were for just under $400; so while small they were substantial grants to the families, many of the grants were relatively small interventions.

More once I get the full evaluation. Thoughts?

Evaluations and Impact Analyses: Economic Impact of Relief and UN Work

A host of documents for today on the economic (and social) impact of relief work, including UN peacekeeping work, in Haiti and other counties.

1. Peace Dividend Trust puts forth a call for relief projects in Haiti to adopt a "Haiti First" policy on purchases.
2. In a somewhat similar vein is this 2005 assessment at Prevention Web.Net of the benefits of Cash for Work (CFW) programs run by Mercy Corps during its efforts in Aceh after the tsunami. The report finds that cash for work programs could be implemented rapidly in emergency situations and had the benefited individuals as well as their communities socially as well as economically. The report only studied short-term CFW programs, however, while Haiti could likely benefit from sustained jobs programs, something President Clinton has suggested several times.
3. Regarding the impact of UN operations, the first report for today is a sobering look at the impactof UN peacekeeping operations (including the operation in Haiti) on prostitution and the trafficking of women. This report, from 2009, is from MICROCON at the University of Sussex.
4. The second report on the UN is a fairly exhaustive and thoughtful 2006 study of an extensive range of concerns about the social, bureaucratic, and economic impact of UN operations in nations. The goal of the study:  "Although the body of literature related to the economic dimensions of peacekeeping operations is wide-ranging and diverse, there has been very little analysis of the extent to which mission policies and choices can affect the longer-term development of the places where they deploy. This project set out to help fill this gap by gathering data that could permit more systematic projections of longer-term impact and by analyzing how such impact might be harnessed to support the fundamental international objective of locally sustainable peace and security."  Everything from the impact of local hiring and pay scales to use of air conditioners is reviewed. The report is by the Peace Dividend Trust and Stimson Center. Fascinating stuff even if you don't always agree with their analysis.
   

Evaluation: Community Organizing in the U.S.

The Alliance for Justice is a nonprofit in the U.S. that maintains a free community organizing web site which includes Resources for Evaluating Community Organizing(RECO).  Although these resources are about community organizing in the U.S., they may be of interest to people evaluating organizing in Haiti. Evaluating organizing can be tricky to think about at first as organizing operates in a very fluid environment where goals often shift and by definition often missed (i.e., if it was easy to win a policy change, you would not need organizing), so these may be worth a look. 

Note: while RECO nicely summarizes and organizes the resources it tracks, some of them are from journals; thus, you may have to track a resource down at the library or contact the authors (many resources are directly linked, however).

If people have documents related to evaluating organizing in Haiti, please post in the comments or email to me (see the top post of this site for contact info).

Some recent resources reviewed on RECO:

Ranghelli, Lisa. 2009. Measuring the Impacts of Advocacy and Community Organizing: Application of a Methodology and Initial Findings. The Foundation Review. Volume 1:3.

"Analyzing and Evaluating Organizing Strategies" by University of Massachusetts-Boston Labor Resource Center (this is available from the UM-B website and was originally a tool for students to use).