Abstract
This paper presents city dwellers and local authorities with questions that international humanitarian organisations (IHOs) may not ask after massive housing destruction. We examine Japan's transitional shelter strategy following the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami (GEJET) against these questions: who decides when and where to build housing; what is built, how and by whom; who finances, owns or rents; and how might such conditions affect disaster response?The analysis puts strategy in context by combining data on housing, subsidies and insurance, rather than presenting shelter delivery in isolation. In Japan, systemic housing-related vulnerabilities preceded the GEJET; shelter was a time-limited accommodation service; and cash hand-outs were not a cultural norm, not intended to be sufficient and never equivalent to the cost of temporary housing units.We argue that such analysis is needed to challenge IHO thinking and uncover specific historical, regulatory and personal housing trajectories following a disaster.
Highlights
The controversial role of international humanitarian organisations (IHOs) in meeting post-disaster shelter needs has been described as “intractable” [33]
We argue that a fair challenge to the strategic prescriptions of IHOs by local authorities and city-dwellers, requires that decisions be framed by an analysis of prior housing processes
We propose a series of questions that might underpin such an analysis: who decides when and where to build housing; what is built, how and by whom; who finances, owns or rents; and how might all this be relevant to disaster response?. We apply these questions to analysis of the government of Japan's transitional shelter strategy following the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami (GEJET)
Summary
The controversial role of international humanitarian organisations (IHOs) in meeting post-disaster shelter needs has been described as “intractable” [33] We argue this diagnosis stems from, and is reinforced by, the framing of IHO decision-making dilemmas. This framing forces a focus on unit costs, delivery speed and family shelters These indicators are compared between IHOs or between countries without an examination of prior housing processes and the systemic context that give them meaning. We apply these questions to analysis of the government of Japan's transitional shelter strategy following the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami (GEJET) These questions allow the strategy and data to be placed in the context of ‘normal’ housing and ‘normal’ temporary housing processes in Japan. This knowledge is often held in different parts of government,
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
