Abstract
Following the disastrous 2010 floods, where almost one million homes were totally destroyed, Pakistan’s government has had to face $2 billion of reconstruction costs. With a given reconstruction budget, reducing households’ vulnerability to flooding generated difficult decisions, where a greater weight given to the poorest also meant achieving less total protection—a typical case of social equity vs. resource use efficiency. This study shows the hidden complexity of such decision-making when there is urgency in disaster relief. Surprisingly, it turns out that in resource-constrained situations typical of developing countries, the choice of equity or justice norms matter little for how to best use the available budget. The determining factor is the interplay of reconstruction costs with both the government’s and households’ available budgets.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Ahmed, I. (2011). An Overview of Post-Disaster Permanent Housing Reconstruction in Developing Countries. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 2(2), 148–164.
Azeem, M. M. (2016). From Static One-Dimensional Poverty to Vulnerability to Multi-Dimensional Poverty: Towards Greater Effectiveness of Social Protection in Pakistan. PhD dissertation, The University of Western Australia, 202 p.
Barakat, S. (2003). Housing Reconstruction After Conflict and Disaster. Humanitarian Policy Group, Network Papers, 43, 1–40.
Cazorla, M., & Toman, M. (2000). International Equity and Climate Change Policy. Climate Policy Brief No. 27, Resources for the Future, Washington, DC (22 p.).
Delaney, P., & Shrader, E. (2000). Gender and Post-Disaster Reconstruction: The Case of Hurricane Mitch in Honduras and Nicaragua. Decision Review Draft. Washington, DC: LCSPG/LAC Gender Team, The World Bank.
Duyne Barenstein, J. E. (2015). Continuity and Change in Housing and Settlement Patterns in Post-Earthquake Gujarat, India. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 6(2), 140–155.
Hayles, C. S. (2010). An Examination of Decision Making in Post Disaster Housing Reconstruction. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 1(1), 103–122.
Kim, K., & Olshansky, R. B. (2014). The Theory and Practice of Building Back Better. Taylor & Francis.
Lukasiewicz, A., & Baldwin, C. (2017). Voice, Power, and History: Ensuring Social Justice for All Stakeholders in Water Decision-Making. Local Environment, 22(9), 1042–1060.
Mannakkara, S., & Wilkinson, S. (2014). Re-Conceptualising ‘Building Back Better’ to Improve Post-Disaster Recovery. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 7(3), 327–341.
Mazza, M., Chiara Pino, M., Peretti, S., Scolta, K., & Mazzarelli, E. (2014). Satisfaction Level on Quality of Life Post-Earthquake Rebuilding. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 5(1), 6–22.
Oliver-Smith, A. (1996). Anthropological Research on Hazards and Disasters. Annual Review of Anthropology, 25(1), 303–328.
Oliver-Smith, A. (1990). Post-Disaster Housing Reconstruction and Social Inequality: A Challenge to Policy and Practice. Disasters, 14(1), 7–19.
Opdyke, A., Lepropre, F., Javernick-Will, A., & Koschmann, M. (2017). Inter-Organizational Resource Coordination in Post-Disaster Infrastructure Recovery. Construction Management and Economics, 35(8–9), 514–530.
Ophiyandri, T., Amaratunga, D., Pathirage, C., & Keraminiyage, K. (2013). Critical Success Factors for Community-Based Post-Disaster Housing Reconstruction Projects in the Pre-Construction Stage in Indonesia. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 4(2), 236–249.
Patel, S., & Hastak, M. (2013). A Framework to Construct Post-Disaster Housing. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 4(1), 95–114.
Powell, P. J. (2013). Post-Disaster Reconstruction: A Current Analysis of Gujarat’s Response After the 2001 Earthquake. In Beyond Shelter After Disaster: Practice, Process and Possibilities (pp. 40–53). Routledge.
Rahmayati, Y. (2016). Reframing ‘Building Back Better’ for Post-Disaster Housing Design: A Community Perspective. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 7(4), 344–360.
Ringius, L., Torvanger, A., & Underdal, A. (2002). Burden Sharing and Fairness Principles in International Climate Policy. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 2, 1–22.
Romero, H., & Albornoz, C. (2016). Socio-Political Goals and Responses to the Reconstruction of the Chilean City of Constitución. Disaster Prevention and Management, 25(2), 227–243.
Schilizzi, S., & Black, J. (2009). Breaking Through the Equity Barrier in Environmental Policy. Land and Water Australia, Canberra, 172 p. Retrieved from http://lwa.gov.au/products/pn21249
Tran, T. A. (2015). Post-Disaster Housing Reconstruction as a Significant Opportunity to Building Disaster Resilience: A Case in Vietnam. Natural Hazards, 79(1), 61–79.
Vahanvati, M., & Mulligan, M. (2017). A New Model for Effective Post-Disaster Housing Reconstruction: Lessons from Gujarat and Bihar in India. International Journal of Project Management, 35(5), 802–817.
World Bank. (2010). Pakistan Floods 2010: Preliminary Damage and Needs Assessment Project. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendix
Appendix
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schilizzi, S., Azeem, M.M. (2020). How to Be Fair in Prioritizing Support in the Aftermath of Disasters: Pakistan’s Housing Reconstruction Challenges Following the 2010 Flood Disaster. In: Lukasiewicz, A., Baldwin, C. (eds) Natural Hazards and Disaster Justice. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-0466-2_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-0466-2_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-15-0465-5
Online ISBN: 978-981-15-0466-2
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)