Post-Disaster Reconstruction: An Opportunity to Recreate a Sustainable Built Environment or...

UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE AND PLANNING

Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University

Kashmere Gate Campus, Delhi

RESEARCH PAPER, 2013-14

Post-Disaster Reconstruction:

An Opportunity to Recreate a Sustainable Built Environment

or

Unplanned Reconstruction creating another Disaster after Disaster?

PARITOSH YADAV

04690701610

4TH YEAR, 2013-14

GUIDE

KAMAL CHAWLA

GURU GOBIND SINGH

INDRAPRASTHA

UNIVERSITY

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my thanks to my guide Ar. Kamal Chawla. His advice,

expertise and encouragement always pushed me to think new and better

and also for parting his valuable time for this paper.

I would like to express my thanks to my dissertation coordinator Prof.

A.G.K. Menon and Prof. Sumant Sharma for leading us and always being

around even in tough times. Their directions and guidance have a pivotal

role in completion of this paper.

I would also like to thank my friends who have been constantly the source

of new ideas and who gave me invaluable inputs. And it would not have

been possible without USAP and its walls and its memories.

Paritosh Yadav

04690701610

(University School of Architecture and Planning)

1

CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... 3

HYPOTHESIS ................................................................................................................... 4

INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 5

OBJECTIVE ...................................................................................................................... 7

RESEARCH QUESTIONS................................................................................................... 7

METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................. 7

RECONSTRUCTION PROCESS .......................................................................................... 8

DESIGN AND RECONSTRUCTION APPROACHES ............................................................. 9

(UNLINKED)MULTI-PHASED APPROACH .................................................................. 9

Emergency Response .............................................................................................. 9

Mid-Term Response................................................................................................ 9

TRANSITIONAL APPROACH .................................................................................... 11

TRANSITIONAL PROCESS ....................................................................................... 11

TRANSITIONAL SHELTER TIMELINE: ...................................................................... 12

CHARACTERSTICS OF TRANSITIONAL SHELTER..................................................... 13

APPROACHES FOR INCREMENTAL PROCESS........................................................ 14

STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES, OPPORTUNITIES AND THREATS OF TRANSITIONAL

SHELTER APPROACH ............................................................................................. 16

SITE SELECTION STANDARDS ................................................................................ 18

DISASTER RESILIENCE MEASURES......................................................................... 21

BASIC DESIGN STANDARDS IN SHELTER, SETTLEMENT ....................................... 28

CASE STUDY 1 : LEH FLASH FLOODS, 2010 ............................................................. 33

CASE STUDY 2 : GUJARAT EARTHQUAKE 2001 ...................................................... 40

CASE STUDY 3 : BARMER FLOOD RAJASTHAN 2006 .............................................. 43

2

CASE STUDY 4 : BALASORE FLASH FLOODS ORISSA 2007 ...................................... 47

CASE STUDY 5 : UTTARAKHAND FLASH FLOODS 2013 .......................................... 53

EXPERTISE CALL ............................................................................................................ 57

QUESTIONNAIRE 1 ................................................................................................. 57

QUESTIONNAIRE 2 ................................................................................................. 60

QUESTIONNAIRE 3 ................................................................................................. 61

CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................ 63

REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 65

3

ABSTRACT

‘The history of post-disaster reconstruction is a gallery of frequent failures and rare

success stories . . . there are numerous examples of no recovery, where years after

the disaster, there is still abundant evidence of ruined buildings, half-finished projects

and the failure to deliver the early promise.’ 1

Though there are many examples of post-disaster recovery across the globe, but

most of them have been erratic and insufficient to cater to the real needs of affected

communities. Houses and other public buildings may have been rebuilt, but have not

been appropriate enough for living by the affected people. However, the reasons for

failures in responding to such emergency situations are mainly related to lack of

time, preparedness and pre-disaster planning for reconstruction.

‘. . . from great destruction comes the opportunity of creation.’ 2

Post-disaster reconstruction could also be seen as an opportunity to recreate the

built environment catering to the needs of present day society, taking care of

natural environment and considering future risks.

'Invention is merely a way of seeing, of accidents as signs and as opportunities.’ 3

Accidents and disasters both have the power to make society review the situation

and come up with suitable solutions responding to the needs.

1 Davis, Ian; Shelter after Disaster, Oxford Polytechnic Press, 1987

2 Deleuze

3 Virillio, 2006

4

‘Recognizing what we have done in the past is recognition of ourselves. By

conducting a dialogue with our past, we are searching how to go forward.’ 4

In present day’s globalised world, when we have access to information and

knowledge - accumulated over centuries and millennia - from every corner of the

globe, we should be in a position to find appropriate solutions to create a

sustainable built-environment for the society. But, this opportunity has been lost in

most of the post-disaster reconstruction cases.

HYPOTHESIS

Pre-disaster planning for reconstruction process can convert disaster scenario into

an opportunity for creating sustainable built environment.

4 Takeda, Kiyoko

5

INTRODUCTION

Natural disasters are becoming a recurring phenomenon due to rapid changes in

climate conditions at global level, causing loss of life, property, natural wealth and

environmental degradation. After such catastrophes major population becomes

homeless, a huge amount of population comes on road without a roof on their head

to sleep, eat or to protect themselves from extreme climatic conditions. So it

becomes vital to provide them with instant shelters for living which are capable of

protecting them from extreme climatic conditions and other problems.

For rehabilitation various government agencies, NGOs, and other organizations

come in action and start the process of reconstruction and rehabilitation. Despite

the wide-ranging and diverse activity carried out in the process of rehabilitation by

these organizations, we come across the scenario in which the affected people are

still on road, without roof or any shelter to live even after months or even years after

the emergency.

‘The shelters after disaster are failing to meet the needs of those who have just lived

through the traumatic experience of losing their primary dwelling.’[5]

The case becomes more shocking when we come to know that the shelters provided

to the beneficiaries were not used by them as they were not functioning properly or

were not appropriate according to the climate or culture for living.

‘The conventional donor structures may economically shelter the body but they

neglect to address of home-permanence and belonging.’[6]

This turns up as another DISASTER AFTER DISASTER.

‘. . . this is mainly due to potential of the space (shelter) to aid the emotional well-

being is severally limited by time and resources in case of emergency.’[7]

[5]

Davis, Ian; Shelter After Disaster, Oxford Polytechnic Press, 1987 [6]

Kronenburg, 2002 [7]

Siegel, 2002

6

Failure of the shelters provided in the process of disaster reconstruction gives rise to

debates questioning the role of architects in such scenarios.

"Architects are often the last people needed in disaster reconstruction . . . and the

role of architects in these circumstances is marginal at best . . . Most of the architects

are taught almost the exact opposite of what is needed in disaster reconstruction.

Architects are taught to focus on product (a building), whereas humanitarian

practitioners major on the process (involving people). For architects, ownership of the

design rests with them and fellow professionals." [8]

The above statement could be perception for certain reasons in the Disaster

Management Sector. On the other hand, I feel that the architects not just

concentrate on products (buildings), but are taught to consider the users of the

space first before thinking of a building and drawing the first line. They are taught

how to respond to the existing cultural context, natural context and architectural

context.

It is seen that many architects focus more on product than on the process and get

fascinated by iconic architecture, but that cannot be generalised for whole

architectural profession.

‘If there’s anyone qualified to consider the long-term when rebuilding in post-disaster

situations, it’s architects. And if there’s anyone with a moral obligation to provide

safe, affordable, and sustainable shelter, it’s most definitely architects.’ [9]

Such debates lead me to explore the architect’s role in post-disaster reconstruction

scenarios and the possibilities of converting disaster into an opportunity for

recreating sustainable built environment.

[8]

Sanderson, David; The Guardian, 3rd

March 2010 [9]

AIA Catalog; Changing Role Of Architects In Disaster Response

7

OBJECTIVE

Studying different approaches for post-disaster reconstruction process.

To understand the scope of architect's role in creating a built environment for the

affected population and looking for the possible solution for the problems related to

post disaster re-construction process.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. What are the various pros and cons of different architectural approaches adopted

in the process of reconstruction?

2.What are the various reasons of gaps in the process of reconstructing shelters for

affected people?

3.What is the role of expertise such as architects and planners in such cases and how

does is affect the process of reconstruction?

METHODOLOGY

Research of this dissertation will be done by going through the following sources:

1. Books: To understand the different approaches adopted at the time of

catastrophes by the various organisations and disaster management authorities in

the process of reconstructing in post disaster scenarios.

2. Journals/Articles: To understand the perspective of the world towards this issue,

and to understand the strategies (if any) taken up in concern of this issue.

3. Case studies: Desk and Field case studies to understand the various reconstruction

techniques and approaches adopted currently on the field and what were the

techniques or approaches followed for the disaster reconstruction in past and what

are the ground realities on field in post disaster scenario.

