Advertisement

An Applied Anthropological Perspective on Localizing Post-disaster Aid: Lessons from Post-tsunami Aceh, Indonesia

  • Patrick Daly
Chapter

Abstract

In cases where local leadership was cited as negative, it is often because donors and NGOs either side-stepped local leadership systems (Dixon and McGregor 2011), or misread traditional systems and over-invested in the village head as a way of ‘ensuring’ local involvement and endorsement. In Aceh, the village head is just one prominent figure embedded within a wider framework that allows for checks and balances. To fully utilize the strengths of local leadership it was necessary to also engage religious leaders such as the imam gampung (head of the local mosque), and other respected village elders such as the tuha peut, which oversee different livelihood sectors, and use of communal lands. The fact that these were not engaged at the village level by most NGOs, allowed too much of the success or failure of community-level efforts to be concentrated in the hands of the village head. The ways that many external organizations engaged with communities simplified a complex system of decision-making and left great scope for abuse by under-qualified or self-serving village heads, and very limited options for disaffected villagers to communicate issues with higher social or source of funding (donors and NGOs).

Keywords

Post-disaster reconstruction Aceh Applied anthropology Humanitarianism Aid governance 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This paper results from countless field observations made over the course of the past decade in Aceh. During this time I benefited from collaboration with Yenny Rahmayati and the Aceh Heritage Community, as well as my more recent collaboration with the International Centre for Aceh and Indonesia Ocean Studies. Ezra Ho and Divya Hundlani at EOS assisted in the preparation of this manuscript. This research was supported in part by the National Research Foundation Singapore and the Singapore Ministry of Education under the Research Centres of Excellence initiative, and is EOS Research Contribution No. 166.

