Incentives and Expectations

Incentives and Expectations

Community Resiliency and Recovery in Tamil Nadu after the Indian Ocean Tsunami

Author: Nakul Kumar

Source

https://search.proquest.com/openview/2fbe835c2da073ea8b1a5c161e5b57bd/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=32833

Quote

“Specifically, effective disaster management requires efficient information generation at three critical stages. The first is the recognition stage: Has a disaster occurred, how severe is it, and is relief needed? The second is the needs-assessment and allocation stage: What relief supplies are needed, who has them readily available, and what areas and individuals need them the most? The third stage is the feedback and evaluation stage: Are our disaster-relief activities working, and what—if anything—needs modification?” (Sobel and Leeson 2007b, 520).

 

Introduction

The issue of tsunamis, community resilience, and disaster management is one of the reviewed areas in the recent times. In this article, the author revisited the Indian Ocean tsunami that stroke in 2004.  Many Southeast Asian countries were affected by the Indian Ocean tsunami, in particular, the state of Tamil Nadu. Many people were forced to relocate and start their life anew a factor that resulted in aggravated confusion, struggle, and poverty.

The government did little to help the Tamil Nadu residents, and there was evidence of social-economic discrimination in the manner in which relief was provided. The central reason why I chose this article is because I have a family in Tamil Nadu who were extensively affected by the tsunami and I wanted to know the mitigation efforts that the government took to remedy the problem and help the residents. Evidently, there is little visible effort that can be associated with the government regarding the mitigation process.  I was also interested in knowing whether any other organizations stepped in to help the affected Tamil Nadu residents.

Research questions

• What was the source of the Indian government lackluster response to the tsunami?
• What were the consequences of the lackluster response to the impact of the tsunami?

Hypothesis

• The government did very little to mitigate the problems created by the tsunami.
• As a result of a lackluster response of the government, the local people adopted self-help strategies for the recovery.

Method

The author of this article had used qualitative data analysis approach to answer the research question and prove his hypothesis. This research method approach helps him understand why the government did not do what it was supposed to do.

 

Findings

Notably, The Indian government failed to address the knowledge problem because the disaster management system that was under their control was not one that was suitable to provide relief to communities. The article describes the Indian government’s bureaucratic approach to disaster-relief management as burdened by multiple layers of decision makers and agents trying to coordinate efforts and communicate information”.

The author of the article notes that the government had all the resources necessary to help out all people in the state of Tamil Nadu, but instead they chose to provide relief and recovery to districts in Tamil Nadu that were considered wealthy. The government was basing who would receive relief packages on an individual’s socioeconomic status and their political faithfulness. Not only did the government fail at providing individuals with the immediate relief they also failed at building back houses and providing individuals with resources to help them make a living for themselves. The government failed at two things when it came providing relief after the tsunami. The first problem was they failed to address the knowledge problem. “The knowledge problem” highlights the obstacle of gathering and utilizing fragmented information held separately and locally by individual members of a society to facilitate social coordination in economic contexts.”

The second thing the government failed at was “collecting critical information in stages two and three.” If one wants disaster management to operate smoothly, they must gather “efficient information at three critical stages.” “The first is the recognition stage: Has a disaster occurred, how severe is it, and is relief needed? The second is the needs-assessment and allocation stage: What relief supplies are needed, who has them readily available, and what areas and individuals need them the most? The third stage is the feedback and evaluation stage: Are our disaster-relief activities working, and what—if anything—needs modification? By not addressing the knowledge problem and by not gathering the information that was necessary to help with the disaster, the government failed the people of Tamil Nadu.

Application

The disaster management system that was set in place should have been a lot more organized so that all communities could receive the relief they needed. The government also did not gather the appropriate amount of information that was needed in stage two. “It also took the government several months to complete its preliminary assessment of the damages and to determine where the relief was most needed.” This is something should have been done a lot sooner because the more time the government wastes, the more people who are in need of relief do not receive it. The government did not understand the community’s needs and because they were not willing to give out information it caused a lot of problems for the leaders of the community that were supposed to be providing their people with recovery packages. The government was unfair as to who would be provided with relief. There was caste-based discrimination as well as discrimination towards women and girls.

Summary of the author

In summary, due to government lack of proper disaster mitigation approach, the people of Tamil Nadu had no hope in their government, and as a result, many people opted for a “mixed-strategy approach” in order to provide themselves with relief, they were left with no choice but to take matters into their own hands. A “mixed-strategy approach” is “where communities choose to rebuild using their efforts while simultaneously lobbying for government support.” The government was not making it easy for these individuals, so, as a result, those who did partake in the “mixed-strategy approach” had to rely on their communities, “mutual help, and assistance from NGOs, charitable institutions, and self-help groups.” The government was supposed to provide relief to all individuals of Tamil Nadu, but instead, they handpicked who would receive relief and who would not. It is important that the governments of all countries provide relief to all their people regardless of their race, gender, or socioeconomic status. A lot of people suffered because the government did not do what it was supposed to and this is something that should never happen again.

 

 

References

Kumar, N. (2017). Incentives and Expectations: Community Resiliency and Recovery in Tamil     Nadu after the Indian Ocean Tsunami. The Independent Review, 22(1), 135.