4. Interviews: Interviews of expertise involved in disaster reconstruction process to

understand the state of post-catastrophic scenarios.

8

RECONSTRUCTION PROCESS

Sustainable reconstruction often takes a number of years, especially in urban

environments. It is always a challenge to support shelter for affected populations

over this period of time.

The shelters provided to persons in the aftermath of a disaster must meet good

quality standards in order to last for a number of years, offering persons affected a

safe, secure, healthy and dignified accommodation. They must also be of the right

size and layout to enable beneficiaries to regain their livelihoods and to take the lead

within efforts for reconstruction.

After the emergency till the permanent solution, the process of disaster

reconstruction in terms of providing shelters is divided in mainly three phases:

1. Emergency response: provision of shelter in form of tents or metal sheets.

2. Temporary/Midterm response: temporary shelters are provided for the time

gap between emergency and permanent solutions.

3. Recovery: a proper habitable housing is provided.

Transitional shelter approach and multi-phased approach are the two approaches

adopted in the process of reconstruction.

9

DESIGN AND RECONSTRUCTION APPROACHES

(UNLINKED)MULTI-PHASED APPROACH

Reconstruction often takes several years. The multi-phased approach aims to

provide instant shelters to the affected population. This approach gives importance

to time more than quality of the product.

In this approach we provide shelter in three stages which are not linked with each

other:

Emergency Response

First week after catastrophe, tents/temporary structures are provided which could

be for single family or a group of families.

Mid-Term Response

Within two months we provide them with semi-permanent shelters which can

endure for the time till full recovery is done. These shelters are mostly prefabricated

structure.

The prefabricated structures are a big no if we talk about Indian context as they do

not culturally fit in our country. They are found being used as stores or are

completely in unusable state and turns out to be another disaster after disaster.

Permanent Reconstruction

For recovery we provide them with permanent shelters which can be pre-fab also.

The time taken for full recovery in disaster reconstruction is said to be 1.6 month to

2 yrs. In reality the timeline of 1 weak-2 month-2 yr doesn't exist., it depends on the

time we are getting funds and depends on scale of design and how much time we

are taking to design the shelters.

10

Diagram below shows an incremental transitional shelter process

After a disaster there is a great need of instant shelter support, pre-fabricated

shelters are very easy to transport and take very less time to build as compared to

other approaches and hence become an instant source for shelter support.

EMERGENCY

SHELTER TEMPORARY

SHELTER PERMANENT

CONSTRUCTION

Image source : Transitional Settlement and Reconstruction after

Natural Disasters, Shelter Centre, 2008

11

TRANSITIONAL APPROACH

Reconstruction often takes several years. The transitional shelter approach aims to

initiate and support a sustainable, beneficiary driven process of constructing

culturally appropriate shelter at the beneficiaries’ individual pace.

In this approach we provide shelter in two steps considering permanent recovery to

be the main goal and design for permanent recovery from day one.

First we provide tents for instant shelter then we aim for permanent recovery and

start designing for permanent structure.

Now, due to shortage of funds and time we do not build full structures for them in

one go, we work in stages for full structures and when the fund comes we complete

the structures.

TRANSITIONAL PROCESS

COORDINATION[10]

Coordination is an activity which continues throughout the response to a disaster so

that common decisions can be made and implemented to best serve the needs of

the affected population. By coordinating efforts in response, gaps and overlaps can

be avoided. It is also a way of ensuring that the affected population can play a key

role in decision making.

STRATEGY[10]

The initial strategy should be prepared in the first days after a disaster. The strategy

should be reviewed and changed regularly throughout the response, as more

information becomes available.

A single strategy should be developed to avoid the confusion and ease the work. The

10 Shelter after disaster - Strategies for Transitional Settlement and Reconstruction, Shelter Centre, 2010

12

strategy should include response to immediate shelter needs but also to longer-term

reconstruction, supporting the entire population affected.

ASSESSMENT[11]

A proper assessment should be done before designing or re-constructing.

Damage assessment helps us in categorizing the buildings on the basis of damage

through which we get a more clear idea of how much work has to be done on the

buildings. If a building is partially or completely damaged will be repaired or

reconstructed respectively.

Transitional shelter commences with immediately distributing reconstruction items

post disaster. These items will be, wherever possible, reused in the future steps of an

incremental transitional shelter response.

TRANSITIONAL SHELTER TIMELINE:

First week

- Basic shelter items such as plastic or metal roof sheeting.

- Further basic building materials and tools.

↓

First month

Programme integration such as water and sanitation.

↓

Six months

Further building materials to allow upgrading and reconstruction.

↓

Durable solution

Upgrading and reconstruction is completed.

↓

Durable solution is reached

11

Shelter after disaster - Strategies for Transitional Settlement and Reconstruction, Shelter Centre, 2010

13

CHARACTERSTICS OF TRANSITIONAL SHELTER12

1. UPGRADABLE

While being inhabited, transitional shelter may be improved over time to

become a permanent shelter solution. This is achieved through maintenance,

extension or by replacing original materials for more durable alternatives.

2. REUSABLE

Transitional shelter is inhabited while parallel reconstruction activities are

taking place. Once reconstruction is complete, the transitional shelter may be

used for an alternative function, for example as an external kitchen, barn or

shop.

3. RELOCATABLE

Relocation distinguishes transitional shelter from other shelter approaches. A

re-locatable shelter can be built on land where tenure is insecure or

temporary. If land tenure issues are resolved on another site, the transitional

shelter, or valuable parts of it, may be relocated to the permanent location.

4. RESALEABLE


taking place. Once reconstruction is complete, the transitional shelter may be

dismantled and its materials can be used as a resource to sell. Therefore, the

materials and their fixings need to be selected so that they will be suitable for

dismantling and resale.

5. RECYCLABLE


taking place. The transitional shelter may be gradually dismantled during the

reconstruction process and its materials used in the construction of a durable

solution. 12

Transitional Settlement and Reconstruction after Natural Disasters, Shelter Centre, 2008

14

APPROACHES FOR INCREMENTAL PROCESS

1.SEMI-PERMANENT SHELTER (Recyclable, Relocatable and Reusable)

Building parts of some elements of a house, such as foundations and a roof, in order

to offer shelter while the remainder of the house is completed. This approach may

require parts of the shelter to be disassembled in order to complete reconstruction.

2. SITES AND SERVICES (Upgradeable)

Preparing the site for the permanent house and all wet services and utilities, such as

the bathroom, sewage and electrical supply, in order to accelerate the process of

reconstructing the remainder of the house, this offsets the costs payable by the

owner and increase the quality of planning as well as provision for common services

and for maintaining hygiene.

3. CORE HOUSE/ONE ROOM SHELTER

It is building at least one complete room of a final house in order to offer shelter

while the remainder of the house is completed. Beyond a single room, this approach

may also build part of the rest of the house, such as the foundations, or all or parts

of key services, such as the latrine or connection to utilities.

The advantage of these three approaches is that the time taken in construction is

less, because it aims for permanent reconstruction. The end product is much

sustainable and habitable for the beneficiaries and it is also less costly then the

shelters made under multi-phase approach as the material used in different stages is

reused in the every next stage of this approach and cuts the cost of construction.

15

Transitional shelter commences with immediately distributing relief items(tents,

metal sheets, etc) post disaster. These relief items will be, wherever possible, reused

in the future steps of an incremental transitional shelter response.

Diagram below shows an incremental transitional shelter process

Sheltering during Reconstruction



16

STRENGTHS, WEAKNESSES, OPPORTUNITIES AND THREATS OF

TRANSITIONAL SHELTER APPROACH

STRENGHTS OF TRANSITIONAL SHELTER

1. Transitional shelter spans the entire reconstruction period, from disaster

until a permanent solution is achieved.

2. Transitional shelter offers a better living space than a tent for activities such

as childcare, cooking and home-based enterprises.

3. A secure, healthy living environment that offers dignity and privacy can be

provided through transitional shelter.

4. Shelter beneficiaries are involved in the decision-making process, ensuring

that structures are built at a speed which does not disrupt their livelihoods,

using familiar materials and construction techniques.

5. Transitional shelter materials are procured from the local economy, creating

livelihood opportunities and reducing dependency on external assistance.

6. Large numbers of transitional shelters can be built incrementally after large

disasters, because common local and regional materials are used, unlike

tents.

7. Materials used may be recycled, upgraded, reused, resold or relocated after

construction.

WEAKNESS OF TRANSITIONAL SHELTER

1. A transitional shelter programme may raise false expectations within

affected communities. Beneficiaries may assume that everyone is entitled to

a transitional shelter.

2. It may divert focus from a holistic support to affected communities.

Transitional shelter programmes may only concentrate on short-term

deliverables.

3. It may offer less time and scope to disseminate sustainable building

techniques to beneficiaries.

17

4. Later stages of building transitional shelters may be delayed by the

availability of materials, following the initial distribution of materials such as

plastic sheeting and fixings.

