Limitations of the Owner-Driven Model in Post-Disaster ... - IIIRR
Limitations of the Owner-Driven Model in Post-Disaster ... - IIIRR
Limitations of the Owner-Driven Model in Post-Disaster ... - IIIRR
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>Limitations</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>Owner</strong>-<strong>Driven</strong> <strong>Model</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Post</strong>-<strong>Disaster</strong><br />
Hous<strong>in</strong>g Reconstruction <strong>in</strong> Urban Settlements<br />
Mojgan TAHERI Tafti 1<br />
1 PhD Candidate, Dep. <strong>of</strong> plann<strong>in</strong>g., The University <strong>of</strong> Melbourne<br />
(3010, Victoria , Australia)<br />
E-mail: m.taheritafti@student.unimelb.edu.au<br />
This paper explores <strong>the</strong> potential shortcom<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> owner-driven model <strong>of</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction <strong>in</strong><br />
urban settlements affected by disasters. The owner-driven model has been widely adopted <strong>in</strong> recent<br />
post-disaster hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction projects. While <strong>the</strong> advantages <strong>of</strong> this model over o<strong>the</strong>r models such as<br />
donor-driven or state-driven models are discussed <strong>in</strong> hazard literature, discussions over <strong>the</strong> potential<br />
shortcom<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>of</strong> this model are scant. Look<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> experiences <strong>of</strong> post-earthquake reconstruction <strong>in</strong> Bhuj<br />
<strong>in</strong> India and Bam <strong>in</strong> Iran, <strong>the</strong> paper sheds light on <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>adequacies <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> owner-driven model <strong>in</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g<br />
recovery and <strong>the</strong>ir un<strong>in</strong>tended consequences for households and <strong>the</strong> urban fabric.<br />
The paper suggests three ma<strong>in</strong> arguments based on <strong>the</strong> ways <strong>the</strong> owner-driven model has been conceived,<br />
formulated, and practiced <strong>in</strong> two post-earthquake hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery projects. The first argument is<br />
that <strong>the</strong> owner-driven model should be conceived as one component <strong>of</strong> a holistic hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery programme.<br />
The second argument revolves around <strong>the</strong> shortcom<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> standardized arrangements <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
owner-driven model. The last argument identifies practical problems that prevailed <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> two projects.<br />
While acknowledg<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> advantages <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> owner-driven model, <strong>the</strong> paper concludes by advocat<strong>in</strong>g a<br />
more holistic, nuanced, and <strong>in</strong>clusive hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery programme <strong>in</strong> disaster-stricken urban settlements<br />
for respond<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> complexities <strong>of</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery <strong>in</strong> urban sett<strong>in</strong>g.<br />
Key Words : Urban disasters, owner-driven model, hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction<br />
Provision <strong>of</strong> permanent hous<strong>in</strong>g follow<strong>in</strong>g disasters is <strong>of</strong>ten described as absorb<strong>in</strong>g a considerable portion <strong>of</strong><br />
post-disaster lend<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong><strong>the</strong> develop<strong>in</strong>g world 1) Plann<strong>in</strong>g for this component <strong>of</strong> post-disaster activities has<br />
<br />
decade, <strong>the</strong> advantages <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> owner-driven model <strong>of</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction - particularly vis-à-vis <strong>the</strong><br />
state-driven and <strong>the</strong> donor-driven models - has been widely acknowledged, and <strong>the</strong> model is <strong>of</strong>ten described <strong>in</strong><br />
2) . However, <strong>the</strong> ways <strong>in</strong> which<br />
this model are <strong>of</strong>ten conceived, formulated, and implemented have implications that have been largely unexplored<br />
<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> literature. The purpose <strong>of</strong> this paper, <strong>the</strong>refore, is to develop a better understand<strong>in</strong>g about <strong>the</strong><br />
limitations <strong>of</strong> this model by <strong>in</strong>vestigat<strong>in</strong>g its application <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> aftermath <strong>of</strong> disasters <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> develop<strong>in</strong>g countries.<br />
<strong>Owner</strong>-driven hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction has its roots <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> pioneer<strong>in</strong>g work <strong>of</strong> John F.C. Turner. Follow<strong>in</strong>g<br />
-<br />
allowed rebuild<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> damaged dwell<strong>in</strong>gs by <strong>the</strong>ir residents. Despite be<strong>in</strong>g acknowledged as an <strong>in</strong>fluential<br />
<strong>in</strong>itiative <strong>in</strong> promot<strong>in</strong>g mechanisms for low-<strong>in</strong>come hous<strong>in</strong>g provision <strong>in</strong> develop<strong>in</strong>g countries 3) , <strong>the</strong> idea <strong>of</strong><br />
aided self-help hous<strong>in</strong>g provision was rarely put <strong>in</strong>to practice <strong>in</strong> subsequent post-disaster reconstruction activities.<br />
Dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g two decades, post-disaster hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction projects were predom<strong>in</strong>antly<br />
contractor-based, managed by state or donor agencies 4) . The new form <strong>of</strong> owner-driven hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction<br />
was promoted <strong>in</strong> some villages affected by <strong>the</strong> Indian Latur earthquake <strong>in</strong> 1993.<br />
The owner-driven model <strong>of</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction <strong>in</strong> its current form has become prevalent after <strong>the</strong> 2001<br />
Gujarat earthquake 5) . The ma<strong>in</strong> idea <strong>in</strong> this model is to enable <strong>in</strong>dividuals to undertake <strong>the</strong> reconstruction <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong>ir houses. Diverse mechanisms such as conditional f<strong>in</strong>ancial assistance - usually on an <strong>in</strong>stalment basis - as<br />
