12 13 14 15 16It is often reiterated that a better understanding of local networks and needs is key to risk reduction.
18Nevertheless, the crucial role of informal social networks and actors in the catering for human needs in 19 disaster circumstances remains largely under-explored. If we have to rethink the "work" that informality 20 21 does for our understanding of urban areas (McFarlane, 2010), its contribution to resilience (Pelling, 2003), 22 23 and take it seriously in the 'full spectrum of risk' in urban and peri-urban centers (Satterthwaite and 24 Bartlett, 2017), better and more balanced methods and are needed. This paper attends to this gap.
26Examining the mechanisms of aid provision in the aftermath of 2015 Gorkha Earthquake in Nepal, it details 27 28 an experimental set of quantitative research methods to explore the role of informal social networks in 29 the provision of critical human needs in natural disasters. Relying on a sample of 160 households across 4 31 districts and 16 villages in the built environment affected by the Gorkha earthquake, the paper reveals 32 33 that, overall, a wide disparity exists in the comparative importance of organizations in the provision of aid 34 and resources. Much crucial after-disaster care is catered for a mix of relatives, temples, friends, neighbors 36 and local clubs. It highlights the importance of informal networks in understanding, and theorizing, 37 38 governance (of disaster and of the 'urban' more in general), and calls for greater attention to its role. It is 39 40 time, it argues, to revalue informal disaster governance networks as a crucial, not tacit, component of 41 disaster response. 42 43 44 45 46 47 Introduction 5 6The connection between disasters and cities might be one of the most pivotal challenges of our time. 7 8 Most of the major international frameworks, like the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, now 9 10 acknowledge that a better understanding of the mechanisms to reduce risk in cities is urgently needed 11 given current demographic urban trends (Satterthwaite and Dodman 2013). This is further heightened by 13 the increasing exposure to natural and technological hazards and the projected climate change impacts 14 15 on urban areas (Dickson 2012). Within this context major international organisations and academia have 16 increasingly paid attention to the social dimension in urban risk reduction. A clear proof of this is that the 18 Sendai Framework, the main international voluntary agreement for Disaster and Risk Reduction (DRR), is 19 20 intentionally explicit about the role of social factors in building resilience (Walhstrom 2017). In the last 21 years terms such as 'social resilience', 'community-based DRR' and 'people-centred approaches' have 23 become common in crisis management forums, with urban studies of disaster flagging their centrality in 24 25 disaster response (Campanella 2006). Seen this emphasis on society, the nexus of built environment and 26 27 natural hazards, then, becomes an apt context where t...