5. Significant human resources are often required to coordinate the acquisition

of building materials, the required technical reconstruction skills and

community input.

6. Tents will be cheaper if shelter is needed for a short period. However, if

shelter is required for longer than the lifespan of a tent, which is usually less

than a year, transitional shelter may be more cost effective.

OPPORTUNITIES OF TRANSITIONAL SHELTER

1. Materials may be salvaged from damaged or destroyed homes and reused in

transitional shelter construction.

2. Materials from the first distribution are part of the transitional shelter design,

rather than distributing materials in phases, such as a shelter kit followed by

a tent.

3. A transitional shelter may be relocated from a transitional settlement site to

a transitional reconstruction site.

4. Transitional shelters may be innovatively reused during or after

reconstruction, such as a shop or livestock shelter.

5. Building back better is encouraged by demonstrating simple construction

techniques, such as cross-bracing and hurricane straps that support building

back more safely.

THREATS OF TRANSITIONAL SHELTER

1. There may not be sufficient resources to complete the reconstruction of the

permanent house, leaving affected families in transitional shelters.

2. Transitional shelter may be poorly implemented if there is insufficient skill,

technical capacity or cross-sector coordination. This can result in unsafe

practices.

3. The prices of key materials may be inflated when demand outstrips supply, or

as a result of profiteering practices.

18

4. Transitional settlement sites may become slums if an exit strategy is not

developed, or if sites are not managed or decommissioned properly.

5. Local resources may be overexploited, for example, timber may be sourced

from unsustainable sources.

SITE SELECTION STANDARDS13

SITE SELECTION

1. Site selection is relevant to both displaced and non displaced populations in

both urban and rural settings. Even when a single transitional shelter is sited

on the land of an affected family, it can still be vulnerable to further hazards

and can impact reconstruction and recovery.

2. Transitional shelters for community groups are often found near original

homes but not on the land itself, due to considerations such as rubble

clearance and reconstructing multi-family dwellings such as apartments. Site

selection in this context must be understood as a process and not a single

event, as families may relocate their transitional shelter to their land, once

they are able to do so.

3. Site selection is an important activity that can result in the success or failure

of a transitional shelter programme. Poor site selection can threaten the

safety of the beneficiaries, the sustainability of livelihoods and essential

environmental resources. In contrast, good site selection may encourage

social integration and enhance sustainability.

13

The Sphere Project: Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Humanitarian Response. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and the ICRC, 2011

19

BASIC SELECTION CRITERIA

Sites should be assessed using criteria specific to the response, but ensuring that

they are: Safe, considering multiple probable hazards such as flooding; Appropriate

to the displaced community with respect to local culture and livelihoods; Capable of

providing key sustainable resources such as water supply and legal in terms of zoning

and planning as well as regarding land owners and customary users.

FOR FLOODS

Key points to consider in flood-prone areas include:

Fine clay soils should be avoided as they do not allow water infiltration and

can become waterlogged;

Sandy soils are good for infiltration but may become unstable; and

Site gradient should not be less than 1 per cent as this increases the risk of

flash flooding and may require extensive drainage of storm waters

FOR LAND SLIDES

Key points for consideration in landslide-prone sites include:

At any site gradient, sufficient surface water drainage and erosion measures

should be taken;

Slopes with little vegetation or a high degree of deforestation should be

avoided as vegetation stabilises the soil and reduces the risk of mud slides;

and

Areas recently affected by wildfire are particularly prone to landslides.

20

Diagram below shows key considerations for landslide prone sites

FOR EARTHQUAKE

Key guidelines to follow when designing in earthquake prone sites include:

Building shelters more than 10m away from steep slopes to reduce danger

during rock falls;

Observing a minimum safety distance from rock faces and/or retaining walls

as rocks may break off during an earthquake;

Constructing buildings next to visible fault lines, or areas damaged by

previous earthquakes, should be avoided;

Constructing buildings with adequate spacing between them to avoid danger

from other collapsing buildings; and

Avoiding construction on alluvial plains, unstable slopes, unstable soils or

reclaimed areas where the ground has not been properly engineered.

Diagram below shows key considerations for earthquake prone sites.





21

FOR CYCLONE

Key points for consideration in storm-prone sites include:

the complexity of wind patterns correlate with the complexity of the

topography;

gaps in mountain ranges and valleys can funnel wind;

mountain peaks may be areas of high rainfall;

surrounding vegetation can provide a natural wind barrier;

a minimum distance should be considered from trees or vegetation with thick

branches or trunks to prevent damage from falling trees or branches during

windy periods; and

considering the direction of prevailing winds in hilly sites and locating

buildings either on the far side of the hill or below the peak.

Diagram below shows key considerations for hurricane/cyclone-prone sites.

DISASTER RESILIENCE MEASURES

FOR FLOODS

Transitional shelters are light structures and are therefore particularly susceptible to

damage from floods. Flash floods, storm surges and/or rise in groundwater can

cause severe damage to buildings and infrastructure particularly with the addition of

debris, increased risk of drowning and promote a breeding ground for insects such as

mosquitoes. Contact with flood water should be avoided due to contaminants such

as sewage.

Image source: Transitional Settlement and Reconstruction after


22

Elevated foundations, or plinths, may be used to raise the living area above the level

of potential flood water. Basic plinths may consist of simple platforms created with

of a mix of compacted sand, clay and cement. Cement or other available hard

materials should be used to stabilise the plinth sides to help prevent scouring

undermining the plinth and foundations.

The plinth level should exceed the maximum flood level, as shown in below diagram:

FOR LANDSLIDES

Landslides, including rock falls, tree slides, mud slides and avalanches, are often the

result of deforestation or overgrazing or in areas prone to wildfi re. Heavy rainfall

may trigger these events on steep slopes. Mining and excavation works can also

affect the stability if slopes. Such “mass movements” can cause extensive building

damage and/or loss of life.

If relocation is not feasible, it may be possible to mitigate the risk through building

walls and other engineering works. This is usually at high cost and specialist

engineering input is required, as not all landslide risks can be managed suffi ciently.

Saturated ground can increase the possibility of landslides. Adequate drainage

measures surrounding the shelter can help to mitigate this.

Larger openings should be provided to llow safe evacuation.

Landslides can occur as a consequence of other major hazards such as earthquakes,

storms and fl ooding, therefore multi-hazard resistance techniques should be

considered when designing transitional shelters.



23

FOR EARTHQUAKE

Earthquakes can cause acute ground shaking resulting in liquefaction (where a soil’s

strength is reduced and it behaves as a liquid), formation of cracks and/or signifi cant

rise and fall of land. Signifi cant damage to buildings and infrastructure may occur

which, at worst, may be irreparable and result in fatalities.

Simple building layout plans are recommended for future upgrades and extensions.

Asymmetrical, L-shaped, H-shaped or T-shaped designs are more vulnerable and

should be avoided.

As shown in the diagram:

If possible, foundations should be deep, carefully constructed and well connected to

the rest of the structure.

Light roofing systems such as corrugated galvanised iron (CGI) sheeting over a timber

frame should be adopted, as the are less likely to collapse or cause injury.

Construction of thin, high or long masonry walls should be avoided or reinforced

with buttresses at regular intervals.Construction techniques, such as reinforced

concrete frames, or confined masonry can improve earthquake resilience.



24

FOR STORM

Wind storms, tropical cyclones, tornadoes, lightning, precipitation, dust clouds and

extreme temperatures can cause extensive building damage particularly if there are

no early warning systems.

Shelters arranged in clusters may dissipate wind forces more effectively than when

arranged in rows, which can amplify the wind’s strength. Vegetation may be used to

provide a buffer against high winds, however, the danger of falling trees should be

considered.

Foundations should be sufficient to ensure that shelters are able to withstand uplift

forces in strong winds.

Roofs should be appropriately pitched, oriented and fastened in order to reduce the

opportunity for detachment during strong winds. Roof pitches in cyclone prone

areas should be at least 30 degrees, ideally 30 degrees–45 degrees

Image source: Transitional Settlement and Reconstruction after


25

FOR TSUNAMI

Tsunamis are waves caused by the displacement of large bodies of water and are

often as a result of other natural events such as earthquakes. They and the debris

they carry can cause extensive damage to buildings and infrastructure particularly in

coastal areas or low lying ground.

A transitional shelter design is unlikely to offer complete protection against a

tsunami. Wherever possible, the community should be relocated away from the

hazard.

Trees and bushes can reduce the effect of tsunamis. Mangroves, swamps and other

vegetation, which may provide a natural barrier to coastal areas, should be

protected.



26

SOURCING MATERIALS FOR RECONSTRUCTION

The following key factors should be considered when identifying materials:

1. what materials the beneficiaries are familiar with, and if they know how to

use them;

2. if the beneficiaries have the necessary skills to repair and maintain the

commodity and its parts and tools;

3. if the material can be replaced when necessary;

4. if the material is appropriate within the beneficiaries’ cultural values and

standards;

5. which materials are readily available;

6. quality and lifespan of the material; and

7. if all risk factors of possible materials have been assessed.