well as technical support and supervision are <strong>in</strong>tegrated <strong>in</strong>to this model to ensure safe build<strong>in</strong>g practices.<br />
Dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> last decade, <strong>the</strong> model has become <strong>the</strong> default strategy <strong>in</strong> post-disaster hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery as a result<br />
- 347 -
<strong>of</strong> be<strong>in</strong>g advocated by key lend<strong>in</strong>g agencies <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> World Bank and prom<strong>in</strong>ent <strong>in</strong>ternational <strong>in</strong>stitutions<br />
such as <strong>the</strong> UN-Habitat e.g., 6) . Fund<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> majority <strong>of</strong> reconstruction projects <strong>in</strong> disaster-affected develop<strong>in</strong>g<br />
uence post-<br />
has advised this approach as <strong>the</strong> most successful hous<strong>in</strong>g assistance strategy 2:93) . Therefore, many disaster-stricken<br />
countries <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g India (after <strong>the</strong> 2001 Gujarat earthquake), Iran (<strong>the</strong> 2003 Bam earthquake),<br />
Pakistan (<strong>the</strong> 2005 earthquake), and Thailand (<strong>the</strong> 2004 Tsunami) have adopted <strong>the</strong> owner-driven model as<br />
<strong>the</strong>ir overall strategy for hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> affected communities.<br />
The owner-driven model has been promoted as it <strong>in</strong>volves people <strong>in</strong> decisions that are directly related to<br />
<strong>the</strong>m. By employ<strong>in</strong>g this <br />
Such <strong>in</strong>volvement <strong>of</strong>fers <strong>in</strong>tangible benefits such as <strong>in</strong>still<strong>in</strong>g a sense <strong>of</strong> place attachment and empower<strong>in</strong>g<br />
people. Numerous empirical studies e.g., 7, 8-10) report that adoption <strong>of</strong> this model ensues a higher level <strong>of</strong><br />
perceived satisfaction and higher occupancy rate compared to o<strong>the</strong>r models <strong>of</strong> post-disaster hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction<br />
<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> donor-driven model. Some researchers also <strong>in</strong>dicate that this approach is faster and<br />
more economical as owners supplement <strong>the</strong> assistance with <strong>the</strong>ir own assets 10, 11) .<br />
A review <strong>of</strong> literature, however, reveals that apart from concerns over <strong>the</strong> safety <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> reconstructed<br />
build<strong>in</strong>gs raised by few studies e.g., 12) , little is known about <strong>the</strong> potential shortcom<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>of</strong> this model. As this<br />
model is expected to be adopted <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> aftermath <strong>of</strong> future disasters, it is critical to develop our understand<strong>in</strong>g<br />
about its potential drawbacks. On this basis, this paper scrut<strong>in</strong>izes <strong>the</strong> owner-driven hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction as<br />
it has been formulated and implemented <strong>in</strong> cities <strong>of</strong> Bhuj <strong>in</strong> Gujarat and Bam <strong>in</strong> Iran, affected by earthquakes<br />
<strong>in</strong> 2001 and 2003 respectively. Investigat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> long-term impacts <strong>of</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery programmes on<br />
esearch draws<br />
upon field observations and <strong>in</strong>-depth <strong>in</strong>terviews with residents <strong>of</strong> both cities, exam<strong>in</strong>ation <strong>of</strong> policy documents<br />
and proceed<strong>in</strong>gs, and <strong>in</strong>terviews with decision makers and some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> key <strong>in</strong>formants.<br />
The paper suggests three ma<strong>in</strong> arguments about <strong>the</strong> unforeseen and contradictory outcomes <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> adoption<br />
<strong>of</strong> owner-driven model. Each argument relies on common issues that emerged <strong>in</strong> this comparative research.<br />
The first argument is that <strong>the</strong> owner-driven model should not be conceived as <strong>the</strong> overall strategy for hous<strong>in</strong>g<br />
recovery aftermath <strong>of</strong> a disaster, but as one component <strong>of</strong> a holistic hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery programme. The second<br />
argument revolves around <strong>the</strong> shortcom<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> standardized arrangements <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> owner-driven model. The<br />
last argument identifies practical problems prevailed <strong>in</strong> both projects. Before present<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>se arguments, <strong>the</strong><br />
next section provides a brief overview <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> two events and <strong>the</strong>ir subsequent recovery activities.<br />
1. HOUSING RECOVERY PROGRAMMES IN BHUJ AND BAM<br />
On 26 January 2001, an earthquake measur<strong>in</strong>g 7.7 on <strong>the</strong> Richter scale occurred <strong>in</strong> Gujarat. In <strong>the</strong> city <strong>of</strong><br />
Bhuj, approximately 7,000 people, mostly <strong>in</strong>habitants <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> historic part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> city, lost <strong>the</strong>ir lives. Nearly<br />
50% <strong>of</strong> this part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> city was destroyed 13) , with 11,036 houses completely and 27,617 houses partially<br />
collapsed.<br />
Two years later, on 26 December, 2003 a major earthquake register<strong>in</strong>g 6.6 on <strong>the</strong> Richter scale devastated<br />
<strong>the</strong> city <strong>of</strong> Bam <strong>in</strong> south-east Iran. With a population <strong>of</strong> around 120,000, <strong>the</strong> death toll was 26,271. The ca-<br />
<br />
city and surround<strong>in</strong>g villages homeless 14) . In <strong>the</strong> wake <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> earthquake, 80% <strong>of</strong> all build<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> city were<br />
completely destroyed.<br />
Both governments, central government <strong>in</strong> Iran and state government <strong>of</strong> Gujarat, established apex-level,<br />
central agencies to respond <strong>the</strong> disaster. These task forces adopted an owner-driven model for hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery<br />
<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> two affected cities <strong>of</strong> Bam and Bhuj. In both cases, homeowners were provided with t<br />
