3.2. Geographical and Community Variations

There is also sustainable livelihoods framework which talks about the asset framework where it is a different model in 1997, which they have developed how the individuals or groups access the resources which are basically an assets to organize their livelihoods and how the capacities make them able to act engage and change the world.

The sustainable livelihoods framework is a model that helps us understand how individuals or groups can use their available resources effectively. This model, developed in 1997, focuses on the idea that resources, referred to as assets, are not just physical or financial. They include social, natural, human, and political assets. These resources enable people to improve their living conditions and engage in the world around them by taking action and making choices that can lead to positive changes in their lives.

Consider a community of farmers. If they have access to quality seeds (natural assets), a supportive cooperative (social assets), and training programs (human assets), they can improve their yield significantly. This situation illustrates how various assets work together to help a community improve living conditions.

But here, the thing is it is not just for the economic necessity where households or groups act upon. But it is with the cultural factors which people manage the results and make their livelihood choices to act upon.

Economic necessity is often a strong motivation for people to make certain choices in their livelihoods. However, cultural factors also play a significant role. These cultural influences include traditions, values, and social norms that shape how individuals and communities approach their livelihoods. This means that people's decisions on how to earn a living or manage resources are influenced not only by what is economically beneficial but also by what aligns with their cultural identity and community practices.

For example, a group of artisans may choose to create handmade crafts instead of pursuing more profitable factory work. Their cultural identity and pride in traditional craftsmanship guide their decision, emphasizing that culture can drive economic choices.

So, this is where I started reviewing a variety of literature starting from Bourdieu’s cultural capital. Kim Dovey’s work on framing places, Neil Leach work and Regina Lim’s work. So, this is where I started revealing a lot of literature on what is culture and that is where I try to adopt certain literatures and made a framework in my research, in order to understand the role of culture, in the disaster development process.

This chunk discusses the importance of reviewing existing literature to build a solid framework for understanding culture in relation to disaster development. The works of important theorists like Bourdieu, who introduced the concept of cultural capital (the non-economic social assets that promote social mobility), and others provided insights into how culture plays a role in shaping communities' responses to disasters. By examining these frameworks, researchers can better understand the interplay between cultural factors and development processes, leading to more effective disaster recovery efforts.

Think of a community recovering from a disaster. If they rely solely on economic data and ignore their cultural practices, their recovery efforts may miss key aspects that help the community heal. For example, incorporating local knowledge and rebuilding in ways that respect cultural traditions can create a more resilient community.

So, mainly my argument lies on how the cultural dimensions of the local communities are not effectively and sufficiently addressed in the current post-disaster humanitarian and development process.

This chunk emphasizes the argument that current post-disaster recovery practices often overlook the cultural dimensions of affected communities. Understanding and integrating these cultural elements is crucial for effective humanitarian efforts. If responders do not consider the cultural context, their initiatives might not resonate with or meet the actual needs of the community, thereby hindering the recovery process.

Imagine a community that places great importance on communal gatherings as a means of healing. If recovery efforts exclude this feature and focus solely on rebuilding houses, the emotional and social recovery of the community might be compromised. Recognizing cultural practices can thus lead to a more effective healing process.

So my methods have started understanding from two subject domains, one is talking about the change which is about this morphology which how the spatial character has changed before disaster and after disaster.

In this chunk, the speaker describes a methodological approach that combines two primary domains of study: spatial morphology (the physical layout and structure of communities) and cultural anthropology (the study of cultures and their development). By examining how the physical spaces changed before and after a disaster, researchers can gain insights into the impacts of disasters and the cultural implications of recovery efforts.

For example, a city devastated by an earthquake may have buildings destroyed. Studying the changes in building layouts and community spaces before and after the disaster will help understand not just physical recovery but also how the cultural dynamics of social interactions have shifted.

--