Abstract
Despite a long history of volcanic debris flows on the northern flank of San Vicente Volcano, El Salvador, authorities and communities were ill-prepared for the lahars that occurred on Nov. 7–8, 2009. More than 250 people were killed by lahars resulting from shallow landslides, not to mention millions of dollars (US) in damage to houses, agriculture, and infrastructure. After the disaster, significant aid was invested in the region to reduce risk in future disasters. This case study uses the ethnographic tools of qualitative interviews, participant observation, and review of institutional documents to analyze two particular aspects of disaster risk reduction strategies in the town of Verapaz: 1) relocation of at-risk residents led by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, and 2) hazard monitoring and emergency management training programs led by Civil Protection, the University of El Salvador, and NGOs. The relocation effort, while effective at reducing physical vulnerability to debris flows, failed to incorporate livelihood, social networks, and cultural ties to homes in their project design and implementation. Since diverse livelihoods are keys to survival, and tightly-knit social networks help families share responsibilities and withstand shocks during hardships, many families returned to the high-risk area or opted not to relocate. Others have adapted using unanticipated strategies to benefit from the resettlement effort. On the other hand, the emergency management training and education programs valued local input, knowledge, and action, which has helped increase awareness and improved the overall capacity to manage emergencies through wide, local participation. The different approaches used in the two risk reduction initiatives reveal important lessons regarding the importance of community participation. Challenges derive from narrow understandings of vulnerability on the part of disaster risk reduction experts, who neglected to consider and understand kin networks and residence patterns that help maintain diverse livelihoods, as well as ensure safety and security. As demonstrated in the 2011 Tropical Depression 12E, effective public engagement and empowerment helped bridge the knowledge, awareness, and preparedness gaps that existed prior to the 2009 disaster.
Highlights
Strategies for disaster risk reduction (DRR) in the aftermath of hazard events have evolved over the last decade
Results demonstrate that despite best efforts, a significant gap persists between the authorities’ perception of program success and the experience of the at-risk population near San Vicente. We examine this gap in the implementation of the resettlement project, and we contrast this with more successful DRR initiatives that involved local residents in hazard monitoring strategies and communication
The analysis detailed below explains the state of hazard monitoring before and after the 2009 disaster; in brief, communication of hazards improved between DRR experts and local residents, which was demonstrated in a subsequent 2011 emergency
Summary
Strategies for disaster risk reduction (DRR) in the aftermath of hazard events have evolved over the last decade. The case of the response to the 2009 San Vicente, El Salvador disaster illustrates this point, while showing ways in which natural hazard monitoring and communication improvements have been made. We examine this gap in the implementation of the resettlement project, and we contrast this with more successful DRR initiatives that involved local residents in hazard monitoring strategies and communication. Usamah and Haynes (2012) conclude that relocation efforts at Mayon volcano in the Philippines did not consider broader livelihood concerns, meaningful beneficiary participation, disruption of social networks, nor culturally appropriate housing design. It did not achieve institutions’ nor residents’ desired goals
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: 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.