Top-down reconstruction and the failure to “build back better” resilient communities after disaster: lessons from the 2009 L'Aquila Italy earthquake

Abstract

PurposeWe consider what happened in the initial reconstruction interventions following the 6 April 2009 earthquake in L'Aquila (Italy). Using the disaster risk reduction and resilience paradigm, we discuss the cognitive and interactional failures of top-down approaches, and we analyse the main constraints to enacting inclusive social learning and socially-sustainable transformation and building back better more resilient communities in post-disaster reconstruction.Design/methodology/approachOur evidence comes from participant observation, action anthropology and analytic auto-ethnography conducted during the reconstruction phase following the L'Aquila earthquake. Findings were triangulated with document analysis, media analysis and retrospective interviewing conducted in 2013 and 2017.FindingsThe shift from civil defence to civil protection did not bring any advance in disaster management and development practice in terms of DRR and resilience. The militaristic command-and-control approach, which is still in vogue among civil protection systems, means that local political leaders become the civil protection authorities in a disaster area. As in the L'Aquila case, this exacerbates local social and environmental risks and impacts, inhibits local communities from learning and restricts them from participating in post-disaster interventions.Originality/valueMost previous commentary on disaster recovery and reconstruction following the L'Aquila earthquake has focussed on the top-down approach carried out by the national government and the Italian Department of Civil Protection (DCP). This paper is unique in that it sheds light on how the command-and-control approach was also implemented by local authority figures and on how this undermined building back better more resilient communities.

The mechanism of disaster capitalism and the failure to build community resilience: learning from the 2009 earthquake in L'Aquila, Italy

“…The design of recovery operations in L'Aquila adhered to a top‐down approach to physical planning, which was negatively influenced by the economic interests of national and local elites and did not acknowledge the social dimensions of the interventions (Imperiale and Vanclay, 2020). The top‐down planning pertaining to emergency shelter, temporary housing, safety measures, rubble management, restoration of key public buildings, and the construction of infrastructure was accompanied by techno‐scientific assessments.…”

“…The framework advocates reducing vulnerabilities and risks and building community resilience during all phases of disaster management and development (IFRC, 2004; UNISDR, 2007; Benson and Twigg, 2007; UNISDR and UNDP, 2007; Department for International Development, 2010; UNDP, 2014). Post‐disaster interventions should be an opportunity to enhance resilience and to build back better not only damaged housing and infrastructure, but also local communities (Quarantelli, 1998; Perry and Quarantelli, 2005; Benson and Twigg, 2007; World Bank, 2009; Hallegatte et al, 2017 ; Hallegatte, Rentschler, and Walsh, 2018; Imperiale and Vanclay, 2020). Understanding how to include community resilience‐building strategies in the design and implementation of post‐disaster interventions should be a key priority of disaster management and development agencies.…”

Irpinia Earthquake and History: A Nexus as a Problem

“…That not for neglecting "objectivity"-destroyed towns are destroyed towns-but for how semiotic contexts shape the representation of the past [7]. It is interesting, for example, how the controversial concept of resilience-adaptive resilience, post-disaster resilience and so forth-can influence the historical interpretation in the light of present-time mechanismsmay be showing the limits of the authoritarian/military emergency management and the marginalization of the communities from post-disaster choices [8]. Moreover even, it is enlightening how historical analysis can decode an interview, showing meanings materialized only with time.…”

When Housing and Communities Were Delivered: A Case Study of Post-Wenchuan Earthquake Rural Reconstruction and Recovery

“…Through selfmanagement of the built environment delivered by official authorities, especially pertaining to housing and communities, disaster survivors become committed to re-establishing lives and livelihoods, a process called long-term, survivor-led recovery (LTSLR). STGLR and LTSLR feature two major post-disaster stages, especially in countries with top-down disaster management systems, such as China, India, and Italy [4][5][6]. Current research has inadequately examined the grassroots efforts of mediating STGLR and LTSLR, namely utilizing short-term reconstruction physical outcomes to rebuild disaster survivors' lives and livelihoods.…”