A ripple in development? - Channel Research

often take place in parallel and the linkage can be rather complicated
seen from either the intended beneficiaries’ point of view or from the
perspective of the planner or the implementation agency. The understanding
and explicit or implicit use of the LRRD concept may thus
become an important factor for the long-term impact of humanitarian
relief interventions.
Because of its complexity a straightforward and simple definition
of LRRD is not possible. The general idea is that there are linkages –
positive or negative in their consequences as well as logical or accidental
– between various stages of interventions after a disaster and these linkages
need to be explored, both in order to explain what has happened
and to learn how to do better next time.
2 Purpose and objective of the evaluation
The main purpose the evaluation is to contribute to learning from a
large scale and complicated disaster, particularly about modes of planning
and operation by different actors. It is desirable to have conclusions
and lessons learned from the tsunami disaster that may be applied to
similar situations in the future.
The possibility of reporting on the results of interventions – the
accountability aspect – is also important in view of the magnitude of
the disaster and the massive response it created.
The first part of the LRRD evaluation served two purposes. One
was to provide information on the LRRD theme for the ‘one year after’
synthesis report published in 2006. The other was to collect basic information
and to establish points of reference, particularly regarding the
intended beneficiaries’ views, to be used in the second LRRD evaluation
phase. The LRRD evaluation complemented the other themes in
the TEC evaluation in order to present a comprehensive assessment of
essential elements of the response to the disaster.
The tsunami disaster was the last large natural catastrophe with a
major international response before the so-called cluster approach was
applied. As such it may serve as a basis for comparison to later international
interventions and this should be kept in mind in the analysis.
The objective of the follow-up evaluation is to identify linkages,
both positive and negative, between relief, recovery and development
activities, investigate results and consequences of these that have taken
place during the more than three years after the disaster and formulate
lessons to be learned and recommendations from this. The analysis shall
be carried out along the dimensions indicated below and in section 2.2.
For learning purposes it may be useful to make comparisons between
the three countries in the evaluation. It is important to look for intended
and unintended as well as positive or negative consequences of the
interventions and the ways they were implemented.
126