References

  1. Athukorala, P.C. 2012. Indian Ocean Tsunami: Disaster, Generosity and Recovery. Asian Economic Journal 26 (3): 211–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. BAPPENAS. 2005. Indonesia: Preliminary Damage and Loss Assessment. The December 26, 2004 Natural Disaster. http://www.unep.org/tsunami/reports/damage_assessment.pdf. Accessed 13 Jan 2017.
  3. Barber, R. 2016. Humanitarian Assistance Following the 2011 Floods in Thailand and Cambodia: The Importance of Formal Invitations and Informal Relationships. In Rebuilding Asia Following Natural Disasters: Approaches to Reconstruction in the Asia-Pacific Region, ed. P. Daly and R.M. Feener, 315–338. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boano, C., and M. García. 2011. Lost in Translation? The Challenges of an Equitable Post-Disaster Reconstruction Process: Lessons from Chile. Environmental Hazards 10 (3–4): 293–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bolin, R., and L. Stanford. 1998. The Northridge Earthquake: Community Based Approach to Unmet Recovery Reeds. Disasters 22 (1): 21–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bonanno, G. 2004. Trauma, and Human Resilience: Have We Underestimated the Human Capacity to Thrive After Extremely Aversive Events? American Psychologist 59 (1): 20–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bouraoui, D., and G. Lizarralde. 2013. Centralized Decision-Making, Users’ Participation and Satisfaction in Post-Disaster Reconstruction: The Case of Tunisia. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment 4 (2): 145–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bowen, J. 1986. On the Political Construction of Tradition: Gotong Royong in Indonesia. Journal of Asian Studies 45 (3): 545–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bradfield, C., M.L. Wylie, and L.G. Echterling. 1989. After the Flood: The Response of Ministers to a Natural Disaster. Sociology of Religion 49 (4): 397–407.Google Scholar
  10. Brinkerhoff, D.W., and J.M. Brinkerhoff. 2002. Governance Reforms and Failed States: Challenges and Implications. International Review of Administrative Sciences 68 (4): 511–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brusset, E., M., Bhatt, K., Bjornestad, J., Cosgrave, A., Davies, Y., Deshmukh, J., Haleem, S., Hidalgo, Y., Immajati, R., Jayasundere, A., Mattsson, N., Mahaimin, R., Polastro, and T. Wu. 2009. A Ripple in Development? Long Term Perspectives on the Response to the Indian Ocean Tsunami 2004. Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency. https://www.oecd.org/derec/sweden/42911319.pdf. Accessed 13 Jan 2017.
  12. Castillo, M.R.M. 2014. Development Projects from the Inside Out: Project Logic, Organizational Practices and Human Autonomy. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities 15 (1): 79–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Christoplos, I. 2006. Links Between Relief, Rehabilitation and Development in the Tsunami Response. London: Tsunami Evaluation Coalition.Google Scholar
  14. Clarke, M., I. Fannany, and S. Kenny (eds.). 2010. Post-Disaster Reconstruction: Lessons from Aceh. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Cuoto, R.A. 1989. Catastrophe and Community Empowerment: The Group Formulation of Aberfan’s Survivors. Journal of Community Psychology 17: 236–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Daly, P., and C. Brassard. 2011. Aid Accountability and Participatory Approaches in Post-Disaster Housing Reconstruction. Asian Journal of Social Science 39 (4): 508–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Daly, P., R.M. Feener, and A.J. Reid (eds.). 2012. From the Ground Up: Perspectives on Post-tsunami and Post-conflict Aceh. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
  18. Daly, P., and Y. Rahmayati. 2012. Cultural Heritage and Community Recovery in Post-tsunami Aceh. In From the Ground Up: Perspectives on Post-tsunami and Post-conflict Aceh, ed. P. Daly, R.M. Feener, and A. Reid, 57–79. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Daly, P., and A. Hor. 2013. Similar Events, Different Disasters: A Comparative Assessment of the Aftermath of the 2004 Indian Ocean and the 2011 Japan Tsunamis. Asian Journal of Environment and Disaster Management 5 (1): 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Daly, P., R.M. Feener, M. Jauhola, and T. Thorburn. 2016. Blueprints for Change in Post-Tsunami Aceh, Indonesia. In Rebuilding Asia Following Natural Disasters: Approaches to Reconstruction in the Asia-Pacific Region, ed. P. Daly and R.M. Feener, 1–56. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Daly, P. 2015. Embedded Wisdom or Rooted Problems? Aid workers’ Perspectives on Local Social and Political Infrastructure in Post-Tsunami Aceh. Disasters 39 (2): 232–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Daly, P. 2016. Cycles of Destruction and Reconstruction: Responding to Disasters in Asia. In Rebuilding Asia Following Natural Disasters: Approaches to Reconstruction in the Asia-Pacific Region, ed. P. Daly and R.M. Feener, 1–56. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Davidson, J., and D. Henley (eds.). 