LOCAL SOURCING

Local sourcing should be encouraged wherever possible due to a number of benefits:

1. support of local economy;

2. possible creation of livelihood opportunities;

3. can build local capacities;

4. possible reduction in tensions between displaced and local communities by

spreading the benefits of aid beyond the displaced population;

5. reduction in delivery and lead times; and

6. less transport problems.

Local sourcing can also have a variety of negative effects on a transitional shelter

programme:

1. lack or sudden disruptions of local material supply;

2. sudden price increases on local markets due to unusually high demand;

3. transport and storage problems;

4. severe environmental impacts such as deforestation; and

5. conflicts within the population may arise due to a lack of available materials.

27

INTERNATIONAL SOURCING

Certain items will have to be procured from international sources due to a lack of

national availability. These are normally items which have long lead times. In some

cases international sourcing may also be used for stockpiling.

International sourcing may offer some of the following benefits in post-disaster

environments:

1. availability of needed materials;

2. better and more stable prices; and

3. materials comply with international quality standards.

International sourcing should generally be a secondary option due to the following

disadvantages:

1. long distance transport negatively impacts the environment;

2. long lead and delivery times;

3. materials may get damaged during long distance transport;

4. necessity of large, appropriate and secure storage facilities;

5. no input to the local economy;

6. transport to the affected area may not be possible due to destruction of

infrastructure; and

7. costs for transport and customs may be signifi cant making international

procurement costly.

PREFABRICATED PARTS

Although the international import of completely prefabricated shelter units cannot

be an option for a transitional shelter approach, the local prefabrication of

components might be beneficial. Nonetheless, prefabrication has to be considered

carefully, when implemented as part of a transitional shelter approach.[14]

14


28

Local prefabrication can offer the following benefits:

1. prefabricated components may be easier to disassemble and relocate;

2. prefabrication may speed up the construction process;

3. prefabrication can lower costs of shelters due to standardised work steps;

4. prefabrication can be conducted in workshops ensuring technical standards

and principles are adhered to; and

5. beneficiaries may receive training in prefabrication workshops.

Depending on the specific situation, prefabrication may pose a variety of risks:

1. the local building culture may not be used to prefabricated components and

therefore be unable to repair damaged parts;

2. transport of prefabricated parts to the site may be diffi cult;

3. materials for future repairs and maintenance may not be available;

4. culturally appropriate materials may not be suitable for prefabrication; and

5. approach may lead to provision of completely prefabricated shelter units.

BASIC DESIGN STANDARDS IN SHELTER, SETTLEMENT

Shelter is a critical determinant for survival in the initial stages of a disaster. Beyond

survival, shelter is necessary to provide security and personal safety, protection from

the climate and enhanced resistance to ill health and disease. It is also important for

human dignity and to sustain family and community life as far as possible in difficult

circumstances.

The type of response required to meet the needs of people and households affected

by a disaster is determined by key factors including the nature and scale of the

disaster and the resulting loss of shelter, the climatic conditions and the local

environment, the political and security situation, the context (rural or urban) and the

ability of the community to cope.15

15


29

Any response should be informed by the steps taken by the affected households in

the initial aftermath of the disaster, using their own skills and material resources to

provide temporary shelter or to begin the construction of new, longer-term

dwellings. Shelter responses should enable affected households to incrementally

upgrade from emergency to durable shelter solutions within a reasonably short time

and with regard to the constraints on acquiring the additional resources required.

SHELTER AND SETTLEMENT

Shelter assistance is provided to individual households for the repair or construction

of dwellings or the settlement of displaced households within existing

accommodation or communities. When such dispersed settlement is not possible,

shelter is provided collectively in suitable large public buildings or structures, e.g.

warehouses, halls, barracks, etc. or in temporary planned or self-settled camps.

PHYSICAL PLANNING

Local physical planning practices are used where possible, enabling safe and secure

access to and use of shelters and essential services and facilities, as well as ensuring

appropriate privacy and separation between individual household shelters.

KEY INDICATORS16

Area or cluster planning by family, neighbourhood or village groups as appropriate

supports existing social networks, contributes to security and enables self-

management by the affected population.

16


30

All members of the affected population have safe access to water, sanitary facilities,

health care, solid waste disposal, graveyards and social facilities, including schools,

places of worship, meeting points and recreational areas.

Temporary planned or self-settled camps are based on a minimum surface area of

45m2 for each person.

The surface topography is used or augmented to facilitate water drainage, and the

ground conditions are suitable for excavating toilet pits where this is the primary

sanitation system.

There are roads and pathways to provide safe, secure and all weather access to the

individual dwellings and facilities.

Mass shelters have openings to enable required access and emergency evacuation,

and these openings are positioned so that access is well supervised and does not

pose a security threat to occupants.

COVERED LIVING SPACE

People have sufficient covered space to provide dignified accommodation. Essential

household activities can be satisfactorily undertaken, and livelihood support

activities can be pursued as required.

KEY INDICATORS17

The initial covered floor area per person is at least 3.5m2

The covered area enables safe separation and privacy between the sexes, between

different age groups and between separate families within a given household as

required.

Essential household activities can be carried out within the shelter.

Key livelihood support activities are accommodated where possible.

17


31

DESIGN

The design of the shelter is acceptable to the affected population and provides

sufficient thermal comfort, fresh air and protection from the climate to ensure their

dignity, health, safety and well-being.

KEY INDICATORS18

The design of the shelter and the materials used are familiar where possible and

culturally and socially acceptable.

The repair of existing damaged shelters or the upgrading of initial shelter solutions

constructed by the disaster-affected population is prioritised.

Alternative materials required to provide temporary shelter are durable, practical

and acceptable to the affected population.

The type of construction, materials used and the sizing and positioning of openings

provides optimal thermal comfort and ventilation.

Access to water supply sources and sanitation facilities, and the appropriate

provision of rainwater harvesting, water storage, drainage and solid waste

management, complement the construction of shelters.

Vector control measures are incorporated into the design and materials are selected

to minimise health hazards.

CONSTRUCTION

The construction approach is in accordance with safe local building practices and

maximises local livelihood opportunities.

KEY INDICATORS17

Locally sourced materials and labour are used without adversely affecting the local

economy or environment.

18


32

Locally derived standards of workmanship and materials are achieved.

Construction and material specifications mitigate against future natural disasters.

The type of construction and materials used enable the maintenance and upgrading

of individual household shelters using locally available tools and resources.

The procurement of materials and labour and the supervision of the construction

process are transparent, accountable and in accordance with internationally

accepted bidding, purchasing and construction administration practices.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

The adverse impact on the environment is minimised by the settling of the disaster-

affected households, the material sourcing and construction techniques used.

KEY INDICATORS19

The temporary or permanent settling of the affected population considers the extent

of the natural resources available.

Natural resources are managed to meet the ongoing needs of the displaced and host

populations.

The production and supply of construction material and the building process

minimises the long-term depletion of natural resources.

Trees and other vegetation are retained where possible to increase water retention,

minimise soil erosion and to provide shade.

The locations of mass shelters or temporary planned camps are returned to their

original condition, unless agreed otherwise, once they are no longer needed for

emergency shelter use.

19


33

CASE STUDIES

CASE STUDY 1 : LEH FLASH FLOODS, 2010

Unprecedented flash floods ravaged the ecologically fragile region of Leh, Ladakh on

August 6, 2010. For a region classified as a cold desert on account of its long, harsh

winters and low levels of precipitation, the scale and impact of the disaster were

entirely unprecedented. With their houses gone, the affected families had to endure

the extreme winter with temperature as low as -30° C if appropriate shelters were

not built.

DAMAGE TO HOUSES

The two main reasons for the damage to houses are –

1. The excessive lateral force exerted by the rushing mixture of water, mud and rocks

2. Use of mud as the only material for walls. Mud loses its ability to bind and

eventually dissolves once it comes in contact with water.

The houses have been damaged to varying degrees and forms depending upon the

location and the techniques and material used. The damage suffered can be broadly

classified into three categories:

a) Damage to the corners of the house: This was due to the absence of any lateral

load resisting features in the house

b) Complete failure of walls: This was due to the excessive outward pressure exerted

by the rushing mass of mud, rocks and water on the plain mud walls, which are

further weekend due to absence of any lateral load bearing features in the house

c) Damaged openings: Due to the force of rushing mud, rocks and water funnelled

through small openings

d) Failure of some RC frame buildings: Limited exposure of local workforce to this

new and alien technology might have resulted in improper construction, which caved

in under the extra stress exerted by flood water.

