1.4. Research Challenges

The first challenge in that time of research we are talking about 2005-2006 where the Google Earth was just in the beginning stages and I was not getting any Maps, so I have to digitize these maps whatever the Google Earth have to give me and some physical observations.

In the early stages of research, particularly in 2005-2006, the technology we now take for granted, such as online mapping tools like Google Earth, was not fully developed. This meant that obtaining accurate maps for the region affected by the tsunami was difficult. As a result, the researcher had to create their own maps by digitizing the few available resources and using physical observations from the area. This involved closely analyzing the environment and relying on personal experiences to gather critical geographic data that was necessary for the study.

Imagine trying to navigate a new city without the help of GPS or online maps, relying solely on traditional paper maps and looking around to find your way. This can be quite challenging! In the same way, the researcher faced difficulties because they didn't have advanced tools at their disposal.

88 houses were damaged during this Tsunami and immediately the government have done the assessment of these 88 houses. And they decided to find alternative position for them because of the CRZ regulations so they have took some land in the DC Nagar phase and SISU Nagar and they have identified this is a government land and have given about 88 houses.

Following the tsunami, the government quickly assessed the damage and discovered that 88 houses were severely affected. Due to the Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) regulations, which are designed to protect coastal environments, the government could not simply rebuild the houses in the original locations. Instead, they sought alternative locations and designated specific plots of government land in DC Nagar and SISU Nagar for rebuilding these houses. This decision was part of a broader effort to ensure that the new homes were safer and complied with environmental guidelines.

Think of it like a flood that destroys several houses in a neighborhood. The local authorities can’t just rebuild those houses in the same spot because it may not be safe. Instead, they find another piece of land that's suitable for rebuilding, ensuring that the new houses are less vulnerable to future disasters.

The church have realized that why not we take this as an opportunity to build a more special village and to also address the pre-disaster vulnerabilities. That is there the church have gathered the communities and they put some money forward and they bought some more land in different parcels.

Recognizing the chance to improve their community after the disaster, the local church took initiative. They encouraged community members to come together, pooling their resources to buy additional land. This collective effort aimed not only to provide new houses but also to address issues that existed before the tsunami, such as social vulnerabilities and inadequate housing conditions. It was a proactive approach to foster a stronger, more resilient community.

It's akin to a neighborhood banding together after a storm to not only repair damaged homes but also build more spacious and safer houses, ensuring that if another storm hits, the community is better prepared. They recognize the importance of working together for the common good.

But here one thing you have to understand that they people who were having houses earlier but now these people were on a lease for 10 years only then they will get the pattas and these people who bought the land with their own money. So now, they have got the pattas from the beginning.

A significant change followed the reconstruction. The families who had lost their homes were given new houses but initially under a lease agreement, meaning they didn't own the land outright and would have to wait ten years to receive the official titles (pattas). In contrast, those community members who had invested their own money in purchasing land received their pattas immediately. This disparity created different levels of property ownership and security among families, which influenced social dynamics and feelings of community belonging.

Imagine a situation where some friends join a community project and receive a place to live temporarily while others invest their time and money to get their own homes. The friends living temporarily may feel uncertain about their future, while those who own their homes feel a stronger sense of security and belonging.

In the new situation, not particular celebrations have gradually diminished. Because the access to the religious places and the political meetings not only that in our personal level.

Due to the relocation of houses and community facilities after the tsunami, social interactions and cultural celebrations began to decline. The new homes were situated further away from key places like the church and village centers, making it more challenging for residents to attend important gatherings, religious services, and celebrations. This change impacted the fabric of community life, leading to reduced participation in collective events that used to bring people together.

Think of how you'd feel if your favorite community center or place of worship suddenly moved far away. It becomes much harder to visit for events and celebrations, potentially leading to a sense of isolation. The joy and unity that those gatherings bring start to fade away.

--