1. CONTEXT

When a large-scale natural disaster strikes, it reaches the news rooms in a matter of hours. Then a complex process of response is set off. In the affected zone, however, the population and the local/national actors are often on their own for a certain period of time, which can be as long as a few days. They try to solve as much as can be solved with the means available locally and the level of organisation prevailing on the scene. Only institutions who have either a permanent presence in the area or access to immediately available, large-scale logistical means and resources can act rapidly. This means that only the military and a limited number of NGO can do so.

Even when they are affected by a large-scale disaster, some countries do not ask for international aid. This is regularly the case of China, for instance. In most other countries, the authorities declare a state of emergency and request assistance.

Nevertheless, most of the aid efforts tend to start slowly. The UN send their UNDAC teams while the UN Resident Co-ordinator switches its country team to the emergency set-up with a possible back-up from OCHA. USAID send a DART, and after several days, the exploratory and needs assessment missions start to reach the affected zones. With the delay for fund raising and file processing by donors, it can take days, if not weeks, before the inputs of international aid can be seen concretely in the field. Flash appeals are launched. Food aid, emergency and rehabilitation assistance in the fields of health, shelter, agriculture, etc., finally reach the so-called beneficiaries. This is often a time of "flag planting", where there can be fierce competition between aid agencies for public image and resources between.

One can ask, however, how far are the views of the population, local actors and organisations taken into accountin this process ? Through what kind of process and with what kind of results ?

 

2. OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this case study are to actually observe and appraise "live" the level of participation and the approaches used for that purpose in the response to a large scale natural disaster. The three main objectives are :

• To identify and describe existing practices;
• To identify important lessons through an analysis of the emergency programmes that are being implemented;
• To transform these lessons learned into a "capital of knowledge" which will be capitalised, used for the preparation of the Practitioner Handbook and the Overview book and disseminated at the "system-wide" level.

This will complement the results of the missions which will have been carried out on two natural disasters "post-mortem": the Goma Volcano eruption and the March 2002 earthquake in Afghanistan .

3.1. Overall approach

The mission will utilise the following tools :

• Distribution of relevant information on ALNAP and the Global Study to possible partners in the field;
• Review of the documents made available by agencies;
• Interviews with agency staff;
• Interview and focus groups with affected populations;
• Feed-back to both affected populations and agencies on the findings for discussions

It is important to note that this study should be looking at participation and consultation both from a holistic point-of-view and from a thematic/sectoral angle. Indeed the corporate culture of agencies working in different fields might affect their behaviour and the way the tend to promote or neglect consultation and participation of beneficiaries and affected population in their programs.

 

Sector-related and transversal issues

Sectors     Transversal Issues	Health		Economic security		Human settlements	Education	Protection	Gender	Environ- ment
	Health	Water and sanitation	Food aid	Agricultural and economic rehabilitation	Housing and H. S. management	Primary and other	IHL and Human rights
Relevance
Impact on the population
Effectiveness
Efficiency
Impact on the social cohesiveness
Impact on the security and conflict dynamics
Links between relief and development
Viability and sustainability
Co-ordination
Population movements
Impact on disaster management

 

3.3. The team

The team for the mission is composed of 3 persons :

A team leader, to be identified;

An assistant team leader from an aid agency;

Charlotte Dufour, research assistant, nutritionist : she will particularly look into the issues of consultation and participation in the food aid sector.

 

3.4. Implementation timeframe

There are, of course, many uncertainties on when and where this rapid onset natural disaster will occur. Therefore, the time frame presented below is only tentative.

 

Pre-mission preparation :

• Team seminar for the elaboration of a common approach with the other ALNAP Global Study teams (will take place early July 2002)
• Contact agencies at HQ and field levels. A series of meetings is being organised for the next couple of weeks with the Desks of interested agencies;
• Collect and read relevant documents (started already through the URD’s documentation centre);
• Prepare "ad-hoc" analytical tools;
• Inform in advance both HQ and field teams on the status of the preparation of the mission. These TOR will be circulated widely and available on the Global Study web site http//:globalstudyparticipation.org

 

During the Field missions :

• Upon arrival of the team, a "presentation meeting" will be held for all interested agencies;
• Field visits, during which meetings with beneficiaries, agency staff, local authorities and other key informants will take place;
• Organisation of a "mini-seminar" in the area for feed-back and reactions;
• Preparation of a draft summary of the findings which will lay the foundations for the Country Monograph;

 

Post-mission activities :

• Preparation of a case study Monograph;
• Wide circulation of the monograph through the Steering Group in order to stimulate reactions;
• Participation to the mini-seminar with the other country teams, in order to start shaping the recommendations that will contribute to the Practitioner Handbook;
• Finalisation of the Country Monograph;
• Preparation of a small "bullet-point" end of mission report to be sent to ALNAP and the Global Study Steering Group.

 

A tentative schedule for the mission is presented bellow:

	07/02	08/02	09/02	10/02	11/02	12/02	01/03	02/03	03/03	04/03	05/03
Preparation	--
Inter-team workshop	-
Stand by arrangement	--	-------	-------	--------	---------	-
Mission		?	?	?	?	?
Feed-back
1st Draft of the Monograph							-
Presentation at ALNAP Biannual
Inter-team for the Handbook							-
Preparation of the Handbook							-----	-----	----
Preparation for the Overview book											-----