2007. The Revival of Tradition in Indonesian Politics: The Deployment of Adat from Colonialism to Indigenism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. de Vries, M.W. 1995. Culture, Community and Catastrophe: Issues in Understanding Communities Under Difficult Conditions. In Extreme Stress and Communities: Impact and Intervention, ed. S.E. Hobfoll and M.W. de Vries, 375–393. Netherlands: Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  25. Dixon, R., and A. McGregor. 2011. Grassroots Development and Upwards Accountabilities: Tensions in the Reconstruction of Aceh’s Fishing Industry. Development and Change 42 (6): 1349–1377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Doberstein, B., and H. Stager. 2013. Towards Guidelines for Post-Disaster Vulnerability Reduction in Informal Settlements. Disasters 37 (1): 28–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Edmonds, K. 2013. Beyond Good Intentions: The Structural Limitations of NGOs in Haiti. Critical Sociology 39 (3): 439–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Feener, R.M., and P. Daly. 2016. Religion and Reconstruction in the Wake of Disaster. Asian Ethnology 75 (1): 191–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Feener, R.M. 2014. Shari’a and Social Engineering: The Implementation of Islamic Law in Contemporary Aceh, Indonesia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Feener, R.M. 2012. Social Engineering Through Shari’a: Islamic Law and State-Directed da’wa in Contemporary Aceh. Islamic Law and Society 19: 275–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Fitzpatrick, D. 2008a. Managing Conflict and Sustaining Recovery: Land Administration Reform in Tsunami-Affected Aceh. ARI Working Paper 004, Asia Research Institute, National University of Singapore.Google Scholar
  32. Fitzpatrick, D. 2008b. Women’s Rights to Land and Housing in Tsunami-Affected Aceh, Indonesia, ARI Working Paper 003, Asia Research Institute, National University of Singapore.Google Scholar
  33. Fitzpatrick, D. 2008c. Access to Housing for Renters and Squatters in Tsunami-Affected Aceh, Indonesia, ARI Working Paper 002, Asia Research Institute, National University of Singapore.Google Scholar
  34. Fitzpatrick, D. 2008d. Housing for the Landless: Resettlement in Tsunami-Affected Aceh, Indonesia, ARI Working Paper 001, Asia Research Institute, National University of Singapore.Google Scholar
  35. Fountain, P., and L. McLaughlin. 2016. Salvage and Salvation: Guest Editors’ Introduction. Asian Ethnology 75 (1): 1–29.Google Scholar
  36. Gaillard, J.C., E. Clavé, and I. Kelman. 2008. Wave of Peace? Tsunami Disaster Diplomacy in Aceh. Indonesia. Geoforum 39 (1): 511–526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Gaillard, J.C., and P. Texier. 2010. Religions, Natural Hazards, and Disasters: An Introduction. Religion 40 (2): 81–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Gibbs, L. 1982. Community Response to an Emergency Situation: Psychological Destruction and the Love Canal. American Journal of Community Psychology 11: 116–125.Google Scholar
  39. Gilbert, D., and D. Silvera. 1996. Overhelping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70 (4): 678–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Gist, R., and B. Lubin. 1999. Response to Disaster: Psychological, Community, and Ecological Approaches. New York: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  41. Government of Indonesia. 2005. Master Plan for the Rehabilitation and Reconstruction of the Regions and Communities of the Province of Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam and the Islands of Nias, Province of North Sumatra. http://www.recoveryplatform.org/assets/submissions/200909020450_master_plan_for_reconstruction__government_of_indonesia__tsunami.pdf. Accessed 23 Jan 2017.
  42. Hagelsteen, M., and P. Becker. 2013. Challenging Disparities in Capacity Development for Disaster Risk Reduction. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 3: 4–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Hutchison, E. 2014. A global Politics of Pity? Disaster Imagery and the Emotional Construction of Solidarity After the 2004 Asian Tsunami. International Political Sociology 8 (1): 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Jha, A., J. Barenstein, P. Phelps, D. Pittet, and S. Sena. 2010. Safer Homes. Stronger Communities: A Handbook for Reconstructing after Natural Disasters. World Bank.Google Scholar
  45. Kenny, S. 2007. Reconstruction in Aceh: Building Whose Capacity? Community Development Journal 42 (2): 206–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kyamusugulwa, P.M. 2013. Local Ownership in Community-Driven Reconstruction in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Community Development 44 (3): 364–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lyons, M. 2009. Building Back Better: The Large-Scale Impact of Small-Scale Approaches to reconstruction. World Development 37 (2): 385–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. MacRae, G. 2008. Could the System Work Better? Scale and Local Knowledge in Humanitarian Relief. Development in Practice 18 (2): 190–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. MacRae, G., and D. Hodgkin. 2016. Beyond the 2006 Yogyakarta Earthquake: From Sectors to Clusters in the International Humanitarian System. In Rebuilding Asia Following Natural Disasters: Approaches to Reconstruction in the Asia–Pacific Region, ed. P. Daly and R.M. Feener, 261–283. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Mahdi, S. 2012. Factors Determining the Movements of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) in Aceh. In From the Ground Up: Perspectives on Post-tsunami and Post-conflict Aceh, ed. P. Daly, R.M. Feener, and A. Reid, 57–79. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.Google Scholar