34

RECONSTRUCTION CASE 1: MULTI-PHASE APPROACH : PRE-FAB STRUCTURES20

With shelter emerging as a critical need, and a short window of opportunity before

the onset of winter in Leh, the District Administration opted for the provision of pre-

fabricated housing units to the affected families. An estimated 450 units were

provided by Hindustan Pre-Fab limited (supported by other Public Sector

Undertakings) and an additional 100 by the National Bamboo Mission.

Consultations with community members who had received both the types of pre-

fabricated shelters showed the units had proved unsuitable for the extreme winters

of Leh and had low levels of occupancy among those who had received them. The

occupancy rates were significantly lower in the case of bamboo shelters.

The concerns with these units include:

Unsuited to local climatic conditions and extremely low occupancy rates.

The shelters were too cold in peak winter, and as a result were unoccupied in a

large number of cases. Community members complained of poor lighting and

ventilation in the bamboo shelters, and several complained that being light, the

structure is prone to shaking violently whenever there are strong winds.

Ecological concerns:

The shelters have resulted in an increased dependence on bukharis and heating appliances

among families who received them. Due to a lack of ventilation, fires cannot be lit inside

these units and in families are forced to live in the adjoining shelters (wherever

constructed) built using traditional mud blocks, where they can light fires.

A large number of people chose not to occupy the pre-fabricated units and instead live with

family members or to rent out houses for the winter. This is an indication of community

support structures that could have been further supported and strengthened through the

use of alternate options such as providing rental support to families for the winter or

extending support to host families with whom the affected families could stay.

20

Leh Flash Floods 2010: Common Forward Looking Learning Mission, Sphere India, February 2011.

35

Economic opportunities:

The use of pre-fabricated units, apart from being extremely expensive (the cost of

each unit provided by Hindustan Pre-fab Corporation is estimated at approximately

Rs. 4,00,000) were also the loss of an opportunity presented by the reconstruction

process to stimulate the local economy. Through the use of local Ladakhi

construction techniques and materials (such as mud blocks and timber), a significant

amount of income, employment, entrepreneurship, training and skill creation

opportunities as well as demand in the local economy could have been created.

RECONSTRUCTION CASE 2 : TRANSITIONAL APPROACH - CORE SHELTER21

The aim was to provide Core shelter assistance to families. The aim is to give all

affected families a safe and comfortable home before winter (an example of

transitional shelter approach).

Learning from the experiences and going opposite of three-phased approach, the

designing and reconstruction started with transitional approach.

While designing the main areas of concern were:

- People-centric approach

- Being culturally relevant

- Being locally sustainable

HOUSING STRATEGY:

-Community Participation

-Culturally appropriate and locally relevant house

-House design based on SPHERE Standards

-Training of local construction workers

-Environment-friendly and Energy efficient materials

-Resistant to future disasters

21

SHELTER STRATEGY Leh Flood, SEEDS - LEDeG August 2010.

36

DESIGN:

The proposed shelter unit had been designed maintaining sensitivity to the Ladakhi

way of life, culture, the fragile ecology of the region and the pressing time frame.

The shelter met to the sphere standards requirement of 3.5m per person. Based on

the census data, average size of a Ladakhi household is 4 or 5. The design shown was

of the overall house, but due to time constrains only a core area was built before the

winters. The house was designed in such a way that it could be easily expanded at a

later stage and could be done after the winter.

Structural elements

Foundation

Foundation are stepped and constructed with stone, available locally and well known

to local construction workers. The depth of the foundation is up to the hard strata.

Walls

Constructed with Stabilized Compressed Earth Blocks. Mud is the traditional medium

used for construction locally. The cement provides the required strength to it

without compromising the desired characters like heat retention.

DAY AND NIGHT

ROOM

CORE UNIT

Image source : SHELTER STRATEGY Leh Flood, SEEDS - LEDeG August

2010

37

Seismic bands

Ladakh falls in Zone IV in the seismic map of India and it is important to provide

lateral load resisting features like seismic bands and corner reinforcement, which

increases the ductility of the shelter. There are two seismic bands provided in shelter

at plinth and lintel levels.

Roof

The structure of the roof is made out of wood available locally. There is a layer of

locally available straw, which increases the thermal comfort. There is also a layer of

mud on the straw with proper drainage slope.

Floor

Constructed with mud as per the traditional technology used in Ladakhi houses. This

increases the thermal comfort inside as mud gains the heat during the day and

retains it during the nights.

Other important elements

Entrance

An east facing entrance is considered auspicious in Ladakhi culture. A lobby area

helps to keep the house warm during cold winters. The door threshold is 300mm

above ground level so that it doesn't jam after snowfall.

Storage

A storage area is provided in order to meet the food storage needs of the family. The

food storage area is in the north, where it will remain cool in summer, and will help

buffer the kitchen from the cold in winter.

Kitchen

The kitchen, which is at the heart of a traditional Ladakhi house, doubles up as a

sleeping area at night. Ladakhis spend much of their time in the kitchen, kept warm

by the cooking stove. The area is used for preparing and eating food, as well as for

entertainment. The shelter kitchen looks much like a traditional Ladakhi kitchen,

with mats and mattresses for seating along the walls, and small tables for eating.

The kitchen has south and east facing windows. These allow ventilation of the

38

kitchen area, and for sunshine to warm the house in winter. The windows are small

in order to help reduce heat loss in winter.

FUTURE ADAPTATION AND EXPANSION

It was intended that the shelter could be expanded by the occupants later and door

openings and winows can be reused.

SANITATION UNIT: TRADITIONAL, CLEAN AND GREEN

In Ladakh, dry composting latrines provide a highly efficient and safe method of

disposal of human waste. Each traditional Ladakhi house has a dry composting

latrine, which is emptied once a year and the compost is used as fertilizer in the

fields. This eliminates the need for pipe work, saves water and power, and avoids

leakages from tanks and thus the chance of water borne diseases. Dry composting

latrines are thus the most appropriate waste disposal system for the proposed

shelter.

The latrine takes the form of a small room with a hole in the floor through which

human waste drops down one floor to a pit below. Earth, and ash from the kitchen,

is shovelled down the hole to cover the waste. This helps to reduce smell, aid

decomposition and enrich the waste for use as fertilizer.

DAY AND NIGHT

ROOM

CORE SHELTER

TOILET

Image source : SHELTER STRATEGY Leh Flood, SEEDS - LEDeG August

2010

39

PEOPLE CENTRIC APPROACH FOR CONSTRUCTION

People centric construction is an important element in a successful rehabilitation

programme. Therefore, people based reconstruction process, which allows the

family to make the final decisions about the design and construction, was proposed.

Involving families in different stages of construction cultivates a sense of ownership

among them..

The families were provided with a design based on the traditional Ladakhi house

with a technological intervention to make it energy efficient and resilient to

disasters. Each family had the freedom to build the house according to its needs. The

project team helped in the construction.

While proposing the design, use of traditional and locally prevalent techniques and

materials was given a major importance, and were improved with limited

technological intervention. This helped in utilizing the existing workforce in the

region as they were familiar with the materials and most of the techniques being

used. It also gave a chance to train the workforce in new technologies that could be

replicated at a minimum cost. This promoted supply of better construction

techniques in the region, increased jobs for local masons and construction workers

and made future repairs easier and cheaper.

In the whole process, the role of the project team was of facilitators and advisers,

with all major decisions taken by the family that own the house. It was also proposed

to build a prototype house at the LEDeG rural building center in Choglamsar to

demonstrate the use of proposed designs, technologies and materials. That was

intended to give the families a chance to get a feel of their new house.

40

CASE STUDY 222 : GUJARAT EARTHQUAKE 2001

Disaster: Gujarat earthquake, January 2001

No. of houses damaged: 180,536 completely

Destroyed and 913,297 partially damaged

Project target population: Over 23,000 families

Occupancy rate on handover: Unknown

Shelter size: Approximately 4m x 2½m

An international NGO worked in partnership with a network of 22 local NGOs to

rapidly implement a non-food items distribution programme followed by a

transitional shelter programme that built over 27,000 shelters. By working with local

organisations, existing networks and local knowledge was used to effectively deliver

materials and help construct shelters on a very large scale.

Damage following the earthquake at Gujarat, that completely destroyed over

180,000 houses. In the first weeks after the earthquake the organisation distributed

non-food items through partners. This was followed by a transitional shelter

programme.

AFTER THE EARTHQUAKE

The earthquake struck the State of Gujarat on 26 January 2001, and particularly

affected the district of Kutch and its neighbouring areas. News of the earthquake

spread rapidly through the international media. Local communities, the Central and

State governments, the defence forces, donors, and international and national NGOs

all responded to the emergency. Within one week, a network of 22 local

organisations, including developmentally minded architects, had formed a

partnership agreement with an international organisation. Members of this local

network had been working on low-cost construction technologies prior to the

earthquake and were able to act as an effective coordination mechanism.

22

Sphere, Transitional Shelter

41

After the earthquake their focus was on:

• Interim, transitional shelter (it would not be possible to build permanent shelter to

meet the needs of all affected families within a year and tents were not durable

enough to fill the gap);

• Examples of low-cost and safe public buildings.

