Long-Term Development in Post-Disaster Intentional Communities in Honduras
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
From Tragedy to Opportunity: Long-term Development in Post-Disaster Intentional Communities in Honduras A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY Ryan Chelese Alaniz IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Ronald Aminzade June 2012 © Ryan Alaniz 2012 Acknowledgements Like all manuscripts of this length it took the patience, love, and encouragement of dozens of people and organizations. I would like to thank my parents for their support, numerous friends who provided feedback in informal conversations, my amazing editor and partner Jenny, my survey team, and the residents of Nueva Esperanza, La Joya, San Miguel Arcangel, Villa El Porvenir, La Roca, and especially Ciudad España and Divina for their openness in sharing their lives and experiences. Finally, I would like to thank Doug Hartmann, Pat McNamara, David Pellow, and Ross MacMillan for their generosity of time and wisdom. Most importantly I would like to express my gratitude to my advisor, Ron, who is an inspiration personally and professionally. I would also like to thank the following organizations and fellowship sponsors for their financial support: the University of Minnesota and the Department of Sociology, the Social Science Research Council, Fulbright, the Bilinski Foundation, the Public Entity Risk Institute, and the Diversity of Views and Experiences (DOVE) Fellowship. i Dedication This dissertation is dedicated to all those who have been displaced by a disaster and have struggled/continue to struggle to rebuild their lives. It is also dedicated to my son, Santiago. May you grow up with a desire to serve the most vulnerable. ii Abstract With 2010 witnessing the second highest number of global disasters in history, climate change has spurred interest concerning how non-governmental organizations (NGOs) should respond with long-term development strategies in post-disaster communities, especially those in fragile states. This comparative case study examines how two intentional Honduran communities built for survivors (comprised of traumatized and displaced poor people) of Hurricane Mitch (1998), Divina Providencia and Ciudad España, developed since the disaster. Although initially similar based on demographics, the communities are dramatically different today in social health (defined as low crime, social capital, social cohesion, vision, sustainability, and community participation). My doctoral research combines household surveys (N=1,918), 74 interviews, nine months of ethnography, and archival research in an analysis of what mechanisms shaped the social health trajectory of each community. I found that both communities have had varying degrees of success and conflict due in large part to the Honduran context and decisions and practices implemented by sponsoring non-governmental organization including: time horizons/long-term commitment, organizational resources, spatial design, community size, and coercive mechanisms by the organizations. Although both communities faced similar constraints, such as trauma and broken social networks, Divina overcame many hurdles with the help of a strong NGO presence, organizational resources, a long-term commitment, and coercive means. It was able to foster cultural structures that created a healthier community than their pre-Mitch neighborhood in Tegucigalpa. Certain emergent norms of community life prevented the Divina community from falling back upon old structures and norms (which were inequitable and socially unhealthy). However, its top-down paternalist approach led to protests by community residents, the creation of dependency on the NGO, and issues of probable long-term sustainability without organizational support. While Ciudad España did have better social health than the former communities in Tegucigalpa, its partnership approach failed to establish emergent norms that would have promoted stronger social health indicators. There was less NGO influence, fewer organizational resources over time, shorter time commitment, and almost no coercive means. Although España has lower social health than Divina, the community has had less conflict and is more independent and is likely to have a more sustainable political system over time. iii Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................................... iv List of Tables ................................................................................................................... viii List of Figures ..................................................................................................................... x List of Abbreviations ........................................................................................................ xii Chapter 1. Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1 Bridging Disaster Recovery and Community Development .......................................... 4 Post-Disaster New Intentional Resettlements/Community ............................................. 8 Research Questions ....................................................................................................... 17 Dissertation Overview .................................................................................................. 19 Chapter 2. Literature Review ............................................................................................ 23 Who is the development protagonist? ........................................................................... 24 Local Empowerment and Participation ......................................................................... 29 What in the community will be developed and how will this be done? ....................... 33 Economic Development ............................................................................................ 34 Community Development ......................................................................................... 35 “Of” versus “In” Community Development ............................................................. 37 Paternalism ................................................................................................................ 39 Partnerships ............................................................................................................... 42 Path Dependency .......................................................................................................... 45 Chapter 3. Research Design and Methodology ................................................................. 47 Comparative Case Study ............................................................................................... 48 Why Divina and España? .............................................................................................. 51 The Amarateca Valley .................................................................................................. 52 NGO Goals and Commitment ....................................................................................... 56 Unique characteristics of Divina and España ............................................................... 57 Community Differences ................................................................................................ 59 Methodology and Data Collection ................................................................................ 63 Documents ................................................................................................................ 63 Survey ....................................................................................................................... 64 Interviews .................................................................................................................. 68 Ethnography .............................................................................................................. 69 Ethnographic Research in Tegucigalpa .................................................................... 71 Crime Statistics ......................................................................................................... 73 Data Collection Challenges ........................................................................................... 74 Chapter 4. Social Development Outcomes ....................................................................... 77 Why Community “Social” Health? ............................................................................... 77 Community Social Health: A Definition ...................................................................... 81 iv Comparability of Communities..................................................................................... 82 Shared Characteristics ............................................................................................... 84 Level of trauma ......................................................................................................... 90 Health ........................................................................................................................ 94 Natural and Built Environment ................................................................................. 95 The Social Health of Tegucigalpa................................................................................. 96 Corruption ................................................................................................................