2.1. Health and Education Facilities

More than 80% of the houses were totally damaged by 2001 earthquake. The reconstructions...

This chunk discusses the devastation caused by the earthquake, which resulted in over 80% of homes being completely destroyed. Consequently, reconstruction efforts were initiated, but the initial layout before the earthquake and the new layout differed significantly. This led to complications in relocating the affected population.

Imagine a neighborhood where all the homes were charged by a storm. Once rebuilt, the homes were located in a completely new area that residents found unappealing. Just like people resist moving to unfamiliar neighborhoods, the residents resisted relocating to the newly planned areas.

This is the number of occupancy in the new, you can see these new constructed house is lying empty...

Despite the construction of new houses, many remained unoccupied. The cost of these units was high, about 1 lakh 20,000 Indian rupees, which was beyond the reach of many. As a result, the majority of the new housing went unused, as people preferred to stay close to each other in familiar areas rather than relocating to the new sites.

Think of a group of friends who grew up together in a tight-knit community. If they were suddenly told they had to move to a new neighborhood far away, even if the houses were nicer, many might choose to stay where their friends and memories are. The emotional and social ties overruled the appeal of new houses.

They have health center but, people are not using that. Ayurvedic health centre also, this is not used by the people...

This section highlights that there were health centers available, including an Ayurvedic center, but they were underutilized. In contrast, schools in the area were functioning well, with children attending regularly. This indicates a disparity in the use of services that could potentially improve residents' quality of life.

Imagine a shiny new gym that opens in a neighborhood. Despite having all the best equipment, if no one in the community is interested in fitness or doesn't know how to use the gym, it will remain empty. In contrast, a local school will always have students, as education holds universal importance for families.

Constructions; those who are rich they did not relocate better off and they build their own house in the damaged side...

The reconstruction faced challenges due to the lack of community involvement. Wealthier individuals opted to build their homes on damaged land, bypassing the new sites. Meanwhile, those without land rights constructed temporary housing and were excluded from the official rebuilding efforts. This situation led to a disconnect between the community and the reconstruction process.

If a community lost their homes and a wealthy member decided to rebuild without consulting the rest, the poorer families left out might feel resentment. It's like a neighborhood potluck where only a few bring food without considering everyone else’s preferences. The lack of involvement leads to frustration and feelings of inequality.

There was no training program, allocation of financial assistance given to the NGO directly and decision makings...

This chunk explains that there was no training provided to the residents to assist them in the rebuilding process. Financial decisions were made without community input, which added to the dissatisfaction and mistrust towards NGOs. The government provided land for relocation, but the villagers had no part in decision-making.

Consider a situation where a school decides to overhaul its curriculum without consulting teachers or parents. This can lead to a lack of support and a feeling that the changes don’t reflect the needs of the students. Similarly, without community input, residents felt alienated from the rebuilding process.

So, what do we see here that no utilisations of local resources designed by the NGO...

The final observations point out that the reconstruction project failed to utilize local resources effectively and did not involve the community. This absence of local involvement led to high costs and a poorly received outcome, as villagers rejected the new designs and management, resulting in houses that were neither well-maintained nor widely occupied.

Imagine a community garden where residents are not consulted about what to plant. The lack of local knowledge can lead to a garden filled with plants that no one likes or wants to care for. Ultimately, the garden would fail because it didn’t represent the interests and preferences of the neighborhood.

--