Disaster Response: Short and Long Term Aid
|
“Supporting resilience means more than delivering relief or mitigating individual hazards. Local knowledge, skills, determination, livelihoods, cooperation, access to resources and representation are all vital factors enabling people to bounce back from disaster.”
World Disasters Report 2004 The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
The immediate task after a major disaster is to save as many lives as possible, to provide security, and to ensure that food, water, and shelter are provided to those made homeless. Dealing with a disaster can involve any number of emergency services, law enforcement officers, medical staff, international aid agencies, public works officials, military personnel, and local charities—just to name a few. Similarly, tasks may include search and rescue operations, medical triage, sheltering the homeless, evacuating neighborhoods, coordinating transportation, handling the dead, and organizing large amounts of donations. Most disaster management plans will ensure that vast quantities of relief supplies are pre-positioned, with items like food, water, blankets, and generators ready to move quickly to areas in need. Even if supplies have been put in place, however, providing such short-term relief can still be a huge logistical challenge, especially when normal communication and transportation channels may be unavailable, or when there is significant chaos and confusion. First Responders Because the first 24 hours after a disaster strikes are critical, local citizens are the ones to provide first-line relief. U.N. Volunteers noted that 300,000 volunteers contributed to immediate relief efforts in Sri Lanka after the South Asian tsunami. The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies—the world’s largest humanitarian organization with 181 member National Societies—can marshal vast numbers of local volunteers very quickly and, as such, are vital to immediate relief efforts. Local governments are also aware of their own resources and have the necessary knowledge base about who lives where and under what circumstances. As such, local communities and local and district/state governments are usually the most effective “first responders” to a crisis. In many cases though, the local community may simply be overwhelmed by a major disaster. Hence, national assistance must be brought in to supplement their efforts. Of course, capacity can vary considerably across countries, many of which lack financial resources for disaster management. A June 2005 U.N. report looked at disaster response capabilities in five countries (Armenia, Nepal, Ecuador, Iran, and Madagascar) and came to the conclusion that national legal frameworks for disaster response in all countries except Iran “appeared weak, fragmentary, and generally inadequate.” Some countries were further along than others, however, in having better systems for disaster coordination. These ranged from no plan in Armenia to a well-developed one in Ecuador, where a technical group and heads of agencies met regularly and had preparedness measures in place. In the case of the U.S., national aid is provided by the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Although the U.S. is seemingly better prepared than many countries to handle disasters, the chaos following Hurricane Katrina threw this assumption into question. Debate has raged over the qualifications of those appointed to oversee the disaster response, which governmental agencies had jurisdiction, and the role of the military in disaster relief. Coordination and Communication Because disasters tend to bring together a wide variety of actors, there can be significant confusion about roles and responsibilities. Poor communication about which branch of government was responsible for which tasks at what time was almost certainly a factor in getting aid that was often too little and too late to the victims of Hurricane Katrina. Further, if the many institutions and organizations providing relief are operating too independently in a disaster, the larger response effort can be compromised. Sharing of information and coordinating efforts between and among agencies at all levels is, therefore, fundamental.
Although many governments have detailed plans on paper, they are unlikely to be very effective unless those responding to disasters know their roles vis-à-vis the many other actors providing assistance. Volunteers who are not trained may also impede disaster efforts. Volunteers who rush to assist search and rescue efforts may, for example, endanger themselves and others by working in unsafe buildings. Although plans for responding to a disaster can be formalized in statutes or contracts, the people-to-people connections are sometimes more important. Research has shown that when there is familiarity, trust, and experiences of working together before a disaster strikes, responses to a disaster can actually run more smoothly. As noted in a book by Dr. Erik Auf der Heide called Disaster Response: Principles of Preparation and Coordination, smaller communities with fewer resources can often respond to disasters more effectively than large, urban areas simply because there is more experience of working together. Information and Communications Technology (ICT) can also play a key role in enabling communities to respond more quickly and effectively to disasters. The Internet, for example, has ensured that the world learns about disasters almost instantaneously. But, remote communities don’t always have this access. Discussions are ongoing about how village communities can use tools like cell and satellite phones to stay informed. (See Viewpoints article from N-Ten) International Aid At a certain point, national governments may need to request assistance from the international community. Following the December 2003 Bam earthquake in Iran, for example, the government appealed for international assistance through the United Nations. When the international community is called upon to offer aid, there are many organizations that can arrive quickly. At the United Nations level, these might include agencies like the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs or the World Food Program. And, of course, there are many big international relief agencies, like Care, World Vision, and Oxfam, at the forefront of disaster response. Groups like Médecins sans Frontières have developed very quick response systems, offering, for example, ready-made, pre-packed medical relief kits that can be shipped in cargo planes within hours. The U.N. also has a Disaster Assessment and Coordination Unit that is on permanent standby and can be deployed to disaster sites within 24 hours. Realizing the need for better coordination among international agencies, governments created the U.N. Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC) in June 1992. The committee includes a range of U.N. agencies, major international non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and the Red Cross movement. The IASC was formed to help these many players establish clear divisions of responsibility, avoid duplication, and develop realistic plans of action for dealing with crises. Money also helps. In the case of tsunami survivors, the generous outpouring of support from both official sources and private individuals was unprecedented. Reuters reported in August 2005 that government and multilateral agencies had pledged around $9 billion in aid for nations affected by the disaster in South Asia, while global private donations amounted to almost $5 billion. What is pledged by governments, however, is sometimes paid much later, or not at all. Rebuilding and Reconstruction After relief supplies have been flown in, search and rescue operations completed, and media attention has moved on, the hard task of rebuilding lives begins. In the immediate term, it is vital to rebuild critical infrastructure, like hospitals, roads, and schools. Having lost everything in some cases, individuals also need opportunities to get back on their feet. Getting businesses back into New Orleans has, for example, been a main priority of the Bush administration following Hurricane Katrina. For many NGOs working in South Asia since the 2004 tsunami, providing short-term employment opportunities through public works projects has been a priority. Groups like Lutheran World Relief, Mercy Corps, and Action Against Hunger are among dozens of NGOs that have invested resources in the region in income generation schemes, small grants programs, restoring food security, repairing fishing boats, rebuilding restaurants, and getting local markets running.
But, are large cash infusions really the answer anyway? Some experts have expressed concern that so much money flowing into a country immediately after a disaster may, in fact, have detrimental impacts in the longer term. The World Bank, for example, notes that the aid pouring into Aceh, Indonesia could put livelihoods at risk once the money dries up unless the economy is strengthened. The challenge after a disaster strikes is to move from immediate relief to sustainable, long-term development. “To not think about medium to long term needs is dangerous, because an over emphasis on the immediate needs can lead to the creation of ineffective mechanisms for, inter alia, aid delivery and relief operations that inadvertently sow the seeds for future conflict,” notes OneWorld South Asia. While providing outside aid may give initial impetus to the economy, locally driven initiatives that help communities rebuild by creating sustainable livelihoods are a key factor in recovery. Take an environmental NGO in Indonesia that gave fishermen from the tsunami-devastated coast opportunities and training to cultivate crops further inland. Due to income from the crops, these new farmers were given a purpose and began to regain their self-sufficiency. Microfinance institutions can also give individuals the tools to regain their independence. The World Bank and regional banks, like the Inter-American Development Bank and the African Development Bank Group, have encouraged microfinance and lending programs to aid disaster-affected populations. Of course, many NGOs remain opposed to the requirements these institutions put on their loans and lobby for more democratic participation in reconstruction efforts overall. See other stories in this issue on “Global Trends” and “Programs That Work.” |
Printable version
Back to top