In the first weeks of the response the focus was on the distribution of non-food

items.

TECHNICAL SOLUTIONS

A low-cost shelter design was developed using low 1m walls and a bamboo-framed

and grass-thatched roof. With time it was recognised that there was a need to

preserve the grass for animal fodder, so the roofing material was replaced with

locally produced Mangalore clay tiles.

The dimensions of the shelters built were approximately 4m x 2½m. Although this

provided a covered area of only 10m2 for a family, these dimensions were carefully

selected to focus on earthquake safety. A larger span would have required

significantly more materials to ensure the same level of safety.

The distribution of construction materials was phased to ensure that buildings were

built safely:

• First, a shallow foundation was built. When this was complete the cement for the

walls was distributed.

• Walls then had to be built. When these were complete, walls and roofing materials

were distributed.

After the initial shelters were built, issues were found with the roofing and an

upgrade programme was required. This involved distributing four pieces of bamboo

(1½m long ) to brace the roof.

42

The distributions of materials were accompanied by the training of local masons and

carpenters, to mobilise the communities and raise their awareness of seismic-

resistant construction. A significant amount of work was required to ensure that

people correctly braced their shelters and to explain that once braced, the buildings

would be stronger and safer.

The resulting programme created difficulties for the auditors, but was effective in

providing shelter for a large number of people.

43

CASE STUDY 323 : BARMER FLOOD RAJASTHAN 2006

SEEDS built 300 intermediate shelter as part of the Post Flood Shelter Restoration

Programme in Barmer, Rajasthan, India

Incessant rains in the desert state of Rajasthan gave rise to one of the worst floods in

Rajasthan in two centuries. Heavy monsoon rains that started on the engulfed

several villages of the of 16th of August 2006 12 odd districts Rajasthan.

Ninety five percent of the villagers were rendered homeless and moved to high sand

dunes with little or no belongings. The families that suffered the most are those that

lived on marginal lands and had little capacity to reconstruct houses on their own.

Ninety five percent of the villagers were rendered homeless and moved to high sand

dunes with little or no belongings. The families that suffered the most are those that

lived on marginal lands and had little capacity to reconstruct houses on their own.

Barmer was the worst affected because of heavy rains and the downstream flow of

heavy rainwater from Jaisalmer. On the 21st midnight there was heavy rainfall and

no early warning was given to the villagers 23 kilometers away from the district

headquarters. The district received about 577 mm of rainfall in 3 days, 300 mm more

than the annual average rainfall of 277 mm. About 60 -100 villages were affected in

the district. Some of the worst hit villages were Kavas, Malua, Bhadaka and Shiv. The

water level reached 25 - 27 feet above the ground level. It is officially reported that

103 people died, 95 percent of the villagers were rendered homeless and moved to

high sand dunes with little or no belongings. Forty seven thousand cattle died in the

floods.

Five thousand two hundred houses were damaged and crops worth 300 million

rupees were destroyed. Most of the villages continued to be submerged a month

after the commencement of the floods, primarily due to the problem of poor

percolation of water in the gypsum rich earth. The homes were rendered

uninhabitable.

23

Barmer Aashray Yojna Post Flood Shelter Restoration Programme, SEEDS 2007

44

Since the structures were mostly made of untreated mud, they were badly damaged

and mostly destroyed by the flood water.

SEEDS (Sustainable Environment and Ecological development Society) constructed

300 houses across 15 flood affected villages to meet the immediate housing need.

Complete community participation, cultural and environmental appropriateness of

shelter design and local capacity building were the significant aspects of the entire

process.

SEEDS decided to build intermediate shelter as against temporary houses as these

offered better living conditions and greater strength. Intermediate shelters can

also be gradually altered by beneficiary families to permanent housing.

Appropriate shelter design

The houses built were in complete compliance with local environmental and cultural

nuances both in terms of design and technology used. At the same time, hazard and

vulnerability profile of the area was also considered to ensure safety from future

disasters.

Traditional houses were made of mud, circular in design and had thatched roofs.

Source : Barmer Aashray Yojna

Post Flood Shelter Restoration Programme, SEEDS 2007

45

New houses :

Had mud stabilized with 5 % cement and compressed for strength, Circular with

interlocking blocks, proper foundations, and structural bands for strength, thatched

roofs for thermal comfort.

Open defecation is a widespread practice in Barmer. Toilets with attached

bathrooms have been built in five villages. SEEDS also undertook a series of

workshop, targeting women, to highlight the issues of personal hygiene, family

hygiene and maintenance of toilet facilities.

Community Involvement And Participation

A lot of focus during entire initiative was on the process and people participation.

SEEDS in the process also ensured informal exchange of knowledge on sustainable

practices. Rainwater harvesting, use of solar energy and disaster preparedness were

often highlighted in community workshops and discussions.

The benefit of using earthquake resistant earthen blocks and its features were often

discussed with the practicing masons and community members. Similarly rainwater

harvesting was demonstrated while the tankahs (storage tanks) were being built.

Source : Barmer Aashray Yojna

Post Flood Shelter Restoration Programme, SEEDS 2007

46

SEEDS also provided solar panels to the families which could take care of there

limited energy needs. For an area with zero electricity, it was a significant step

towards fulfilling the aspirations of people.

The other most significant aspect was involvement of women in decision making

process. The role of women in the region, like most parts of the country, was

relegated to household chores.

SEEDS ensured women take an active part not only as passive learners but also

express their viewpoints on key decisions like location of houses and design of

toilets.

The work was accomplished through a combination of central fabrication of

material, on-site fabrication of material and masonry work at site. Local masons and

beneficiary families were involved in the on-site construction activities. Construction

teams were formed each comprising a team leader and assistant masons. The team

leaders were brought in from Gujarat, trained by SEEDS under its Mason Training

Programme over the past three years, and been associated with SEEDS in the post

tsunami shelter construction in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands and post

earthquake shelter programme in Jammu and Kashmir.

The construction process was closely monitored for all activities, at all levels and on

all locations. The monitoring was carried out by a team of technical experts led by

SEEDS, and also included personnel with local knowledge, and social experts for

taking into account community issues. The monitoring was thus real time,

participatory and facilitated corrective decisions.

Mud architecture: Low energy, thermally

comfortable and culturally appropriate

Solar lights: Clean renewable energy Locally driven process: Socially

sustainable

47

CASE STUDY 424 : BALASORE FLASH FLOODS ORISSA 2007

Though floods are a common scene in Balasore, the intensity and frequency of

flooding has increased over a last few years. change in climatic conditions is

escalating the occurrence of disaster. The 2007 floods proved to be fatal as the

district was hit by as many as 7 flash floods within a period of three months. The

economic impact of the flash floods in this coastal district was Rs. 508 crores in

2007. Many roads, bridges, houses and paddy crops were washed away by turbulent

water of the overflowing rivers. People were forced to run towards higher reaches

with their meager belongings. The homes were rendered uninhabitable as almost 95

percent of them were kuccha houses.

It's unnerving that Balasore has been declared disaster affected for about 75 years

out of last 105 yers, and the extreme weather conditions have reduced its food

production by staggering 40 percent. With climate change gaining momentum, the

frequency of floods in Balasore has increased in last few years.

24

Balasore Aashray Yojana Orissa Flood Resilient Shelter Programme, SEEDS 2009.

Source : Balasore Aashray Yojana

Orissa Flood Resilient Shelter Programme, SEEDS 2009.

48

PROJECT

After each flood, every year families are left to cope with damaged houses and

livelihoods with the resources they have left. Realizing this gap, SEEDS in partnership

with Christian Aid with support from the European Commission Humanitarian Aid

Department initiated a shelter programme in one of the worst affected areas,

Balasore.

The programme intended to offer greater resilience to its beneficiaries from

recurrent floods and hence restrict damage to human life and reduce their

vulnerability

Basta was the hardest hit block in Balasore, which was submerged under water even

weeks after the rain stopped primarily because of the topographic depression where

it is located. The project intervened in the gram panchayats of Raghunathpur, Kulida,

Santoshpur and Paunskuli covering 43 villages. Lying in the catchment area of the

rivers Subarnarekha, Jaloka and Budhabalanga, the area is severely affected due to

multiple flooding and has the most vulnerable population in need of flood resilient

shelter. The improved shelters seek to assuage the present conditions by impacting

the physical and mental health of the people. In addition, the shelter will provide a

cushion for people, allowing them to divert their existing resources for other fruitful

purposes. The programme also addressed the sanitation issues prevailing in the area

and increased the reach of its intervention by strengthening the schools and

upgrading them to emergency refuge centers.