f<strong>in</strong>ancial and technical assistance, aimed at enabl<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>se affected groups to rebuild <strong>the</strong>ir own houses. The<br />
f<strong>in</strong>ancial assistance paid on an <strong>in</strong>stalment basis to ensure <strong>the</strong> conformance <strong>of</strong> construction process with seismic<br />
build<strong>in</strong>g codes. The assistance <strong>of</strong> up to US$ 3,225 for build<strong>in</strong>g a 45-square-meter house <strong>in</strong> Bhuj and<br />
US$ 19,375 for build<strong>in</strong>g an 80-square-meter house <strong>in</strong> Bam was <strong>of</strong>fered to homeowners. In <strong>the</strong> case <strong>of</strong> Bam, <strong>the</strong><br />
ners were eligible for receiv<strong>in</strong>g<br />
assistance for each and every damaged house <strong>the</strong>y had <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir possession. In Bhuj, accord<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g<br />
recovery programme, owners were given hous<strong>in</strong>g assistance for only one damaged residential unit <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir own<br />
occupancy at <strong>the</strong> time <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> earthquake. Moreover, as <strong>the</strong> reconstruction <strong>of</strong> Bhuj city was a comb<strong>in</strong>ation <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>in</strong>-situ reconstruction and relocation (<strong>in</strong> contrast to <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>-situ reconstruction <strong>of</strong> Bam), those landowners who<br />
opted to move to relocation sites could receive a plot <strong>of</strong> land aga<strong>in</strong>st <strong>the</strong>ir old ones.<br />
Investigat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> long-term recovery process <strong>of</strong> affected households eight and ten years after <strong>the</strong>se earth-<br />
- 348 -
quakes provides some <strong>in</strong>sights about <strong>the</strong> deficiencies <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery programmes, <strong>the</strong>ir formulation<br />
and delivery. In <strong>the</strong> follow<strong>in</strong>g sections, we present three ma<strong>in</strong> common issues, identified <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>se two<br />
post-disaster hous<strong>in</strong>g programmes.<br />
(1) <strong>Owner</strong>-driven hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction and <strong>the</strong> role <strong>of</strong> tenure <strong>in</strong> def<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g access to <strong>the</strong> programme<br />
One <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> concerns over <strong>the</strong> emphasis on <strong>the</strong> owner-driven model is <strong>the</strong> underm<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g needs<br />
<strong>of</strong> non-owner disaster-affected groups <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g tenants, sharers and squatters. Exam<strong>in</strong>ation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> recovery<br />
programmes <strong>in</strong> both cases suggests that <strong>the</strong> owner-driven model was conceived as a holistic framework for<br />
post-earthquake hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery. Therefore, <strong>the</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> non-owner groups was treated as a<br />
marg<strong>in</strong>al part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> programme. On this basis, <strong>in</strong> both cities <strong>the</strong> ownership <strong>of</strong> land or property was <strong>the</strong> determ<strong>in</strong>ant<br />
<br />
for 18% <strong>of</strong> households <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> city, were denied hous<strong>in</strong>g assistance. Later, this group was <strong>of</strong>fered hous<strong>in</strong>g assistance,<br />
provided that <strong>the</strong>y could buy land with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> city.<br />
In Bhuj, on <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, <strong>the</strong> recovery programme <strong>in</strong>cluded some provisions for hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery <strong>of</strong><br />
renters, but ignored sharers and squatters. The policy for <strong>the</strong> collapsed rental units was a payment to <strong>the</strong> owner<br />
for rebuild<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> rental house, provided that she/he guaranteed <strong>the</strong> restitution <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> pre-<br />
right <strong>of</strong> occupation. Based on <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>terviews conducted with tenants and landlords, it can be concluded that this<br />
policy did not reach its goal, ma<strong>in</strong>ly due to <strong>the</strong> very low level <strong>of</strong> rent price prior to <strong>the</strong> earthquake. Later,<br />
changes <strong>in</strong> programme due to this failure allowed tenants to buy a plot <strong>in</strong> relocation sites, if <strong>the</strong>y could afford to<br />
do so. Moreover, <strong>the</strong> local authority <strong>in</strong>vited NGOs to take a part <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> process and build new hous<strong>in</strong>g projects<br />
for <strong>the</strong>se groups. These new provisions did not provide for households with o<strong>the</strong>r tenure agreements which<br />
were practic<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> city before <strong>the</strong> earthquake.<br />
In addition, <strong>the</strong>re were eighteen slum areas <strong>in</strong> Bhuj, some <strong>of</strong> which were badly damaged by <strong>the</strong> earthquake.<br />
These slums have not been <strong>in</strong>cluded <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> new urban development plan and <strong>the</strong>ir low-<strong>in</strong>come residents were<br />
ignored dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> recovery process. Even NGOs paid scant attention to <strong>the</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se groups<br />
follow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> earthquake 15) .<br />
These hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction policies have had long-term ramifications for non-owner groups. These policies<br />
left tenants to <strong>the</strong> mercy <strong>of</strong> landlords and made <strong>the</strong>ir hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery dependent on <strong>the</strong> decisions <strong>of</strong><br />
o<strong>the</strong>rs. These groups had to wait for long periods <strong>in</strong> temporary shelters until (and if) <strong>the</strong> rental market catches<br />
up with demand. In Bhuj, <strong>the</strong>se groups have been liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> a site far from <strong>the</strong> city with poor access to livelihood<br />
and social amenities. A local NGO built affordable hous<strong>in</strong>g for some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> residents <strong>of</strong> this site and o<strong>the</strong>rs are<br />
liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> dilapidated dwell<strong>in</strong>gs built for temporary hous<strong>in</strong>g purpose.<br />
Decision-makers <strong>in</strong> both recovery programmes employed <strong>the</strong> same discourse for ignor<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g needs<br />
We believed that <strong>the</strong>y did not lose <strong>the</strong>ir properties and <strong>the</strong>refore<br />
<strong>the</strong>y were no(Interview BM-O1-05/02/2011). This questions<br />
<strong>the</strong> very objective <strong>of</strong> allocat<strong>in</strong>g hous<strong>in</strong>g assistance which <strong>in</strong> both cases has been ma<strong>in</strong>ly based on <strong>the</strong> disaster-<strong>in</strong>curred<br />
material asset losses, but were represented <strong>in</strong> programmes under <strong>the</strong> guise <strong>of</strong> creat<strong>in</strong>g an enabl<strong>in</strong>g<br />
environment. Conceiv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> owner-driven model as <strong>the</strong> holistic framework for hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery <strong>in</strong> both cases<br />
was arguably <strong>in</strong> l<strong>in</strong>e with a more desirable outcome <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> recovery process for politicians: build<strong>in</strong>g houses as<br />
a tangible outcome <strong>of</strong> reconstruction 1) , <strong>in</strong>stead <strong>of</strong> enabl<strong>in</strong>g households whose hous<strong>in</strong>g condition has been<br />
affected by <strong>the</strong> disaster to achieve <strong>the</strong>ir hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery. The key to understand and dist<strong>in</strong>guish between <strong>the</strong>se<br />
<br />
Bam and Bhuj, <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> (re)constructed houses is more than <strong>the</strong> damaged ones. Many people <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g<br />
<br />
-earthquake hous<strong>in</strong>g<br />
condition, <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> security <strong>of</strong> tenure, affordability, location, and quality <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> dwell<strong>in</strong>g.<br />
Hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery <strong>of</strong> non-<br />
dynamic nature <strong>of</strong> vulnerability, because its driv<strong>in</strong>g forces change over time, many earthquake-affected<br />
households <strong>in</strong> Bam could have been considered as vulnerable groups for a period <strong>of</strong> time. Among <strong>the</strong>m<br />
earthquake-<strong>in</strong>duced damage aggravated <strong>the</strong> precarious liv<strong>in</strong>g condition <strong>of</strong> low-<strong>in</strong>come, female-headed<br />
households. Realiz<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g needs <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se households, some <strong>in</strong>ternational <strong>in</strong>stitutions, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong><br />
UNDP, took part <strong>in</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction for <strong>the</strong>m. Ironically, <strong>the</strong> governmental organization responsible for<br />
<strong>the</strong> reconstruction process asked <strong>the</strong>se <strong>in</strong>stitutions to contribute to <strong>the</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se households<br />
provided that <strong>the</strong>y possessed land with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> city 16) . This decision, <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> context <strong>of</strong> Iran where women do not<br />
have equal <strong>in</strong>heritance rights, deprived many female-headed families from <strong>the</strong> contribution <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se <strong>in</strong>stitu-<br />
- 349 -
tions. For those female-headed households who did not have a plot <strong>of</strong> land, an Iranian NGO provided a limited<br />
number <strong>of</strong> free accommodation <strong>in</strong> two complexes <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> city. Hold<strong>in</strong>g no tenure rights, <strong>the</strong>se families could<br />
stay <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>se, no-male-entry residences, provided <strong>the</strong> head <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> family, many <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>m young widows, never<br />
get married aga<strong>in</strong>. The condition was even worse for those women who had not legally divorced, due to its<br />
cultural stigma, and based on <strong>the</strong> fieldtrip <strong>in</strong>terviews constituted a considerable portion <strong>of</strong> female-headed<br />
households. This group has not been formally recognized as female-headed families and hence were deprived<br />
<strong>of</strong> receiv<strong>in</strong>g such helps. Around 800 female-headed families have been left with no hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery option.<br />
In Bhuj, despite enjoy<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> equal legal right <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>heritance, women who were <strong>the</strong> head <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir families<br />
faced difficulties <strong>in</strong> receiv<strong>in</strong>g hous<strong>in</strong>g assistance, especially because majority <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>m were traditionally liv<strong>in</strong>g<br />
as sharer with <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>in</strong>-law families before <strong>the</strong> earthquake. Some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se <strong>in</strong>terviewees were denied a share <strong>in</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong> new reconstructed houses by <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>in</strong>-law families. These female-headed families with no land ownership<br />
and no family support were not <strong>of</strong>fered any hous<strong>in</strong>g option. Some local NGOs such as Abhyan and religious-based<br />
donor organizations provided hous<strong>in</strong>g for a group <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se households, albeit at <strong>the</strong> urban fr<strong>in</strong>ge<br />
where <strong>the</strong> land was available. This led to a fur<strong>the</strong>r economic and social exclusion <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se households.<br />
The issue <strong>of</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery <strong>of</strong> non-owner groups has not been properly addressed by research and practice<br />
<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> field <strong>of</strong> post-disaster recovery as <strong>the</strong> majority <strong>of</strong> recent disasters with natural triggers <strong>in</strong> develop<strong>in</strong>g<br />
countries have taken place <strong>in</strong> rural settlements or small towns. After <strong>the</strong> Haitian earthquake <strong>in</strong> 2010 and due to<br />
<strong>the</strong> large number <strong>of</strong> households without formal property ownership, this issue has emerged as a concern and<br />
drew attentions. While cities accommodate a variety <strong>of</strong> households with heterogeneous tenure arrangements,<br />
<strong>the</strong> owner-driven model <strong>of</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction addresses <strong>the</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g needs <strong>of</strong> just one group among <strong>the</strong><br />
o<strong>the</strong>rs. It can be argued that conceiv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> owner-driven model as <strong>the</strong> holistic framework for hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery,<br />
as it has been conceptualized <strong>in</strong> Bam and Bhuj, provides benefit to a specific group and deprives o<strong>the</strong>rs<br />
based on <strong>the</strong>ir tenure condition.<br />
(2) Different capability <strong>of</strong> beneficiaries<br />
Not only are cities agglomerations <strong>of</strong> variety <strong>of</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g with different tenure arrangements, but also <strong>the</strong>y<br />
accommodate heterogeneous communities. This paper argues that <strong>the</strong> owner-driven model, <strong>in</strong> its current<br />
shape, sets up a standardized method <strong>of</strong> payment and technical assistance which does not respond to <strong>the</strong> different<br />
capabilities <strong>of</strong> homeowner households to pursue <strong>the</strong>ir hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery. The different capability <strong>of</strong><br />
households may stems from different cultural, social, or economic factors or may be related to <strong>the</strong> disaster-<strong>in</strong>duced<br />
impacts. Look<strong>in</strong>g at <strong>the</strong> long-term recovery trajectory <strong>of</strong> different groups <strong>of</strong> people depicts how<br />
different households demonstrated different capabilities <strong>in</strong> achiev<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ir recovery. Draw<strong>in</strong>g upon <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>terviews<br />
<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> two cities, this section is to show, on a few examples, some implications <strong>of</strong> adopt<strong>in</strong>g such a unified<br />
-term recovery.<br />
The first example is related to land/property-owner female-headed households <strong>in</strong> Bam whose number has<br />
sharply <strong>in</strong>creased due to some social issues that emerged follow<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> disaster (some <strong>of</strong>ficials reported a<br />
ten-folded <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se families). The common problem <strong>the</strong>se households faced was related<br />
to <strong>the</strong> fact that based on <strong>the</strong> owner-driven model <strong>the</strong> management <strong>of</strong> all adm<strong>in</strong>istrative and construction activities<br />
is to be undertaken by owners. In <strong>the</strong> social context <strong>of</strong> this small city, many women found it difficult to<br />
<strong>in</strong>terfere <strong>in</strong> this male-dom<strong>in</strong>ated field. Consequently, many <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>m had to trust and relied on <strong>the</strong> help <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
male relatives or acqua<strong>in</strong>tances to oversee <strong>the</strong> construction process by contractors. Many <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>in</strong>terviewed<br />
women reported problems with contractors, <strong>the</strong> majority <strong>of</strong> whom were non-local, and replac<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>m dur<strong>in</strong>g<br />
<strong>the</strong> construction period.<br />
Ano<strong>the</strong>r group <strong>of</strong> households with different capability were those who started <strong>the</strong> reconstruction process<br />
later than o<strong>the</strong>rs or could not keep <strong>the</strong> same pace <strong>of</strong> rebuild<strong>in</strong>g as o<strong>the</strong>rs. An example <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> first group,<br />
late-starters, is traumatized families. In Bam, where at least a quarter <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> residents <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> city lost <strong>the</strong>ir lives,<br />
traumatized households constituted a large number <strong>of</strong> population. These households or those preoccupied with<br />
<strong>the</strong> treatment-related issues <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>in</strong>jured family members started <strong>the</strong>ir hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction later than<br />
o<strong>the</strong>rs. Given <strong>the</strong> double-digit <strong>in</strong>flation <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> country, many <strong>of</strong> Bammi late-starters could not f<strong>in</strong>ish <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
hous<strong>in</strong>g construction as <strong>the</strong> assistance was not adequate anymore for f<strong>in</strong>ish<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> construction <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir houses.<br />
Accord<strong>in</strong>g to <strong>the</strong> Statistical Centre <strong>of</strong> Iran 17) , 51 percent <strong>of</strong> households were still liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> temporary hous<strong>in</strong>g<br />
three years after <strong>the</strong> earthquake.<br />
In <strong>the</strong> case <strong>of</strong> Gujarat earthquake, those <strong>in</strong>terviewees who started late, due to problems <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>juries <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong> family members faced with <strong>in</strong>creas<strong>in</strong>g construction material price and had difficulties <strong>in</strong> f<strong>in</strong>ish<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
houses with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> required time period. Moreover, some very low-<strong>in</strong>come groups consumed <strong>the</strong>ir first <strong>in</strong>-<br />
- 350 -
stalment for <strong>the</strong>ir daily needs or livelihood purposes and consequently could not seek or receive <strong>the</strong>ir next<br />
<strong>in</strong>stalments. Ano<strong>the</strong>r problem reported by <strong>the</strong> very low-<strong>in</strong>come owners was <strong>the</strong> difficulties <strong>in</strong> go<strong>in</strong>g through<br />
<strong>the</strong> bureaucratic process <strong>of</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction as it demanded frequent trips to <strong>the</strong> adm<strong>in</strong>istration <strong>of</strong>fices<br />
while <strong>the</strong>y had to work everyday to feed <strong>the</strong>ir households. In general, 19,500 beneficiaries did not seek or<br />
receive <strong>the</strong>ir next <strong>in</strong>stalments to complete <strong>the</strong>ir homes <strong>in</strong> Gujarat 5) .<br />
The capability <strong>of</strong> households to undertake <strong>the</strong>ir hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction, as shown <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> aforementioned<br />
examples, might be impeded by factors such as economic conditions and hold<strong>in</strong>g marg<strong>in</strong>al assets, age, <strong>in</strong>juries<br />
or death <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> head <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> household, and <strong>in</strong>heritance problems. Even issues such as <strong>the</strong> level <strong>of</strong> literacy were<br />
important <strong>in</strong> access<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>formation and hous<strong>in</strong>g assistance. In both cases <strong>of</strong> Bam and Bhuj middle <strong>in</strong>come<br />
educated households could manipulate <strong>the</strong> regulations and received more than hous<strong>in</strong>g assistance.<br />
These examples illustrate that <strong>in</strong> contrast to <strong>the</strong> equal process <strong>of</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction, assumed by <strong>the</strong><br />
owner-driven model <strong>in</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery programmes <strong>of</strong> Bam and Bhuj, different homeowner households<br />
have demonstrated different capabilities <strong>in</strong> rebuild<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ir damaged houses. For many households, <strong>the</strong><br />
hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction processes lasted longer than o<strong>the</strong>rs and given <strong>the</strong> availability <strong>of</strong> f<strong>in</strong>ancial or technical<br />
assistance only dur<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> <strong>of</strong>ficial period <strong>of</strong> reconstruction, <strong>the</strong>y were not able to receive assistance as o<strong>the</strong>rs<br />
did. This raises questions about <strong>the</strong> standardized strategies embedded <strong>in</strong> formulation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> owner-driven<br />
model.<br />
(3) Quality <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> built environment: Practical shortcom<strong>in</strong>gs<br />
While <strong>the</strong> two former arguments criticize <strong>the</strong> way <strong>the</strong> owner-driven model is <strong>of</strong>ten conceived and formulated,<br />
<strong>the</strong> third argument is related to issues which are not <strong>in</strong>herent <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> model. This section looks at common<br />
problems related to <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> built environment, observed <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> two case studies. It is argued that <strong>the</strong>se<br />
issues need to be appropriately addressed <strong>in</strong> policy and implementation arrangements <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> owner-driven<br />
hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction.<br />
The first problem, also raised by o<strong>the</strong>r studies 12, 18) , is related to physical vulnerability <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> reconstructed<br />
build<strong>in</strong>gs. In both cities <strong>of</strong> Bam and Bhuj, <strong>the</strong> reconstruction process was predom<strong>in</strong>antly executed by contractors<br />
or skilled labours hired by homeowners. Supervis<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> process <strong>of</strong> construction, eng<strong>in</strong>eers appo<strong>in</strong>ted<br />
by <strong>the</strong> government had <strong>the</strong> responsibility <strong>of</strong> controll<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> conformity <strong>of</strong> construction with <strong>the</strong> seismic code at<br />
each stage and issu<strong>in</strong>g permit for disbursement <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> next <strong>in</strong>stalment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> grant to owners.<br />
Although several programmes for tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g skilled labours and contractors were carried out <strong>in</strong> Gujarat, <strong>in</strong>terviewed<br />
academics expressed <strong>the</strong>ir concerns over <strong>the</strong> physical fragility <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> rebuilt residential units. In<br />
Bam, where <strong>the</strong> earthquake destroyed 80 percent <strong>of</strong> build<strong>in</strong>gs <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g many newly built structures, people<br />
became very conscious about adopt<strong>in</strong>g safety measures <strong>in</strong> construction <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir houses. Over time and partly<br />
because <strong>of</strong> a very slow reconstruction process, this concern lost its priority to <strong>the</strong> economic hardship. Consequently,<br />
some low-<strong>in</strong>come groups returned to <strong>the</strong>ir pre-earthquake unsafe construction practices. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore,<br />
with <strong>the</strong> <strong>of</strong>ficial term<strong>in</strong>ation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> reconstruction before a considerable part <strong>of</strong> construction activities<br />
f<strong>in</strong>ished and given <strong>in</strong>adequate technical knowledge transfer to builders, endur<strong>in</strong>g safe construction practices<br />
became less probable 19) .<br />
These examples illustrate that <strong>in</strong>adequacies <strong>in</strong> safe construction practices are partly resulted from an <strong>in</strong>sufficient<br />
technical knowledge transfer to builders. The tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g components <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> owner-driven hous<strong>in</strong>g programmes<br />
are normally evaluated through <strong>the</strong> quantitative data about <strong>the</strong> number <strong>of</strong> tra<strong>in</strong>ees, <strong>in</strong>stead <strong>of</strong> look<strong>in</strong>g<br />
at how safety practices are communicated with skilled labours <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> ways tailored to <strong>the</strong>ir literacy level and<br />
construction knowledge.<br />
The second problem is related to <strong>the</strong> difficulties <strong>in</strong> reconstruction <strong>of</strong> multi-unit build<strong>in</strong>gs with mixed use and<br />
