Download the file - United Nations Rule of Law

296Towards safer and more secure citiesBox 12.16 Community participation: Lessons from the Maharashtra Emergency EarthquakeRehabilitation Programme, IndiaOn 30 September 1993, an earthquake struck the Indian state ofMaharashtra, killing about 8000 people and damaging some 230,000houses. To guide reconstruction, the government of Maharashtraand the World Bank created the Maharashtra EmergencyEarthquake Rehabilitation Programme (MEERP). MEERP identified52 villages that needed to be relocated and 1500 villages (190,000families) that needed their homes to be reconstructed, repaired orstrengthened, but on the same site.In the relocation sites, beneficiaries were not directlyinvolved in construction, but were heavily engaged in the decisionmakingstages, including the selection of beneficiaries, theidentification of relocation sites, the layout of the village, the designof houses and the provision of amenities. Final decisions were takenin plenary meetings of the whole village. During the constructionstage, only the village-level committee and community participationconsultants were involved with the project management unit. Oncethe construction was completed, houses were allotted to beneficiariesin open consultation with the entire village.In communities undergoing reconstruction or repair,homeowners took on the responsibility of repairing, retrofittingand strengthening their houses, with materials and financial andtechnical assistance from the government. The projectmanagement unit opened a bank account for each of the 190,000eligible homeowners, who received coupons for constructionmaterials. A junior engineer appointed at the village level providedtechnical assistance to ensure that the houses were earthquakeresistant. Each village formed a beneficiary committee to work withthe project management unit. In most villages, these committeesconsisted of women’s self-help groups. Training programmes wereorganized in villages with large numbers of beneficiaries, whereresidents were informed of their entitlements and the processes tobe followed.After 18 months, the programme had taken on the dimensionsof a housing movement. As MEERP progressed, communityparticipation became increasingly accepted as an effective methodfor resolving problems during the reconstruction process. It alsohad a positive effect on communities insofar as involving localpeople helped them to overcome their trauma.In addition to housing work, some agencies also tackledsocial issues, such as schooling. Over time, MEERP became apeople’s project. The participatory process opened many informalchannels of communication between ordinary people and thegovernment. Beneficiaries became aware of their entitlements andworked hard within the process to secure them. Individuals whofelt that their grievances were not addressed appropriately at thelocal level approached the district authorities and the governmentin Mumbai.Source: Barakat, 2003accountability for intermediary humanitarian actors needs tobe resolved. First, and most important, is downwardaccountability to the survivors of disaster. Second is accountabilityto donors or the government agencies, privatecompanies or individuals who provide funds for specificwork to be undertaken. Tensions set up by these necessarylines of accountability contribute towards gaps, overlaps andcompetition between agencies on the ground. This leads tolosses in the efficiency and equity of programmes and canundermine local governance structures.Perhaps most fundamental is that humanitarian actorsshould review the extent to which their interventionscontribute to local development agendas and build resilienceby adding to local skill, knowledge and resource bases. In areview of the tsunami reconstruction, it was found thatgenerous levels of funding created obstacles for field-levellearning as a consequence of requirements for upwardaccountability. Upward accountability is resource intensiveand expensive. It relies upon skilled professionals to reportback on local actions. 63If reconstruction and development are to begenuinely linked, then those involved in reconstruction needto think hard about who sets the agenda, and about how besttheir actions can contribute to local and national visions andplans for development. But concerted effort will be required.The Stockholm Conference in 1999 set out a framework forthe US$9 billion in international reconstruction aid forCentral America following Hurricane Mitch, but this hasarguably led to little improvement in socio-economic statusor environmental security in the region. 64 More recently, inSri Lanka, a Road Map for Disaster Management, cosponsoredby the Government of Sri Lanka Ministry forDisaster Management and the UNDP, was issued in 2005.This provides a framework for integrating disaster risk reductionwithin development planning. 65 The centralinvolvement of national government in the planning stage ofthe road map is a good example of growing partnershipsbetween national and international actors in reconstructiongovernance.THE ROLE OFPARTICIPATORY ANDINCLUSIVE STRATEGIESAND POLICIESBuilding resilience into urban development is a challengethat requires the application of participatory and inclusivestrategies. The task of participatory and inclusive strategiesis to identify what every actor and asset in the city cancontribute to shape and implement sound disaster riskmanagement. The fact that everyone, even children, has arole to play is demonstrated well in Armenia, where disasterrisk education is promoted in schools and through the massmedia. This initiative is led by a women’s development groupthat emphasizes disaster mitigation and focuses on mothers