res 3 dev. relief and emergencies

Development, Relief, and Complex Emergencies

(and avoiding “watertight box” thinking)

Local to Global Sustainable DevelopmentThird Residency:

Rights for the Environment and Sustainable Development

Review of development debates: The good/green life and how to get there

The current debates:

Is sustainable development even possible?

If so, is modernization the solution?

Why this matters to you, as a manager:

Conceptual: New insights and a checklist for planning/monitoring

Political: To figure out stakeholder views and how to converse for their support

As Chambers notes -- Managerial bias vs. reality . . .Biases of distance, power and professionalism (and the

implications)

Development, relief, and emergencies are…

Simultaneously separate with

different: Challenges, time frames, security

Skills and routines Assisting

organizations with different agendas

…but also linked.

Often impact the same people, but at different “stages”

Are political AND technical

Include similar basic techniques and principles

Involve intervention, risk, uncertainty

Result in costs as well as benefits, not equally shared

…and have important similarities

Relief – development continuum

Disaster relief:• Quite sudden• Widespread

causalities• Material damage• Demanding quick

attention• Different skills,

arrangements• New orgs (e.g.

military)

Yet closely linked to dev:• Relief solutions impact

future dev efforts• Development projects

impact likelihood of future disasters

• Overlapping techniques (e.g. comm. participation)

Introduction to Humanitarian Challenges

Honduras, Nicaragua, Guatemala, El Salvador:

Vulnerable, remote populations

Case study: Hurricane Mitch, 1998180 mph winds, 6’ rain, 9,000 dead, 700,000 homeless

• 10/21: Storm formed south of Jamaica

• 10/23: Upgraded to tropical storm• 10/24: Upgraded to hurricane• 10/26: Category 5 hurricane,

one of century’s strongest• 10/27-29: Slowly wound west

toward Honduras (bore brunt)• 10/30: Mainland landfall• 11/1: Moved out• 2008 Weather Channel Video

1998 Hurricane timelines

A model for survival: Oxfam’s partnership with Foundation for Cooperation and Rural

Development (CORDES) in lower Lempa region of El Salvador

• Emergency supplies• Repaired water/sanitation systems• Reconstructed housing

Damage so extensive “thousands of lives and years of development work swept away” (Oxfam, 2003)

One NGO response: Oxfam

First night of storm: 10’ high flood water(Power of preparedness and prevention)

• CORDES helped evacuate • Divided villagers into groups• Could then meet daily• No deaths in this region• Organized quickly, escaped danger

Early alert and risk management systems for villages(gauging rainfall, marked routes, etc.)

• Salvadoran Foundation for Reconstruction and Development (REDES) purchased Global Positioning System (GPS) equipment and radios

• Detects dangerous systems two weeks before strike

• Radio towers reach isolated communities

With Oxfam support . . .

• Most lives lost 15 days following disaster

• Need flexible, dependable network of allies

• Locals work in ways outside agencies can’t

• Local knowledge integral part of solutions

Ingredients of rapid response

• Honduras, Nicaragua: Adjusted crop cycles to withstand hurricane season

• El Salvador: Rivers cleared of debris (caution against flood damage, gains extra income from extra planting)

• El Salvador: Grain silos built on raised ground (emergency supplies or sold for higher price in off-season)

Integrating disaster and sustainable development

Post Hurricane-Mitch:

New community assertiveness

Now cooperating: Local/international NGOs;

local communities; govt. agencies; foreign militaries/

govts.

Assigning different orgs to different stages can reinforce problem of specialization vs. broader perspective

Hides fact of multiple problems by focusing on most overwhelming issue

Narrows vision of ‘problem’ and ‘reality’ (e.g. quickly “solve” problems without considering future impact)

Watertight box thinking reinforced by incentives and training

Takeaways for you, as managers:Beware of ‘WATERTIGHT BOX’

Thinking (especially in relief and complex issues)

Two practical challenges

Devising practices, routines, techniques to help reduce tradeoffs for one problem while compromising another

(e.g. Involving community in planning/actions instead of everything coming from outside)

In tradeoff areas, clarifying costs and specifics

(e.g. being clear on employment tradeoffs for Prop 23 and any offsets)

• Social movement theory: Academic vs. Activist applications

• Reinforcing hegemony and privileged patterns• Experimenting outside conventional institutions

Recent TED talk by Sugata Mitra: Child-driven education

Final thoughts: Taking risks, outside the box

Arnold, S. (2007). Personal correspondence.Consultative Group for the Reconstruction and Transformation

of Central America, Inter-American Development Bank. (2000).

Central America After Hurricane Mitch: The Challenge of Turning a Disaster into an Opportunity. Accessed October 16, 2011.Oxfam. (2003). “Mitch + 5.” Oxfam Exchange. Sphere. (2010). Introduction to Humanitarian Challenges.

(Accessed October 16, 2011)

References