  51. McKeon, J. 2008. World Bank: Tracking Reconstruction Funds in Indonesia After the 2004 Earthquake and Tsunami. In Data Against Natural Disasters: Establishing Effective Systems for Relief, Recovery, and Reconstruction, ed. S. Amin and M. Goldstein, 185–232. Washington: The World Bank.Google Scholar
  52. Older, M. 2015. When is too Much Money Worse than too Little? Giving, Aid, and Impact After the Indian Ocean Tsunami of 2004. In Recovery from the Indian Ocean Tsunami, ed. R. Shaw, 121–137. Tokyo: Springer.Google Scholar
  53. Oliver-Smith, A. 1996. Anthropological Research on Hazards and Disasters. Annual Review Anthropology 25: 303–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Omer, H., and N. Alon. 1994. The Continuity Principle: A Unified Approach to Disaster and Trauma. American Journal of Commonly Psychology 22 (2): 273–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Ophiyandri, T., D. Amaratunga, C. Pathirage, and K. Keraminiyage. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Oxfam. 2003. Guidelines for Post Disaster Housing Reconstruction. Oxfam UK. http://www.ifrc.org/PageFiles/95751/B.d.03.%20Guidelines%20for%20Post%20Disaster%20Housing%20%20version%201_OXFAM%20GB.pdf. Accessed 23 Jan 2017.
  57. Pandya, C. 2006. Private Authority and Disaster Relief: The Cases of Post-Tsunami Aceh and Nias. Critical Asian Studies 38 (2): 298–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Rahmayati, Y. 2016a. Reframing ‘Building Back Better’ for Post-Disaster Housing Design: A Community Perspective. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment 7 (4): 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Rahmayati, Y. 2016b. Post-disaster Housing: Translating Socio-Cultural Findings into Usable Design Technical Inputs. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 17: 173–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Reid, A. 2004. An Indonesian Frontier: Acehnese and Other Histories of Sumatra. Singapore: Singapore University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Reid, A. (ed.). 2006. Verandah of Violence: The Historical Background of the Aceh Problem. Singapore: Singapore University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Rich, R., M. Edelstein, M. Hallman, and A. Wandersman. 1995. Citizen Participation and Empowerment: The Case of Local Environmental Hazards. American Journal of Community Psychology 23 (5): 657–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Scott, J.C. 1985. Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Resistance. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Smirl, L. 2015. Spaces of Aid: How Cars, Compounds and Hotels Shape Humanitarianism. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  65. Telford, J., and J. Cosgrave. 2007. The International Humanitarian System and the 2004 Indian Ocean Earthquake and Tsunamis. Disasters 31 (1): 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. The Sphere Project. 2004. Humanitarian Charter and Minimum Standards in Disaster Response. Geneva: The Sphere Project.Google Scholar
  67. Thorburn, C. 2007. The Acehnese Gampong Three Years On: Assessing Local Capacity and Reconstruction Assistance in Post-tsunami Aceh. Report on the Aceh Community Assistance Research Project (ACARP).Google Scholar
  68. Thorburn, C., and B. Rochelle. 2014. The Acehnese Gampong Ten Years On: A Post-post Tsunami Assessment. Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Government of Australia; ICAIOS; Earth Observatory of Singapore; Monash University. http://artsonline.monash.edu.au/wp-content/arts-files/ges/Acehnese-Gampong-Ten-Years-On.pdf. Accessed 23 Jan 2017.
  69. UNDP. 2010. Evaluation of UNDP Contribution to Disaster Prevention and Recovery. United Nations Development Programme. http://www.oecd.org/derec/undp/47871337.pdf. Accessed 23 Jan 2017.
  70. Vale, L., and T. Campanella. 2005. The Resilient City: How Modern Cities Recover from Disaster. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Von Vacano, M., and S. Schwarz. 2014. The Religious Dimension of Coping: The Roles of Cosmologies and Religious Practices. In Cultural Psychology of Coping with Disasters, ed. M. Zaumseil, M. Von Vacano, S. Schwarz, G.B. Sullivan, and J.E. Prawitasari-Hadiyono, 245–264. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. World Bank. 2000. Working Together: The World Bank’s Partnership with Civil Society. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/477131468767089339/pdf/multi-page.pdf. Accessed 23 Jan 2017.
  73. Zeccola, P. 2011. Dividing Disasters in Aceh, Indonesia: Separatist Conflict and Tsunami, Human Rights and Humanitarianism. Disasters 35 (2): 308–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Earth Observatory of Singapore, Nanyang Technological UniversitySingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations