|
|
 |
 |
 |
| Tuesday, 8 February 2005 |
 |
|
 |
Features | |
| News Business Features Editorial Security Politics World Letters Sports Obituaries
|
Science, politics and social intervention by Prof. S.T. Hettige, University of Colombo Most Sri Lankans had not heard the word tsunami, when the tsunami waves struck much of the coastal belt of the country, devastating thousands of lives, infrastructure and private and public property. Those who were knowledgeable about the phenomenon no doubt felt that it was not very likely to strike Sri Lanka.
Nevertheless, the national disaster management task force that was appointed in 2002 in the wake of the major floods that year had identified tsunami as one of the likely national disasters in Sri Lanka. When the floods receded and the government changed, the national disaster management initiative was shelved. The issues involved in disaster management did not figure prominently in public discussions, and, therefore no attempt has been made to make public awareness about possible national disasters that can affect the country. Now almost everybody knows that tsunami waves are produced by undersea earthquakes. Earthquakes cannot be predicted in advance but a tsunami can be predicted as it follows the actual occurrence of an undersea earthquake. If the location and the magnitude of the earthquake can be detected using available scientific instruments, the damage that a tsunami is likely to cause can probably be minimized. Hence, the current efforts by international agencies to set up a tsunami warning system in the region. But, for us tsunami came with no prior warning and did the biggest damage to people and property in the recorded history of Sri Lanka. Our task today is not to apportion the blame between the scientists and politicians. Both these groups have been as helpless as ordinary people in the country, though it might be a little too much for them, given their usual assertiveness and arrogance. What remains to be done is to utilize the public funds that the people in this country and the international community so generously contributed and offer whatever support the victims need to get on with their lives. This is a daunting task that cannot be accomplished according to whims and fancies of politicians and their stooges in Colombo. It is a complex process that should be handled with care, with the full participation of stakeholders at all levels, particularly at the grass roots level. It was critical in the immediate aftermath of the disaster to reach out to all the victims with the necessary relief supplies. The generosity of the local people of all walks of life, followed by rapid shipment of supplies and support services by foreign governments and agencies, no doubt ensured the availability of basic necessities for the victims in almost all areas affected by the disaster. The affected people will continue to depend on relief supplies for their survival till their income sources are restored. It is necessary to facilitate the transition from "camp life" to re-settlement as quickly as possible. Yet, re-settlement is a complex process that requires careful planning and implementation. If this is not done properly, it can have an adverse effect on the quality of life of the resettled. This is particularly so because re-settlement process is intimately connected with the process of livelihood restoration. Livelihood restoration People who were living along the coast have been dependent on sources of livelihood connected with their location. Fishing, tourism related activities and cottage industries are the main sources of livelihood for most of these people. Those who were living in large towns affected by the disaster were dependent a wide range of economic activities such as business, white collar employment, professional services, etc. For them the restoration of their former livelihoods is no doubt pre-requisite to resuming normal lives. Yet, this is virtually impossible for them unless the process is facilitated and assisted by the State. Closely connected to livelihood restoration is re-settlement, an equally complex process as what is involved is not just building houses. People affected have been living in coastal communities for generations, often on ancestral property. They had their social networks based on kinship, class and other factors. When they are uprooted, these networks get disrupted. People who have been affected or displaced come from diverse socio-economic and cultural backgrounds. While there were poor people living in makeshift housing along the coast, others were, well established families living in modern houses. There were unskilled workers and the self-employed living at a substance level. On the other hand, some of the people affected had lucrative businesses in such fields as tourism, trade, industry and fisheries. There were also regular employees in the public and private sectors. In other words, when we talk about tsunami victims, we are talking about an extremely diverse population. In addition to their socio-economic differences, there are also other characteristics that need to be taken into account. These include gender, age, health status, disability and trauma. All these factors and circumstances need careful attention in the process of resettlement. If not, it can lead to serious problems. How can we take into account the above factors, and circumstances in the process of resettlement? While it is safe to conclude that broad policies and guidelines can be developed at national level, paying adequate attention to ground realities, actual resettlement plans have to be designed and implemented in close consultations with all stakeholders at the community level. In this regard, the most logical planning unit is the local council area. All those who engage in resettlement related activities should work within the framework of local councils such as Urban Councils and Pradeshiya Sabhas. (To be continued) |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
Produced by Lake House |
