Concerns and Recommendations for Consideration in the National Recovery and Reconstruction
West Java Earthquake Response, Shelter Coordination Group
concerns and recommendations
for consideraton in
the National Recovery and Reconstrcution Action Plan
Introduction
The earthquake that struck southwest Java on 2 September 2009 left approximately 60,000 families homeless and a similar number living in precariously damaged structures across the 15 districts to south of West Java and 1 district in Central Java. Schools and government offices, shops and other community structures have been badly affected
The government and people of Indonesia responded quickly and impressively, with the assistance of both local and international NGO’s and the community at large, emergency aid and assistance has been distributed across much of the affected areas.
Although much has been done in the first month of the response, rugged terrain and the remoteness of many villages combined with the breadth of the area affected and sporadic, seemingly random nature of the earthquakes impact has made it difficult for humanitarian agencies to respond effectively. A month on from the disaster many families remain in need of assistance. The rapidly approaching rainy season and recent diversion of attention and assistance to the Padang Earthquake Response has left Cluster members deeply concerned about a range of issues and potentially vulnerable groups within the area.
The Government of Indonesia is currently preparing a comprehensive Recovery and Reconstruction Action Plan and has invited the Shelter Sector to voice any concerns or recommendations for potential inclusion in the plan. This document summarizes the concerns and recommendations as discussed by the cluster.
Table of Contents
Introduction 1
Table of Contents 2
1. Concerns 2
1.1.1. Rush to rebuild 3
1.1.2. Insufficent funding allocated for emergency and transitional needs 3
1.1.3. Potential for Corruption 4
1.1. Those as yet unassisted 4
1.2. Relocation communities 4
1.3. Potential further risks 5
1.3.1. Climatic 5
1.3.2. Potential Landslide areas 5
1.3.3. Deforestation 5
1.3.4. Asbestos 5
1.3.5. Market fluctuation 5
1.3.6. Cash for work & Gotong Royong 6
1.4. Needs of the most Vulnerable 6
1.4.1. The newly handicapped 6
1.4.2. Single parent households 6
1.4.3. Renters and non-landowners 6
1.4.4. The poor 7
1.4.5. Minority groups 7
1.5. Urban vs Rural needs 7
1.5.1. Urban 7
1.5.2. Rural 8
1.6. Crosscutting issues 8
1.7. Information Management 9
2. Recommendations 10
2.1. Recommendations for G.o.i. and National Action Plan 10
2.1.1. Funds distribution 10
2.1.2. Transitional shelter 10
2.1.3. Technical training and public outreach 10
2.1.4. Asbestos 10
2.1.5. Relocation groups 10
2.1.6. Vulnerable groups 11
2.1.7. Information management 11
1. Concerns
Over and above specific concerns that are laid out in following paragraphs, a number of specific overarching concerns are worthy of mention.
1.1.1. Rush to rebuild
There is great concern that as the first rains of the monsoon season now fall and families are still without adequate shelter, that when government funds are dispersed there will be sudden rush to reconstruct that may well result in mass re-construction of non earthquake resistant housing. Families are attempting to rebuild; faster than they have had to before, with less financial backing after months of financial difficulty and with less available tradespeople per household.
The experience of recent large disaster recovery operations in Indonesia has shown that without adequate education and guidance, communities are unaware of how to build an environmentally safe house. Dissemination of such information and training has proved insufficient in other recent disasters and must be a high priority in this response.
Providing families with interim or transitional shelters may assist them to better plan, and gather resources for more resilient reconstruction.
Heavy rainfall over the next few months may make construction of a permanent shelter impractical if not impossible for many families.
1.1.2. Insufficent funding allocated for emergency and transitional needs
There remains concern amongst humanitarian actors that there are outstanding needs for both emergency and transitional shelter, and that cluster members have received insufficient funds to address these needs. Donors have been confused by what they see as mixed messages by the government about the need or even acceptance of assistance. Damage has occurred sporadically over such a vast area, that it may take 3-4 hours to get from one totally destroyed village to the next with in-between villages seeming untouched, resulting in confusion about the exact numbers and difficulty in quantifying community coping capacity. The combination of these issues with a series of much higher profile international disasters and many agencies still recovering from the recent global economic downturn has left most donors focusing elsewhere, resulting in an under-resourced response.