mixed tenure. In <strong>the</strong>se two small cities, <strong>the</strong> issue <strong>of</strong> multiple unit build<strong>in</strong>gs with mixed tenure did not appear to<br />
be a problem, because <strong>the</strong> new build<strong>in</strong>g regulation limited <strong>the</strong> height <strong>of</strong> build<strong>in</strong>gs to double story. However,<br />
<strong>the</strong> reconstruction <strong>of</strong> build<strong>in</strong>gs with mixed use was treated differently. In Bhuj, <strong>the</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g assistance was<br />
exclusively allocated for residential purposes. This led to <strong>the</strong> disappearance <strong>of</strong> a prevalent build<strong>in</strong>g typology,<br />
i.e. build<strong>in</strong>gs with shops on <strong>the</strong>ir ground floor from <strong>the</strong> old neighbourhoods <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> city. This was not <strong>the</strong> case <strong>in</strong><br />
Bam where a more flexible hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery programme allowed construction <strong>of</strong> such build<strong>in</strong>gs. Adequate<br />
flexibility which accommodates <strong>the</strong> requirements <strong>of</strong> diverse arrangements is <strong>of</strong>ten a neglected aspect <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
owner-driven hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction which imp<strong>in</strong>ges upon <strong>the</strong> applicability <strong>of</strong> this model <strong>in</strong> urban settlements.<br />
The <br />
problem is not specific to <strong>the</strong> owner-driven model but is accentuated partly as this model implies more conceived<br />
autonomy <strong>of</strong> owners <strong>in</strong> build<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>ir homes. In both cities, <strong>the</strong> historic fabric <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> city, where hous<strong>in</strong>g<br />
- 351 -
comprised considerable portion <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> cultural landscape, was dramatically transformed through <strong>the</strong> reconstruction<br />
process. Hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction <strong>of</strong>fered a unique opportunity to people to build <strong>the</strong>ir dream houses,<br />
and <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> absence <strong>of</strong> legal guidel<strong>in</strong>es and prescriptions, <strong>the</strong> result was a hodgepodge <strong>of</strong> diverse build<strong>in</strong>g forms<br />
and materials, and hence loss <strong>of</strong> dist<strong>in</strong>ctive characteristics <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se historic cities.<br />
Beyond address<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> short-term hous<strong>in</strong>g demands <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> affected communities, it is essential that <strong>the</strong><br />
owner-driven model <strong>in</strong>corporates considerations about <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> built environment. Integrat<strong>in</strong>g<br />
guidel<strong>in</strong>es correspond<strong>in</strong>g different aspects <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> physical sett<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g physical resilience, function, and<br />
place identity <strong>in</strong>to hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery programme can contribute to <strong>the</strong> improvement <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> built<br />
environment.<br />
2. CONCLUSION<br />
This paper has scrut<strong>in</strong>ized <strong>the</strong> owner-driven model <strong>of</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction based on <strong>the</strong> ways it has been<br />
conceived, formulated, and practiced <strong>in</strong> two post-earthquake hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery projects. It has been argued that<br />
<strong>the</strong> owner-driven hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction responds to <strong>the</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g needs <strong>of</strong> just one group <strong>of</strong> affected communities<br />
and <strong>the</strong>refore, cannot be conceptualized as a holistic framework for hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery. In fact, conceiv<strong>in</strong>g<br />
<strong>the</strong> owner-driven model as <strong>the</strong> ma<strong>in</strong> framework for hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery implies <strong>the</strong> exclusion <strong>of</strong><br />
non-owner groups from hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery options. This means that an <strong>in</strong>dispensible part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery<br />
process is left, without a clear plan, to <strong>the</strong> non-public sector, i.e., hous<strong>in</strong>g market or NGOs. NGOs, as<br />
depicted, might not be able to or will<strong>in</strong>g to appropriately cover all <strong>the</strong> left groups. Also, literature shows that<br />
hous<strong>in</strong>g market is not <strong>of</strong>ten able to provide affordable hous<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> aftermath <strong>of</strong> disasters 20) .<br />
Moreover, <strong>the</strong> formulation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> owner-driven model implies an <strong>in</strong>correct assumption about equal capability<br />
<strong>of</strong> households to manage <strong>the</strong>ir hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction. Different factors <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g ex-ante vulnerabilities,<br />
disaster impacts, or contextual issues might curtail <strong>the</strong> capability <strong>of</strong> households to achieve <strong>the</strong>ir recovery. Even<br />
more problematic, <strong>the</strong> most vulnerable groups received <strong>the</strong> least assistance, compared to <strong>the</strong> elites who <strong>of</strong>ten<br />
expand <strong>the</strong>ir capabilities.<br />
These arguments <strong>in</strong>dicate a structural <strong>in</strong>congruity <strong>in</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery programmes which def<strong>in</strong>e <strong>the</strong>ir goal<br />
as creat<strong>in</strong>g an enabl<strong>in</strong>g environment and at <strong>the</strong> same time deprive those who need <strong>the</strong> most contribution to be<br />
able to achieve <strong>the</strong>ir recovery. F<strong>in</strong>ally, <strong>the</strong> paper has underp<strong>in</strong>ned <strong>the</strong> importance <strong>of</strong> a better formulation <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
owner-driven model by rely<strong>in</strong>g on a more nuanced understand<strong>in</strong>g about <strong>the</strong> complexities <strong>of</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery<br />
