A ripple in development - Norad

1. The return of the stateand civil societyThematic scope: This theme aims to capture the process and the outcomesof return to normally functioning government and community functionswhich does not necessarily means a return to status quo ante. Alsoit shall cover the transitional nature of humanitarian agencies andNGOs and how they facilitate or disrupt return to a normal situation.1.1 Capacity to lead regained?To what extent have state and civil society institutions regained their capacity to leadrecovery, development and risk reduction?Implicit in this question is the assumption that state and civil societyinstitutions:1. Have the capacity (and the interest) in leading at least developmentand risk reduction prior to the tsunami.2. Lost their capacity to lead either because of the disaster or duringthe response when they were overwhelmed by the “second tsunami”of aid.The first of these assumptions is not validated by the evidence, given thelow investment in disaster preparedness or other risk reduction measuresin many of the affected states prior to the tsunami. The first assumptionalso raises questions about the leadership for developmentprovided prior to the tsunami. In spite of the fact that we have the nationalownership policies around the Paris Declaration on aid effectivenessand harmonisation suggests that donors have not always supportedthe leadership role of national governments.The second assumption is certainly true for some levels of governmentin some countries for the relief phase, but it is certainly not trueuniversally, and especially not for recovery and development phases.It is widely acknowledged in the document set that “to be effective nationaldisaster response needs to be led by national authorities” at least for natural15