2. Responses and cultural dimensions after disasters

We are living in a generation where the architecture profession in the disaster context has moved from a singular vision to a shared vision. In the first version of build back better where Michael Lyons and other authors have demonstrated the various participatory approaches have been successful and obviously they also bought the pros and cons of each approach and bringing various case examples.

This chunk discusses how the field of architecture has evolved in response to disasters. Previously, architects may have had a singular vision for rebuilding, focusing solely on structural aspects. However, now there is a shared vision that includes input from various stakeholders, particularly those directly affected by disasters. This shared vision is part of the 'build back better' initiative, which emphasizes participatory approaches where community members are actively involved in the planning and rebuilding process. This means considering the benefits and drawbacks of various approaches and learning from real-life examples.

Imagine a community coming together to rebuild a park after a natural disaster. Instead of a single architect designing everything, community members provide input on what features are important to them—like playgrounds, gardens, and pathways. By combining their ideas, they create a park that meets the needs and desires of everyone, creating a space that feels like home and belongs to them, rather than just a generic design.

Most of them they are talking about putting people in the centre, like we can see in some of the examples where the south Indian fishermen federation societies, Benny Kuriakose. Where he has implemented a bottom-up approach of completion from the documentation to the design to the erection process and the one to one consultation process has been a time-taking process.

This section illustrates a bottom-up approach adopted by specific communities, like the South Indian fishermen societies. This means that the community members participate directly in all stages of rebuilding, from planning to construction. Instead of decisions being made solely by authorities or architects, local people's voices are prioritized. While this process takes more time due to extensive consultations and involvement, the outcome is typically more aligned with the community’s needs, increasing the chances of successful reconstruction and satisfaction among residents.

Think of a school project where students choose the topic and contribute individually. Instead of one student doing all the work and presenting a single view, all students share their ideas and collaborate. Although it might take longer to complete due to discussions and feedback, the final project better represents the interests and inputs of every member, making it a more cohesive and appreciated effort.

Also there are issues of land tenure and ownership, the people who are having houses before and but who have lost their houses in the disaster maybe when the aid agency support they may not give the tenure full tenure. But the people who are not having houses who have a little money but now they could able to afford the land and then they have a tenure so there is always the discrepancies occur in the tenure and the ownership aspect.

This chunk highlights the complexities regarding land ownership after disasters. When people lose their homes, aid agencies may provide support, but this does not always guarantee full ownership of land. Conversely, those who did not own land before the disaster, but now have some resources, can acquire land ownership. This creates discrepancies and inequalities, where previous homeowners may struggle to reclaim their rights while new owners emerge due to changing circumstances.

Imagine a neighborhood where a storm destroys many homes. Some families had owned their homes free and clear, while others rented. After the storm, donation money helps some families buy new land, but previously owned land may not be returned to the original owners. This could lead to conflicts and feelings of injustice, similar to how changes in school district boundaries affect students who previously belonged to a particular school but are now assigned to a different one.

You can see the responses what the aid agencies have given, and what people have developed. There is always a personalization is a natural response to the cultural deficiencies whether it is a kitchen, whether it is a religious, what you can see is a toilet has been converted as a worship place.

This section emphasizes the human tendency to adapt and personalize their living conditions following disasters. Aid agencies may provide standard solutions, but individuals often modify their spaces to reflect personal or cultural significance. For example, a toilet being used as a place of worship illustrates how people adapt spaces to meet their emotional and cultural needs, filling the void left by lost customs and rituals. This adaptation contributes to a sense of normalcy amidst the chaos and loss.

Imagine a family that loses their home in a fire. While they receive a temporary trailer from a relief agency, they might decorate it with family photos and set up a small space for prayer. Even though it's just a trailer, they infuse it with their traditions and memories, making it a home again despite the circumstances.

Normality and a normality of disasters: relief agencies normally they rarely pay attention to the way in which housing is delivered. Often assuming that developing countries have no experience in low-cost social housing schemes, no finance mechanisms, nor they do sometimes possess a profoundly rich and established informal sector.

This chunk critiques how relief agencies typically operate under a misconception that communities in developing countries lack experience in affordable housing. This often leads to oversights where agencies do not recognize existing informal housing solutions that communities have developed over the years. The failure to consider these established practices can result in ineffective aid and rebuilding efforts that do not align with the reality of local capabilities and infrastructure.

Think of a teacher coming to a new school and assuming that students have never worked on projects before, so they impose strict, non-collaborative styles of learning. If the teacher fails to see prior group activities and project-based learning that students are used to, the new teaching methods might not resonate with the students and could hinder their ability to engage effectively, just as relief efforts might miss the mark in a disaster scenario.

So if you look at the schematic understanding of what we have discussed that Boano and William Hunter have framed in a nice conceptual diagram where there is a reconstruction phase, how it is programmed with different forces.

This chunk introduces a conceptual framework for understanding reconstruction after disasters, created by Boano and William Hunter. It outlines various forces that impact rebuilding - including social relationships, material conditions, power dynamics, and land issues. Understanding these forces is crucial for designing effective recovery strategies that consider the complexities at play in post-disaster scenarios.

Imagine planning a community event. You need to consider various elements: the venue, financing, community interest, volunteers, and the rules set by the local government. Each factor influences how the event can be organized. Similarly, in disaster reconstruction, multiple factors influence how the rebuilding process unfolds, making the task complex and requiring comprehensive planning.

In short summary Ian Davis reflects. Shelter must be considered as a process but not as an object, and this whole set of cases and examples which we are facing in our daily observations it opens a call for more culturally sensitive approaches to home making or remaking in the aftermath of disasters.

This concluding thought from Ian Davis emphasizes that the process of creating shelter should be viewed holistically rather than simply as a physical structure. It highlights the need for approaches that respect and incorporate local cultural practices and beliefs into the rebuilding process. By recognizing that shelter is more than just walls and a roof, relief efforts can create spaces that individuals truly identify with and that reflect their cultural heritage.

Think about the difference between a generic house and a home that reflects a family's identity. A house can be just bricks and mortar, but when family photos, cultural decor, and personal touches are added, it becomes a home filled with meaning. Recognizing the importance of creating spaces that resonate personally makes a huge difference in how people feel about their living environments after rebuilding.

--