WHAT WAS ACHIEVED:

400 resilient shelters constructed in 43 villages across 4 panchayats

200 sanitation units constructed

5 schools in 4 panchayats retrofitted as refuge centers

200 masons trained on disaster resistant construction

115 shelters 54 sanitation units 2 schools were built in Kulida Panchayat

92 shelters 45 sanitation units 1 school were built in Santoshpur Panchayat

49

117 shelters 57 sanitation units 1 school were built in Raghunathpur

Panchayat

76 shelters 44 sanitation units 1 school were built in Paunskuli Panchayat

FLOOD RESILIENCE OF SHELTER DESIGN

During a mild or moderate flood the raised plinth and plinth beam will provide

suitable protection from flood waters.

During a moderate to severe flood it is advised that the cement bags provided are

filled with sand to create a water tight seal around the entrance.

During extreme and sustained flooding it is advised that all belongings are stored at

attic level and the family moves to higher ground.

BUILDING COMPONENTS

PLINTH

The raised plinth is constructed by the beneficiaries to bring the level of the shelter

above the prevailing flood level. It provides a stable base and is protected against

future erosion by a retaining wall of blocks and mortar.

Source : Balasore Aashray Yojana


50

FOUNDATIONS

The foundations are constructed from reinforced concrete additional pipes filled

with concrete and reinforcement rods. These foundations increase the lateral

stability of the structure to resist cyclonic wind pressures, fast flowing flood water,

and also the adverse affects of weak sub soil.

FLY-ASH BLOCK WALLS

The blocks are made from fly-ash, a waste product from coal fired factories. They

also have a lower embodied energy in comparison with traditional bricks as they do

not require firing. In addition, the blocks require no mortar due to their ‘lock and

key’ design.

ATTIC

The roof structure offers the potential for the beneficiaries to add an attic to

provide additional space within the shelter for storage. During times of flooding this

raised floor will provide safe refuge for their belongings.

51

ROOF

The roof has been designed with the traditional building materials of bamboo. Three

primary roof trusses are manufactured offsite as a single component and can

accommodate the beneficiaries’ choice of thatch, tin sheets or terracotta tiles.

OPENINGS

The design of the openings is left to the beneficiaries to install their own traditional

doors and windows. To maintain a water- tight seal around the door sand bags will

be provided with each shelter.

OWNER-DRIVEN CONSTRUCTION

The process of designing and executing of the shelters was based on the active

participation of the village community and the local government to ensure that the

final product matches their aspirations and there is a local sense of ownership.

The strengths of the programme is the theme of owner-driven construction that has

run throughout.

The beneficiaries were responsible for dictating the height and proportions of the

plinth, the orientation of the shelter and the position of window and door openings.

52

As the shelters were largely built on the site or close to the beneficiaries previous

homes they were aware of the level of water during previous floods, prevailing

winds and access routes. The beneficiaries had to mobilise the labour and materials

to build their plinth before the team of masons could commence with the shelter

construction. The roof was the aspect of the design that offered the most potential

for permutations and expression by the beneficiary as they were responsible for the

choice, procurement and construction of the roofing material on the truss roof

structure. The stage at which the beneficiary completes their roof is the point at

which they take full ownership over their shelter and begin to start living in it.

53

CASE STUDY 5 : UTTARAKHAND FLASH FLOODS 2013

Uttarakhand disaster, June 2013 was the country's worst natural disaster since the

2004 tsunami causing widespread damage and claiming over 5700 lives. according to

disaster mitigation and management centre, uttarakhand 1940 dwelling units were

completely damaged, 1575 dwelling units were severely damaged and 5647 dwelling

units partially damaged. In uttarakhand major affected population was displaced

from their original sites. most of the displaced population have shifted to the houses

of their relatives or living on rent which is being provided by the government till the

reconstruction of their homes.

There is an urgent need to provide temporary/permanent shelters to all the affected

people, as the winter is approaching and there is huge time and resource constraint.

CASE-1

Village-Jethi Malli

Beneficiary- Narayan singh

There are total of 35 households in the village of jethi malli out of which a total of 12

homes were majorly affected by the flash floods. Most of the people are living on

rent or as tenant in their relative's house.

A prototype is being designed by the NGOs working for the disaster reconstruction

and was provided to the family of Narayan Singh one of the affected household in

this village.

Narayan Singh have a family of four members including two children and his wife.

He had total of eight rooms in his house which was destroyed due to flash floods.

54

Before this prototype they lived in Jethi-Bharkothi (another village nearby the

present location) for three months on their another land which he owns in this

village.

The prototype provided to them is claimed to be durable for 2 years.

The prototype have a big multi-functional space and a kitchen made inside it.

The prototype is constructed with stone and cement-plaster till the cill-level of the

house. Have a truss roof made of wooden members and tin sheets used as roofing

material.

The beneficiaries are a little worried about the efficiency of the prototype in extreme

coming winters as the prototype is not well thermally insulated.

The kitchen space inside the prototype is used as a store instead being used as

kitchen. This is due to the fact that most of the traditional houses in uttarakhand

have kitchens outside the main unit or connected to the periphery of the main core

unit as they use traditional old ways of cooking using coal and wood as fuel instead

of gas and the smoke from that should not fill inside the house.

The beneficiary were uncomfortable in cooking inside the kitchen proposed in the

prototype as the smoke from the kitchen fills in the shelter.

55

To counter this problem they constructed a kitchen in front of the prototype by

themselves with the tin as material using the tin sheets they were provided from a

donor at the time of emergency.

Overall they are satisfied with the prototype.

CASE 2.

School- Blooming Birds Grammar School

Principal and Founder - Raghuvir Singh Aswal

After the disaster the school was completely destroyed and remained closed till 2nd

of Aug.

The school is now running on another site which is on 15000 rent per month.They

were provided with tents by Red Cross organization within a month, the tent sizes

were not appropriate for the use of schooling activities and hence they were not

used. the tents were even damaged without being used due to rain and mishandling.

56

The rest of the tents were passed to some needy people and were used in small

purposes like stopping leakage or as curtain to cover window openings.

The school was even provided with 40 tin sheets and 40 steel angles by SDMA ( local

NGO) till 16th august. And tarpaulin sheets from CARE organization.

By using the materials from donors the school was temporarily build on a rented first

floor of a building.

School have 12 rooms and total of 275 students coming from radius of 7-8 km.

The tin sheets act as walls and roof of the school supported with the steel or iron

rods and angles and the tarpaulin sheets act as partition walls of the rooms.

57

EXPERTISE CALL

ANSHU SHARMA IS A FOUNDING DIRECTOR OF SEEDS INDIA AND WORKED IN POST-

DISASTER SCENARIOS IN MORE THAN 15 COUNTRIES OVER PAST 20 YEARS.

QUESTIONNAIRE 1

After disaster, I, as an architect, would do the following steps for shelter response:

1. Damage and need assessment

2. Contextual study (geo-climatic, cultural, vulnerability, vernacular

architecture)

3. Site identification for emergency shelters

4. Emergency shelter design and implementation

5. Preparation for permanent recovery for displaced and non-displaced

population

i. User / community involvement for designing of permanent shelter

ii. Designing and implementation of shelters for transitional period (time

between emergency shelter and permanent shelter) considering permanent

solutions

6. Implementation of permanent shelter

Now, if you were in my position, what would you suggest as an experienced

planner/architect/shelter expert for shelter response ?

Have I missed any steps in this process?

Are there any steps which you would like to change?

Is the order of these steps correct?

58

Anshu : Start with the people not with the buildings

Don’t start with damage and assessment ,figure out where people are what

they’re doing what capacities they have. As an architect working in these

conditions you will be working with aid agencies and the ones who are provided

with the houses are called beneficiaries which is a very contradictory term as it

sets a mindset that I am the architect I am working for humanity I am going to

provide them houses and we start analyzing there damages and start doing our

own thing without considering them as clients and just treat them as

beneficiaries. So we should treat them as clients, this will help us know what they

had and what they want and on what they can build on.

Architect tends to think that they are giver they know the technology they know

the software and new techniques to build and they think that they are the giver,

the donors, they know how things work and the beneficiaries should listen to

them. And this thinking screws up the whole thing.

So u should listen to them. As they have very traditional ways of living as they

have lived to those traditions since generations and they have developed those

ways of living by lot of hit and trial methods.

And that is the thing you cannot change, you cannot just go there and provide

row houses or houses like in urban cities.

Shifting is the last option we should consider, as that doesn’t work.No one wants

to live away as there are big families living in the villages together, and providing

their houses outside or shifting them will separate them and they will not be able

to live without their locality. Shifting word should be completely removed

through our vocabulary. It's a western concept of intermediate phase.

Largest donor agencies is European commission. Lot of money comes from

European countries. Their Parliament is in Brasil and they come with emergency

decisions in disasters. They make policies to distribute money and how work will

proceed. They divide the money between 8-10 agencies with policies.

59

The money have to be spent in 6 months which is only to support people in

emergency, no permanent construction is allowed with that money.

So what we do is we make core shelter and consider them as emergency

shelters. The Intention is good to provide them with some permanent structure

by making a core room for them.

