Inter-Agency Real Time Evaluation of the Response to Cyclone Nargis

individuals responding without any emergency experience – but also to the very real logisticaldifficulties of working in the affected areas, most of which were accessible only by air or boat (manyboats having been damaged or destroyed). Compounding the problem was that field levelcoordination was handicapped due to delays in deploying OCHA staff.Although early international media reports implied that the government was blocking aid to affectedpopulations, interviews and agency reports showed that local groups and even some internationalorganizations were able to access affected areas immediately after the cyclone. For example, oneinternational NGO had 28 medical teams in some of the most affected areas of Labutta Townshipwithin a few days after the cyclone. There were certainly very real restrictions on access, but evenso, those organizations already in the country that were less risk-averse and were less constrained byissues around national sovereignty reached affected populations soon after the cyclone. Internationalagencies were also quick to mobilizing funding, activate the clusters, and mount a concerteddiplomatic effort that eventually resulted in, among other things, the TCG and the air bridge inThailand that helped to expedite the delivery of aid.The government restrictions placed on international agencies were not imposed because of cycloneNargis, but the effect was to limit the number of international agencies and staff responding. It issafe to assume that this factor decreased coverage of affected areas and probably prolonged sufferingin some communities. Due to the relatively small number of responders, the restrictions obligedseveral organizations (both NGOs and UN) to take on a relatively wide variety of sectoral activities,going beyond the institutional technical expertise of agencies. At the same time, the team saw noevidence from agency reports/surveys or interviews that there has been any epidemic or increase inacute malnutrition from pre-cyclone levels. While there were post-cyclone deaths, based oninterviews with responders who were among the first arrivals in the Delta there was no evidence of amassive second wave of preventable deaths as predicted by many international media reports in earlyMay.It is illuminating to draw further comparisons with the tsunami response in Aceh, which was floodedwith hundreds of international NGOs staffed mainly by expatriates operating with private fundsraised from outside the country. Most of the aid workers in Aceh had never worked in Indonesiabefore the tsunami, had little emergency experience or relevant technical expertise. In Myanmar, dueto limited restrictions on access, these ‘fringe’ organizations were by and large not able to deploy.Stakeholder interviews and reports indicated that local organizations, local businesses, nationalcelebrities (musicians, actors, etc.), schools and groups of private citizens had been able to mobilizesignificant amounts of private funds to complement funds that were being provided by the Myanmargovernment and neighboring countries. This translated into a much more prominent role for localactors than in Aceh, aided by the relatively good access to the Delta from the main commercialcenter of Yangon.The result was impressive. Although hardly any of the (primarily national) individuals, privatebusinesses, student groups, and local agencies responding had previous disaster managementexperience, they spoke the local language, understood what constituted a culturally appropriate reliefitem and knew how to interact with local authorities and communities. Findings of this IA RTEmirrored those of the TEC which suggested that most of the live-saving activities after cycloneNargis were carried out by national actors prior to the arrival of international agencies, but this timenational actors were not pushed aside by an influx of international agencies under pressure todisburse funds quickly as was the case in Aceh.11