Social repair and structural inequity: implications for disaster recovery practice

Abstract

Purpose -This paper introduces a model of social repair to the language of disaster recovery that potentially provides a new way of conceptualizing reconstruction and recovery processes by drawing attention to the dismantling of structural inequities that inhibit post-disaster recovery. Design/methodology/approach -The paper first engages with the current discourse of vulnerability reduction and resilience building as embedded within a distinct politics of post-disaster recovery. The concept of social repair is then explored as found within post-conflict and reconciliation literature. For application within the context of natural disasters, the concept of social repair is modified to have evaluative and effectiveness significance for disaster recovery. A short case example is presented from post-flood Pakistan to deepen our understanding of the potential application and usage of a social repair orientation to disaster recovery. Findings -The paper recommends that the evaluative goals of post-disaster recovery projects should be framed in the language of social repair. This means that social relationships (broadly defined) must be restored and transformed as a result of any disaster recovery intervention, and relationship mapping exercises should be conducted with affected communities prior to planning recovery interventions. Originality/value -Current discourses of disaster recovery are rooted within the conceptual framings of reducing vulnerabilities and building resilience. While both theoretical constructs have made important contributions to the disaster recovery enterprise, they have been unable to draw sufficient attention to pre-existing structural inequities. As disaster recovery and reconstruction projects influence the ways communities negotiate and manage future risk, it is important that interventions do not lead to worsened states of inequity.

Post-disaster recovery and sociocultural change: Rethinking social capital development for the new social fabric

“…Post-disaster recovery is discussed mainly in terms of response, rehabilitation, restoration and reconstruction but rarely are the long-term dynamics considered. Recently, the focus of disasters research has been at decadal-scale post-disaster recovery and directed towards vulnerability reduction [17]. The post-disaster decision-making process is challenged by the consequences of the disaster and the loss of resources.…”

“…Pelling and High [40] suggest that the growing interest in social capital enables us to better understand the role played by social attributes, in particular social networks and norms, in the production of adaptive capacity and adaptive actions to environmental change, a view echoed in other studies [48]. Because of the importance of social change [2], [49], [50] and social capital in the recovery process, several authors have called for a re-orientation of recovery programmes, from the established approach focused mainly on physical infrastructure to programmes that target forms of social infrastructure, like social capital [2], [17], [41], [51].…”

Demand Stratification and Prediction of Evacuees after Earthquakes

“…The breeding environment is formed through the interaction of many factors in nature and society, including soil, vegetation, transportation systems, and public places [42]. Specifically, the environment of different affected areas includes the natural environment and social environment [43].…”

Development of an Integrated Pathways Model of Factors Influencing the Progress of Recovery After a Disaster

“…However, recovery to a pre-disaster state was delayed for more than 2 years due to exploitation and pre-disaster structural inequity between the villagers and business men. 38 The problem of social vulnerability is a feature of both developing and developed countries in the aftermath of disaster, for example, survivors of hurricane Sandy who lived with family members before the disaster were less likely to relocate than those who lived alone, underscoring the vulnerability of the single individual in rebuilding and decision-making during the recovery. 5 Various studies in the past have established the role of household factors in disaster recovery, either individually or in combination with other factors such as external aid, government policies, and disaster management.…”