But for this phase we promote other approaches also leaving them with kachcha

houses or prefab systems which do not last for long time.

Now people have been provided with houses in papers but have kachcha houses

or temporary shelters only. And government or agencies do not go back to

provide them permanent houses as on papers they have been provided with

shelters. So at the end people suffer and this transitional approach is actually

doing harm to them.

We are able to provide only 5% houses which are destroyed. So reconstruction

starts from the day one, people starts repairing their houses from the first day as

they need a roof to sleep. So if we really want to help the effected people, we

should help them in repairing and rebuilding their houses properly stronger and

safer. If we really want to make a change we have to graduate from that.

60

QUESTIONNAIRE 2

According to theory, I have come across a timeline for shelter response:

1. Emergency shelter (tents): first-second week after emergency

2. Transitional shelter (pre-fab/semi-permanent/incremental): first month-

second month after disaster

3. Long term recovery (permanent shelter): one year-two year after disaster

But, through my case studies and recent field study in Uttarakhand, I have seen that

this timeline is not practically followed due to time taken by government and NGOs

in decision making and co-coordinating within themselves and with the community.

So, I have observed that the timeline from theory is not followed in practical world

and if followed the coordination and community participation is not done properly.

So there is a contradiction in these approaches in theory as the work in practical and

timeline doesn’t match.

Is there a way to follow the timeline and not compromising with the process of

coordination and community participation?

Is there a need to develop some new approach which can be practically followed

with suggested timeline?

Anshu : There is a different timeline for each different case. Work is done according

to the funds provided, the labour involved, context, and the amount of work to be

completed.

We people living in metro cities have different timeline or pace of doing some work,

and people in villages or areas such as Uttarakhand or Orissa or Ladakh have

different set of mind or different set of timeline or pace to follow.

So there’s no such timeline, but yes the funding agencies workout some timeline for

distribution of funds, which in actual is not followed with accuracy.

There is no right or wrong they are all shades of grey.

61

QUESTIONNAIRE 3

In a multi-phase approach (emergency shelter-transitional shelter-permanent

shelter) temporary shelter is provided.

so for a temporary shelter, pre-fab systems comes first into my mind as they are very

much easy to construct and most INSTANT to construct of all the other shelter

design approaches.

But through my case studies I have observed that pre-fab systems may work for

short period of time but doesn’t work well or are not used by the people for long

period of time.

This is due to the reasons like firstly there is no community participation or

involvement in designing of their shelter as there is not much time for that.

Designing of these shelters and installation is also done in very less time so it is

difficult to achieve all the basic standards, majorly cultural and climatically

appropriate standards.

So how appropriate pre-fab systems are for transitional shelter response?

If not appropriate, how can it be possible to provide INSTANT shelter which is also

appropriate for long term use?

Anshu : I have never seen prefab shelters working well or been a success.

Talking about transitional phase-this is a phase which does not exist. NGOs get funds

from big organizations or banks and a time limit to spend the money for providing

relief. The money left after the due date is taken back by the banks or funding

agencies. So what happens after first phase is people are provided with prefab

systems as one of the approaches to spend the money. And prefab systems doesn’t

work due to the various reasons. According to the survey the beneficiaries have been

provided with shelters but in real they do not get a habitable permanent home for

them to live.

So to use the funding and also to benefit the beneficiaries we adopt incremental

approaches or core shelter approach in which we emphasis on building a permanent

62

home for them so with the money for transitional stage we try to complete as much

as possible.

For instant shelter, people are provided with rent to live in places nearby or people

shift to other houses in their locality, for e.g. in Uttarakhand people are living in the

houses of their relatives or friends in their locality or villages near their homes and

many are living on rent which is provided by the government till the period of one yr.

Before we have worked in Kashmir and provided prefab systems there as winters

were near and shelter should be provided as soon as possible. But given the chance

again I’ll never support provision of prefab shelters in future.

63

CONCLUSION

Months and years after the catastrophe the affected people still remain without

shelters worldwide or the shelter given to them fail to create a sustainable built

environment around them and become slums or used just as stores instead of living

spaces.

In today's world of advanced information and technology when we can access whole

world on our fingers through gadgets and other media, why is it that we are still

lagging in providing sustainable shelters to the affected population.

The success cases in providing post-disaster shelters worldwide are negligible to the

number of affected population. The shelters provided didn't function properly and

become slums or used just as stores instead of shelters.

This is due to the fact that the shelters we provide to affected population are not

culturally or socially acceptable and were unsustainable to live.

Architects have actually failed in the process of post-disaster re-construction due to

which their role in disaster re-construction is also questioned.

While designing we need to look after all the aspects of social context, cultural

context, natural context and should have an understanding of transitional aspects of

the place and people we are designing for.

While designing in normal conditions we follow all the architectural and contextual

aspects but while designing for disaster re-construction we do not design with that

positive attitude and give time more importance over a sustainable design solution.

This is due to the fact that in post-disaster conditions we give time more importance

than quality and just focus on the deadlines and are not able to involve ourselves on

community level resulting in lack of understanding of cultural, environmental and

social context which replicate in our designs and an alien architecture is created

which is socially and culturally not accepted by the affected people and results in

another disaster after disaster.

As architects we should not see these catastrophe as a negative thing.

we should see disasters as opportunity to create a better built environment for the

people.

64

Working for disaster re-construction gives us an opportunity to work at community

level by which we can understand the social and cultural aspects of the place and

also gives us an opportunity to understand the various traditional ways of their living

and architecture which they have evolved with lot of hit and trial methods over past

many years.

As architect we also have the opportunity to learn from the past mistakes and can

work on them to improve them to explore them and can evolve from the mistakes to

create a better built environment.

But for post-disaster reconstruction we do not have sufficient time to involve

ourselves at community level and becomes almost impossible to study all the social,

cultural and traditional aspects of the place and people and we develop a negative

attitude of working giving time more importance over quality and start looking for

instant results which are practically not sustainable for living environment.

To avoid these failures we as an architect should develop a positive approach while

designing for post-disaster reconstruction and should always give quality of space

more importance then time.

But as we don't have time after catastrophe we should work on re-construction

preparedness and should develop a pre-disaster reconstruction programme in which

we should prepare a contextual study in terms of social, cultural and environmental

aspects of all the climatic zones of India which are frequently prone to natural

disasters.

This will provide us a base before designing for the post-disaster reconstruction and

will cut down the time we spend on these studies after the catastrophe when time is

so less and instant solutions are needed.

This will help us in creating a better built environment for the affected people which

will be acceptable in all terms of built environment.

65

REFERENCES

1. Tony Lloyd-Jones; Mind the Gap! Post-disaster reconstruction and transition

from humanitarian relief. Max Lock Centre, University of Westminster.

2. Shelter after disaster - Strategies for Transitional Settlement and

Reconstruction, Shelter Centre, 2010

3. Ashbridge Jo et al; Transitional shelter - Guidelines, Shelter Centre, 2012

4. Transitional Settlement and Reconstruction after Natural Disasters, Shelter

Centre, 2008

5. Transitional shelters— Eight designs, International Federation of Red Cross

and Red Crescent Societies, Geneva, 2011

6. The Sphere Project: Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in

Humanitarian Response. International Federation of Red Cross and Red

Crescent Societies and the ICRC, 2011.

7. Jha, K. Abhas et al; Safer Homes, Stronger Communities: A Handbook for

Reconstructing after Natural Disasters, 2010. Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery, World Bank.

8. Davis, Ian; Learning from Disaster Recovery Guidance for Decision Makers,

International Recovery Platform (IRP), May 2006

9. Shokeen, Kapil; COMPRESS-Compact Energy Response Shelter System, Thesis,

University School of Architecture and Planning, 2010-11

66

10. Handbook for Emergencies, UNHRC 2007.

http://www.sheltercentre.org/library/Handbook+Emergencies

11. Owner-Driven Housing Re-Construction Guidelines, International Federation

of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Geneva, 2010

12. Sanderson, David; Article:The Guardian, 3rd March 2010 http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/mar/03/architects-disaster-reconstruction-haiti-chile

13. AIA Catalog; Changing Role Of Architects In Disaster Response http://www.aia.org/about/initiatives/AIAS075272

14. National Policy On Disaster Management 2009

National Disaster Management Authority, Govt. of India, Ministry Of Home

Affairs

15. Case Studies on Recovery and Reconstruction.

Asian Disaster Reduction Centre, July 2005.

16. Balasore Aashray Yojana


17. Barmer Aashray Yojna

Post Flood Shelter Restoration Programme, SEEDS 2007.

http://www.sheltercentre.org/library/Handbook+Emergencies

Post-Disaster Reconstruction: An Opportunity to Recreate a Sustainable Built Environment or...

Documents

Transcript of Post-Disaster Reconstruction: An Opportunity to Recreate a Sustainable Built Environment or...