<strong>in</strong> urban sett<strong>in</strong>g.<br />
While knowledge transfer about best practices <strong>in</strong> post-disaster hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery is essential for <strong>in</strong>form<strong>in</strong>g<br />
decision-makers <strong>in</strong> cases <strong>of</strong> future disasters, an appropriate communication <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> limitations <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> previous<br />
experiences can result <strong>in</strong> a better preparation and a more efficient and equitable use <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> scarce f<strong>in</strong>ancial<br />
resources. In this sense, <strong>the</strong> owner-driven hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction model requires a revisit<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> conceptualization,<br />
its formulation and practical arrangements with a view to create an <strong>in</strong>clusive and enabl<strong>in</strong>g environment<br />
for post-disaster hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery.<br />
ACKNOWLEDGMENT: I wish to thank Pr<strong>of</strong>. Richard Tomlison, <strong>the</strong> head <strong>of</strong> plann<strong>in</strong>g department at <strong>the</strong><br />
University <strong>of</strong> Melbourne, for his comments and contribution.<br />
REFERENCES<br />
1) Freeman, P.K.: Allocation <strong>of</strong> post-disaster reconstruction f<strong>in</strong>anc<strong>in</strong>g to hous<strong>in</strong>g, Build<strong>in</strong>g Research and Information, Vol. 32 (5), pp.<br />
427-437, 2004.<br />
2) Jha, A.K., J.D. Barenste<strong>in</strong>, P.M. Phelps, D. Pittet, and S. Sena. Safer Homes, Stronger Communities: A Handbook for<br />
Reconstruct<strong>in</strong>g after Natural <strong>Disaster</strong>s. . Wash<strong>in</strong>gton D.C. : The World Bank, 2010.<br />
3) Keivani, R. and E. Werna. Refocus<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g debate <strong>in</strong> develop<strong>in</strong>g countries from a pluralist perspective, Habitat International,<br />
Vol. 25 (2), pp. 191-208, 2001.<br />
4) elter?, Environmental Hazards, Vol. 10 (3-4), pp. 193-212,<br />
2011.<br />
5) World Bank. Implementation completion and results report for Gujarat emergency earthquake reconstruction project, 2009,<br />
Available at:<br />
http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2009/06/08/000333038_20090608014529/Rende<br />
red/PDF/ICR6380P074018101Official0Use0Only1.pdf<br />
- 352 -
6) UN-Habitat. Build<strong>in</strong>g back better <strong>in</strong> Pakistan, 2007, Available at:<br />
http://www.unhabitat.org/downloads/docs/4627_75789_GC%2021%20F<strong>in</strong>anc<strong>in</strong>g%20Field%20Report%20Pakistan.pdf<br />
7) Karunasena, G.: <strong>Post</strong>-disaster hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction: Comparative study <strong>of</strong> donor vs owner-driven approaches, International<br />
Journal <strong>of</strong> <strong>Disaster</strong> Resilience <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> Built Environment, Vol. 1 (2), pp. 173-191, 2010.<br />
8) Baresnste<strong>in</strong>, J.D. and S. Iyengar. India: From a culture <strong>of</strong> hous<strong>in</strong>g to a phylosophy <strong>of</strong> reconstruction. <strong>in</strong> Build<strong>in</strong>g Back Better:<br />
Deliver<strong>in</strong>g people-centred hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction at scale. M. Lyons and T. Schilderman, Editors. Warwickshire: Practical Action.<br />
2010.<br />
9) Barenste<strong>in</strong>, J.D.: Who governs reconsrtuction? Changes and cont<strong>in</strong>uity <strong>in</strong> policies, practices and outcomes. <strong>in</strong> Rebuild<strong>in</strong>g after<br />
disasters: From emergency to susta<strong>in</strong>ability. G. Lizarralde, C. Johnson, and C. Davidson, Editors. New York: Spon Press. pp.<br />
149-176, 2010.<br />
10) Lyons, M.: Build<strong>in</strong>g back better: <strong>the</strong> large-scale impact <strong>of</strong> small-scale approaches to reconstruction, World Development, Vol. 37<br />
(2), pp. 358-398, 2009.<br />
11) Ingirige, B., R. Haigh, C. Malalgoda, and R. Palliyaguru. Explor<strong>in</strong>g good practice knowledge transfer related to post tsunami<br />
hous<strong>in</strong>g re-construction <strong>in</strong> Sri Lanka, Journal <strong>of</strong> construction <strong>in</strong> develop<strong>in</strong>g countries, Vol. 13 (2), pp. 21-42, 2008.<br />
12) Barakat, S. Hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction after conflict and disaster, 2003, Available at:<br />
http://www.odihpn.org/documents/networkpaper043.pdf<br />
13) Balachandran, B.R. The Reconstruction <strong>of</strong> Bhuj Case Study: Integration <strong>of</strong> <strong>Disaster</strong> Mitigation <strong>in</strong>to Plann<strong>in</strong>g and F<strong>in</strong>anc<strong>in</strong>g Urban<br />
Infrastructure after an Earthquake, 2005, Available at:<br />
http://<strong>in</strong>fo.worldbank.org/etools/docs/library/114715/istanbul03/docs/istanbul03/07bala3-n%5B1%5D.pdf<br />
14) World Bank. Technical annex for a proposed loan for Bam earthquake emergency reconstruction project, 2004, Available at:<br />
http://www-wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2004/10/12/000160016_20041012100319/Rendered/PDF/<br />
T7637.pdf<br />
15) Mukherji, A.: Negotiat<strong>in</strong>g hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery: why some communities recovered while o<strong>the</strong>rs struggled to rebuild <strong>in</strong><br />
post-earthquake urban Kutch, India. Department <strong>of</strong> Architecture, University <strong>of</strong> California at Berkeley, Doctor <strong>of</strong> Philosophy, 2008.<br />
16) UNDP. F<strong>in</strong>al review: susta<strong>in</strong>able hous<strong>in</strong>g reconstruction programme <strong>in</strong> Bam through community mobilization and participation.<br />
2008 December 2011]; Available from: erc.undp.org/evaluationadm<strong>in</strong>/downloaddocument.html?docid=1838.<br />
17) The Statistical Centre <strong>of</strong> Iran. National Population and Hous<strong>in</strong>g Census <strong>in</strong> 2006, 2006.<br />
18) Todd, D. and h. Todd. Natural <strong>Disaster</strong> Response Lessons from Evaluations <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> World Bank and O<strong>the</strong>rs (Evaluation Brief 16),<br />
2011, Available at:<br />
http://lnweb90.worldbank.org/oed/oeddoclib.nsf/DocUNIDViewForJavaSearch/6E05ABFAE2ED2CF58525794400774EAE/$fil<br />
e/eval_brief_nat_disaster_response.pdf<br />
19) Gharaati-Kopaei, M.: Knowledge transfer <strong>in</strong> post-disaster reconstruction The Problem <strong>of</strong> <strong>Post</strong>-post-disaster Reconstruction.<br />
School <strong>of</strong> Architecture, McGill University, Montreal. Doctor <strong>of</strong> Philosophy <strong>in</strong> Architecture, 2009.<br />
20) Comerio, M.C.: <strong>Disaster</strong> hits home : new policy for urban hous<strong>in</strong>g recovery. Berkeley : University <strong>of</strong> California Press, 1998.<br />
- 353 -