Assessing the Impact of Household Participation on Satisfaction and Safe Design in Humanitarian Shelter Projects

Participation has long been considered important for post‐disaster recovery. Establishing what constitutes participation in post‐disaster shelter projects, however, has remained elusive, and the links between different types of participation and shelter programme outcomes are not well understood. Furthermore, recent case studies suggest that misguided participation strategies may be to blame for failures. This study analysed 19 shelter projects implemented in the Philippines following Typhoon Haiyan in November 2013 to identify the forms of participation employed. Using fuzzy‐set qualitative comparative analysis, it assessed how household participation in the planning, design, and construction phases of shelter reconstruction led to outcomes of household satisfaction and safe shelter design. Participation was operationalised via eight central project tasks, revealing that the involvement of households in the early planning stages of projects and in construction activities were important for satisfaction and design outcomes, whereas engagement during the design phase of projects had little impact on the selected outcomes.National Science Foundation, United States Agency for International Development Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance, Nicolas R. and Nancy D. Petry Fellowship in Construction Engineering and Managemen

The mechanism of disaster capitalism and the failure to build community resilience:learning from the 2009 earthquake in L'Aquila, Italy

This paper reflects on what materialised during recovery operations following the earthquake in L'Aquila, Italy, on 6 April 2009. Previous critiques have focused on the actions of the Government of Italy and the Department of Civil Protection (Protezione Civile), with little attention paid to the role of local authorities. This analysis sheds light on how the latter used emergency powers, the command-and-control approach, and top-down planning to manage the disaster context, especially in terms of removal of rubble, implementing safety measures, and allocating temporary accommodation. It discusses how these arrangements constituted the mechanism via which ‘disaster capitalism’ took hold at the local and national level, and how it violated human rights, produced environmental and social impacts, hindered local communities from learning, transforming, and building resilience, and facilitated disaster capitalism and corruption. To make the disaster risk reduction and resilience paradigm more effective, a shift from centralised civil protection to decentralised, inclusive community empowerment systems is needed

Public expectations of critical infrastructure operators in times of crisis

Maintaining a minimum level of service and recovering quickly after a shock are key components of critical infrastructure (CI) resilience. Nevertheless, recent literature indicates that there is an ‘expectation gap’ in relation to the services CI operators should provide to members of the public in the immediate aftermath of a disaster. However, few of these studies have empirically investigated what members of the public expect. As such, this paper explores this under-researched area by drawing on key themes that emerged from a literature review, results from an online questionnaire-based study (N = 403), and analysis of 22 semi-structured interviews with CI operators and other relevant stakeholders. Results indicate that the public appear willing to tolerate reductions in service during crisis. The public also expect CI operators to keep them informed about progress to restore these services and answer direct queries via both traditional and social media. Based on these findings, resilience recommendations are presented