In other recent disasters in Indonesia, such as the Yogyakarta/central Java Earthquake the humanitarian sector has had sufficient resources to supply all affected family with emergency tarpaulins and at least 1 in 4 with transitional shelter assistance. This has not been the case in West Java, leaving more workload on an already overstretched local government and impoverished community
1.1.3. Potential for Corruption
Members of the cluster continue to remain concerned that with such large levels of funds at stake the potential for corruption is high. The cluster strongly supports the planned PokMas distribution system as fair, equitable and timely.
1.1. Those as yet unassisted
Difficulty of access, breadth of area, incomplete assessments and insufficient data have made it impossible to know precisely how much of the affected population has received assistance or remains in need of emergency shelter. The cluster remains concerned that some families may have inadequate shelter for the forth coming rainy season and this may have serious health implications. Of particular concern are:
· High density highly damaged communities, where damage levels may be beyond the coping capacity of the community and where there is insufficient land beside families homes for shelter. Many such families continue to live in precarious structure at serious risk of aftershocks
· Remote, isolate communities, who face increased transport costs and much poorer access to both resources and information
1.2. Relocation communities
A number of communities across the affected area now face relocation. For some families this is due to landslips or the potential for land collapse, for others it is due to lack of land title and disclarity over their right to rebuild on their original location.
Relocation communities will face a range of difficulties not faced by other sections of the affected population. Land settlements may take a prolonged time leaving these families in poor housing for much longer than other families. Families will face a greater array of costs than the average, as they start “completely for scratch”, costs such as digging wells and septics, connecting power and phones, transporting reclaimed materials will not be faced by other members of the affected community.
Relocation communities will require assistance with land acquisition and land title allocation, and town planning. Access to schools and places of work, public transport and markets must all be taken into consideration.
1.3. Potential further risks
It is critical that recovery plans include analysis of potential risk factors during the recovery and include contingency plans for those risks. Members of the cluster remain concerned about a number of potential risks.
1.2.
1.3.
1.3.1. Climatic
Communities have expressed their concern about how well their temporary shelters will cope in the rainy seasons and for coastal communities in the string winds of January and February. Cluster members support these concerns and recognize that there may be a need for additional shelter support if the weather is harsh over the coming months.
1.3.2. Potential Landslide areas
The combination of potential aftershocks and heavy monsoonal rains on recently destabilized soils creates an increased likelihood of landslides on steeper slopes across the affected area.
1.3.3. Deforestation
The rapid urge to rebuild, particularly in remote communities that are used to looking after themselves and in some cases have little faith in government assistance plans, is already resulting in logging of remnant forests. Aside from other pressing environmental reasons, deforestation will result in increased rates of landslides in already destabilized slopes.
1.3.4. Asbestos
Asbestos is globally recognized as a major health risk, responsible for two forms of lung cancer, mysothelioma and asbestosis. Indonesia is one of the few remaining countries in the world that continues to allow the sale of Asbestos. This has resulted in asbestos dust and fibres in rubble across the affected area. Families, unaware of the risks and how to abate them are rapidly clearing their building sites, dumping unwanted rubble and reusing sheeting where they feel they can. Strong messaging is required urgently to inform people of the hazards of asbestos and to encourage them not to continue to purchase this dangerous product. Asbestos is outlawed across America, Europe, Australia and Japan, the same should be considered both regionally and nationally in Indonesia.
1.3.5. Market fluctuation
The cluster remains concerned about potential fluctuation in market costs. This is of particular concern for products such as cement and steel in remote areas and sand and timber in higher density areas.
1.3.6. Cash for work & Gotong Royong
Cash for work programs as conducted in a number of recovery programs across Indonesia can have a devastating impact on existing social support networks such as the gotong royong tradition in West Java. Cluster members are concerned that community self support capacity be at all times strengthened within aid programs, not weakened.
