OneWorld.net (U.S.)

For Ratree, a fisherwoman from the village Leam Pok in Kao Lak, Thailand, the death of her 10-year-old daughter in the tsunami waves that hit the shores of the Indian Ocean on December 26, 2004 was only the peak of a long and painful nightmare. The devastated village was sealed off by nai toons (money barons) who claimed ownership of the beachfront on which the village was located. For days, none of the local residents were able to access their houses, or find out what had happened to their families and friends. Even when access was granted, the local government—possibly bribed by interest groups coveting the land—ignored the rehabilitation needs of the locals and left them outside of the public support umbrella. Today, eight months after the disaster and with the help of courts and citizen sector organizations, Ratree and others in Leam Pok are still struggling to reclaim their land in the face of administrative corruption and business interests that hamper redevelopment work.

Throughout the tsunami-hit regions of south-east Asia and eastern Africa, the media have focused on the provision of shelters, boats, and agricultural tools. The legal battle over land ownership is, however, a less familiar aspect of the story. For real estate entrepreneurs, the tsunami provided a rare opportunity for a shift in land use—from housing to tourism—and the appropriation of local land holdings became much easier. The difficult challenge is how to proceed with rehabilitation while making sure that the land remains under local villagers’ ownership.

It is a common pattern for pre-existing social, political and economic problems to be greatly intensified by a disaster. In Sri Lanka, for example, the international support that streamed into the country after the tsunami stoked the ongoing struggle between the central government and the Tamil rebels over control, resources, and local support. In Indonesia, ethnic discrimination by the central government, which existed before the tsunami, worsened after the money started to flow in. In India, the infamous caste system presented difficulties for members of the lower caste when they tried to use emergency services.

As these examples demonstrate, there is certainly a dark side to the massive influx of foreign aid. Just like uncontrolled economic development, international support can also be unsustainable or even harmful. Mihir Bahtt, an Ashoka fellow and the founder of the All India Disaster Mitigation Institute (ADMI), argues that external funds contributed to the failure of internal communal initiatives. Following its extensive activities after the tsunami, ADMI found that local support—in which the survivors receive assistance from people known to them prior to the disaster—was more effective and more beneficial in terms of economic value. (See info. on ADMI on page 14.)

Foreign support can sometimes have the effect of weakening the local sense of self-reliance and capability, changing locally determined priorities, and eroding existing social fabric. It can, however, also be effective when it takes local social structures and demands into account, is delivered via local activists, and relies on the community as a source of strength. The real challenge, in the case of any disaster, is to better integrate foreign and local assistance. Ensuring that external resources amplify local efforts is a positive sum game. Ultimately, involving local people—and their knowledge, expertise, and preferences—in any decision-making process is fundamental.

Nir Tsuk Director, Global Fellowship Program

© Ashoka: Innovators for the Public