Preventive Resettlement of Populations at Risk of Disaster - GFDRR

and status: They went from being informal or illegal
settlers to legal owners with deeds.
It should be noted that deeds were provided to families,
rather than individuals, as a way of safeguarding
the rights of women and children (Guatemala and Colombia);
also, families were prevented from selling their
houses for a given period of time (Argentina and Guatemala).
9. Environmental Impact Study
of the Resettlement
Guatemala was the only country to assess the environmental
impact of the new settlements. This is an important
activity because collective resettlements may put
pressure on natural and social resources and negatively
affect the environment. Therefore, measures should be
included to mitigate any adverse impacts.
10. The Transition from the
Informal to the Formal
Sector
One of the many challenges for resettled families and
those who plan the resettlement process is moving people
from an informal to a formal environment. In the
formal city, they must assume new responsibilities, such
as paying for utilities and taxes. Also, in some cases, the
new urban setting may require a different type of neighborhood
behavior.
For this reason, once households were resettled (in Brazil
and Colombia), they were provided with manuals
about rules and regulations to promote harmonious relations
with the neighbors and trained on how to handle
the costs associated with new houses and the efficient
use of utilities, among other topics.
11. Restoration of Access
to Social Services
Resettlement may sometimes cause children to miss a
year of school or lose access to schools entirely. Also,
the population may lose its access to health care, since
families were registered at health centers in their original
sites.
Such problems were addressed in different ways. In Brazil,
it was necessary to build schools and health centers
for the families resettled in the housing complexes. Also,
the moving was scheduled on dates that had the least
negative effect on the children’s schooling. In Colombia,
arrangements were made with public entities to register
families with schools and health centers close to their
new houses. In Argentina, no extra actions were needed
because the families’ distance from schools and health
centers was not altered substantially. In Guatemala, these
facilities were built later, due to the synergies in Chuk
Muk with public entities and international agencies.
12. Restoration of Income
Peoples conducting economic activities within their
homes or neighborhoods may lose this source of income
when they move. Thus, it is important to study their socio-economic
conditions to determine the nature of the
families’ economic activities and assess whether income
will be lost through resettlement. None of the cases produced
detailed information on such aspects, but they all
considered the issue. In Brazil, commercial premises were
built inside the housing complexes for families that had
been engaged in a trade. In Argentina, income sources
were not affected because distances were not significantly
altered by resettlement. In Colombia, income-generating
projects are under way. In Guatemala, the new settlement
was designed as a “productive habitat,” with spaces incorporated
for subsistence and commercial activities, and
special programs were conducted to revive the economies
of the communities affected by the disaster.
It should be noted that while much can be done to improve
family incomes, resettlement cannot solve a country’s
or region’s structural problems.
13. Monitoring Risks and
Contingency Plans
Since preventive resettlement is a response to communities
exposed to high risk hazards, authorities must monitor
the risk conditions, and develop contingency plans
to react properly. In the cases studied, two approaches
were adopted: Guatemala constructed shelters, while
Bogotá (Colombia) subsidized housing rentals pending
permanent solutions, or gave grocery vouchers to
112 Preventive Resettlement of Populations at Risk of Disaster: Experiences from Latin America