1.4. Needs of the most Vulnerable
The cluster remains concerned about the particular needs of highly vulnerable groups across the affected area. For a range of reasons such groups may not have the same level of energy, capability or resources and hence will recover much more slowly and be at much greater risk during the recovery process. These groups include:
1.4.
1.4.1. The newly handicapped
Families coping with the needs of a handicapped member have reduced resources for disaster recovery. This impact is of particular concern where the handicapped person is the breadwinner or childrearer. Assessments in disaster affected communities show that families where one of the breadwinners is newly handicapped by the disaster are particularly vulnerable. These families are easily identified through health post data and extra assistance should be targeted towards them.
1.4.2. Single parent households
Single parent families, particular women headed households often lack the skills or time to reconstruct their home. The PokMas system should include additional support to these families, whilst NGO’s are encouraged to identify and target assistance towards these families.
1.4.3. Renters and non-landowners
The cluster remains deeply concerned about the permanent housing situation of renters across the affected area. Much of the countryside in West java is owned and managed by large plantation companies, hence many families live in houses they rent from the companies or live with informal historical right of abode on plantation land.
West Java is in the midst of an important and complex land reform process that will not reach resolution rapidly enough to address the needs of non land owning families.
The cluster remains concerned that the Action Plan should recognize the housing needs of renters, providing assistance to these families as well as to those who have formal landtitle.
1.4.4. The poor
Background poverty levels vary greatly across the affected areas. Some families have already managed to amass sufficient resources to rebuild their homes with or without assistance, for many other families though, simply buying a plastic sheet to put over their heads has drained their resources. Funds should be reserved to target the additional needs of the poorer members of society.
1.4.5. Minority groups
A number of cluster members have reported instances of cultural or religious minority groups being left of assistance list, whether deliberate or unconscious it is clear that cultural or religious difference can become a barrier to access to assistance. It is important that the PokMas System is uninfluenced by these differences.
1.5. Urban vs Rural needs
The West Java earthquake is spread over a vast area, affecting both rural and urban populations. The skills, resources and hence coping capacity and needs of these groups differs greatly.
1.5.
1.5.1. Urban
“Rumah kami selalu dibangun oleh tukang”
In the denser urban communities few families build their own house and even fewer have access to any raw materials. In these communities, houses are traditionally built by tradespeople hired in on day rates or else homes are bought as a finished product. In a post disaster community there are simply not enough tradespeople for the task at hand. Faced with such a massive rebuild, these communities are likely to face a serious deficit on both skills and tools.
Urban communities must buy in all resources, so although average incomes may be higher than in rural communities, communities with high damage levels will take a long time to rebuild.
Education levels and access to information, through radio, television and print will be higher in these communities.
1.5.2. Rural
“Rumahku dibangun oleh saya sama teman”
In remote rural communities, families and communities need to be much more self sufficient than their urban counterparts. Within these communities homes are constructed by families with the help of friends and neighbors. Many rural communities have better access to primary resources such bamboo timber wood and sand, as well as tools and basic building skills.
Remote rural families may face an arduous journey to buy steel & cement and have limited access to information on safe construction. There is an increased risk that these families will build back more quickly though potentially with limited improvement over their prior construction, unless training s provided.
1.6. Crosscutting issues
1.6.
Environment
1.7.
1.7.1.
1.7.2.
1.
1.1.
1.2.
1.3.
1.4.
1.5.
1.5.1.
Environmental issues have been addressed elsewhere in this document, with the main cluster concern being the risk of land clearing through illegal logging and increased landslide risk. Illegal mining for sand and safe dumping of asbestos laden rubble are also of concern.
Gender & Protection
The cluster remains concerned about protection issues especially for young woman now living in confined spaces in camps or temporary shelters. Space to change clothes in privacy, secure private bathing areas and safe evening access to bathing facilities are all of concern, particularly in camps and relocation communities.