| 008 |
|
130719n^^^^^^^^xx^||||^o^^^^^|||^0^eng^d |
| 245 |
00 |
|a Responding to earthquakes 2008: learning from earthquake relief and recovery operations |h [electronic resource] |y English. |
| 260 |
|
|a [S.l.] : |b ProVention Consortium ; |a [S.l.] : |b Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance (ALNAP), |c 2008. |
| 506 |
|
|a Refer to main document/publisher for use rights. |
| 510 |
|
|a Cosgrave, J. (2008). Responding to earthquakes 2008: learning from earthquake relief and recovery operations. Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance (ALNAP), ProVention Consortium. |
| 520 |
3 |
|a This document builds on 30 years of learning from earthquake responses ranging from the 1976 Guatemala earthquake to the 2006 Yogyakarta earthquake. The document’s intended audiences are operational decision-makers and relief program managers working in sudden-onset disaster contexts. The different lessons learned from past earthquake responses are presented in four sections: (1) recovery first, (2) relief issues, (3) managing aid, and (4) livelihoods and shelter. Relief and recovery processes are merged in this document because one of the strongest lessons emerging from recent disaster responses is that providing effective support for recovery during the disaster relief phase is critical to ensuring that the devastation caused by an earthquake is not compounded by other crises. Recovery is often the overarching challenge of responding to earthquakes; disaster relief, though challenging, is often less complex. The document addresses the various intricacies and linkages that exist between recovery and relief measures, specifically highlighting some of the factors that managers and decision-makers must take into account when responding to these disasters. These include thinking strategically about timeframes, cultural nuances that may exist in each disaster context, and aid distribution. In each of these cases, the author turns earthquake relief strategy on its head, ensuring that short-term response decisions are structured by long-term recovery goals. Throughout the document, themes such as the importance of collaboration, the power of social capital and social networks, flexibility, sustainability, engagement, and advocacy, run throughout the document. In the last section of the document, livelihoods and shelter are discussed. In the last section of the document, an important discussion about livelihoods and shelter assistance following disaster is presented. The document recommends that agency planning not overstate the need for relief, but rather emphasize moving quickly into recovery activities. Agencies should provide ample and accurate information about their plans to the affected community, so that affected families can structure their own recovery strategies around these plans. It recommends that agencies not attempt to restore particular livelihoods unless these livelihoods are going to be viable in the changed circumstances caused by the disaster. |
| 520 |
2 |
|a Recovery first p. 3; Recovery is the overriding challenge p. 3; Set realistic time-frames for recovery p. 3; Avoid compromising recovery p. 4; Don’t prolong the relief phase p. 6; Advocacy and engagement are vital tools for response p. 6; Recovery is not neutral p. 8; Disaster response is no magic bullet p. 9; Include measures to reduce disaster risk p. 9; Relief issues p. 11; Disease is unlikely p. 11; The ratio of dead to injured varies widely p. 12; Let the living bury the dead p. 12; Prevent further asset erosion p. 13; Pay people to clear rubble p. 14; Flexibility is key p. 14; Managing aid p. 15; Use existing social capital p. 15; Ask recipients to find out if your assistance is appropriate p. 16; Livelihoods and shelter p. 17; Livelihoods are closely tied to shelter p. 17; Livelihoods are the key to recovery p. 17; Allow for complex livelihoods p. 18;
Don’t recreate unsust ainable livelihoods p. 19; A single asset does not make a livelihood p. 20;
Be cautious about planning restrictions p. 20; Limit relocation to what is essential for safety p. 21; Don’t rebuild vulnerability p. 22; Shelter is complex and needs special skills p.23; Transitional shelter – only when appropriate p. 24; Gear up for land-ownership issues p. 25; Use shelter grants or advocate for them p. 26 |
| 520 |
0 |
|a General Risk Management |
| 533 |
|
|a Electronic reproduction. |c Florida International University, |d 2013. |f (dpSobek) |n Mode of access: World Wide Web. |n System requirements: Internet connectivity; Web browser software. |
| 650 |
1 |
|a Disaster response and recovery. |
| 650 |
1 |
|a Natural hazards and disasters |x Earthquakes. |
| 710 |
2 |
|a Disaster Risk Reduction Program, Florida International University (DRR/FIU), |e summary contributor. |
| 856 |
40 |
|u http://dpanther.fiu.edu/dpService/dpPurlService/purl/FI13042591/00001 |y Click here for full text |
| 992 |
04 |
|a http://dpanther.fiu.edu/sobek/content/FI/13/04/25/91/00001/FI13042591thm.jpg |
