@article {bnh-6774, title = {Unpacking the meaning of resilience: the Tarnagulla community definition comparing to the literature}, journal = {Australian Journal of Emergency Management}, volume = {35}, year = {2020}, month = {01/2020}, pages = {29-37}, abstract = {

In 2018, the Tarnagulla Alternative Energy Group in regional Victoria took steps to plan futures for their town and its local community that strengthened resilience to the many challenges in the area including those from climate change. Believing that {\textquoteright}anticipation strategies work against known problems, while resilient strategies are better against unknown problems{\textquoteright} (IFRC 2012, p.5) the group turned to the RMIT Climate Change Transformations group to unpack the meaning of resilience as it related to the town and community. The purpose was to produce a locally-focused Resilience Action Plan. Despite an international consensus and media propagation of resilience as a silver bullet to address future uncertainties, the concept remains contentious and challenging to implement. This paper considers how the various framings of resilience - the {\textquoteright}conceptual{\textquoteright} (in literature) and the {\textquoteright}operational{\textquoteright} (in policy) - relate to the Tarnagulla community{\textquoteright}s lived experience and the implications. The comparison allows to unpack a mixture of the complexities in understanding the nature of values, preferences, expectations, capacities, contested knowledge, as well as, the uncertainties. Study findings show that communities are best placed to frame their resilience, collectively and from a {\textquoteright}systems{\textquoteright} perspective, and that implementing actions, which may require radical change, hinge on a political voice and sustained support from policy makers.

}, keywords = {Climate change, community, operational, resilience, strategies}, url = {https://knowledge.aidr.org.au/resources/ajem-january-2020-unpacking-the-meaning-of-resilience-the-tarnagulla-community-definition-comparing-to-the-literature/}, author = {Mittul Vahanvati} } @article {bnh-7233, title = {Reliability of Build Back Better at enhancing resilience of communities}, journal = { International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment}, volume = {10}, year = {2019}, month = {08/2019}, pages = {208-221}, abstract = {

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to analyse the reliability of Build Back Better slogan in the context of post-disaster housing reconstruction in developing countries, at enhancing disaster-resilience of housing and its occupants in the long term from socio-ecological systems resilience perspective.

Design/methodology/approach

A predominantly qualitative methodology and multi-disciplinary case study methodology is adopted to compare long-term outcomes of two post-disaster housing reconstruction interventions: post-2008 Bihar Kosi River floods in India and post-2010 Mentawai earthquake and tsunami in Indonesia.

Findings

Out of the nine generalizable findings, two of the most significant findings include giving freedom of choice or human capabilities to the disaster survivors and sustaining capacity development during and beyond the completion of housing reconstruction. These two processes play a significant role in linking reconstruction to resilience in the long term, especially of those living at- risk and poverty.

Originality/value

This paper further advances the current scholarship on overarching long-term impacts of housing reconstruction efforts, based on longitudinal and empirical studies in India and Indonesia. While these findings represent a snapshot of diverse and complex disaster experiences in the developing-world context, the comparison offers insight into how to turn the rhetoric surrounding {\textquotedblleft}owner-driven{\textquotedblright} or {\textquotedblleft}built back better{\textquotedblright} into long-term resilience outcomes.

}, keywords = {Capacity building; post-disaster reconstruction}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1108/IJDRBE-05-2019-0025}, url = {https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IJDRBE-05-2019-0025/full/html}, author = {Mittul Vahanvati and Irina Rafliana} } @article {bnh-7234, title = {A novel framework for owner driven reconstruction projects to enhance disaster resilience in the long term}, journal = {Disaster Prevention and Management}, volume = {27}, year = {2018}, month = {08/2018}, pages = {421-446}, abstract = {

Purpose

Post-disaster reconstruction poses a double-edged sword to its implementers as it demands addressing survivors{\textquoteright} need for speed as well as meeting the growing expectation to trigger resilience. While an owner-driven housing reconstruction (ODHR), inter-disciplinary and long-term approach has been promoted internationally; however, there is limited research focussed on the long-term impacts (\>10 years after a disaster) of ODHR. Furthermore, there is no one accepted framework for practitioners to guide through the process of ODHR projects to carve pathways for disaster resilience. The purpose of this paper is to assimilate findings{\textemdash}contingent and generalisable{\textemdash}into a novel framework for future change in practice.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper deployed a mixed methods methodology with a comparative case study research method. Two case study projects were from the Indian state of Gujarat, 13 years after the 2001 earthquake and the other two from Bihar, 6 years since the 2008 Kosi river floods. Due to multi-disciplinary nature of research, empirical data collection relied on a mix of social sciences methods including 80 semi-structured interviews, and architectural research methods including the visual analysis of photographs and sketches. Three sample groups of agency members, beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries were purposively selected. Thematic content analysis was used for the data analysis.

Findings

The paper provides empirical insights on how ODHR projects in Indian states of Gujarat and Bihar succeeded at enhancing disaster resilience of communities. It suggests that the civil society organisations acted as {\textquotedblleft}enablers{\textquotedblright} at four stages: envisioning strategically based on systemic understanding, building soft assets including community trust and dignity for social mobilisation prior to, proposing minor modifications to construction technology for its multi-hazard safety as well as cultural relevance, and sustaining capacity building efforts beyond reconstruction completion or beyond one project life-cycle.

Research limitations/implications

The author of this paper cautions that the spiral framework needs further development to make it flexibility and customisable to suit the specifics of a particular context.

Originality/value

The implications of the findings discussed in this paper are primarily for practitioners involved in disaster recovery and development sector. Since prevailing models or frameworks neither incorporate multi-disciplinary approach (demanded by socio-ecological systems resilience concept), nor represent project scale, a novel, four-pronged framework for ODHR has been proposed in this paper for strategic success. The framework has been illustrated in spiral and tabular forms, and has been kept abstract to provide practitioners the much-needed flexibility for adapting it to suit the specifics of a particular context.

}, keywords = {Capacity building; post-disaster reconstruction, disaster resilience, framework, owner-driven reconstruction, project management}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1108/DPM-11-2017-0285}, url = {https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/DPM-11-2017-0285/full/html}, author = {Mittul Vahanvati} } @mastersthesis {bnh-5324, title = {Owner-driven housing reconstruction as a means of enhancing disaster resilience of at-risk communities in India}, year = {2018}, month = {05/2018}, pages = {247}, school = {RMIT University}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

A key question facing disaster recovery scholars and practitioners is the mode of reconstruction in post-disaster context so as to trigger adaptability in the construction sector and disaster resilience in residents. Despite significant advancement in theoretical understanding of concepts (disaster, disaster risk, vulnerability and socio-ecological systems (SES) resilience) and approaches to post-disaster recovery (process-driven, multi-stakeholder, cross-disciplinary and an owner-driven housing reconstruction (ODHR)), linking reconstruction to resilience remains problematic. The literature review presented in this PhD with Publication discusses two main hurdles in reconstruction contributing to resilience objectives, as: one, a rather narrow focus on one{\textquoteright}s field of expertise and two, the lack of research focused on the long-term impacts of ODHR projects. This PhD with publication aims to identify contingent yet generalisable issues and factors, which determine the success or failure of projects in terms of enhancing disaster resilience and long-term developmental needs of the community.

In order to address the identified gap in the ODHR literature, this PhD has deployed a comparative case study research methodology, predominantly using qualitative/interpretative research methods. A mixed methods methodology, including some methods taken from built environment research and others from the social science, has been used. Four ODHR projects were selected from rural parts of India: two are from Gujarat, following the 2001 earthquake, while the other two case studies are from Bihar, after the 2008 Kosi River floods. The case studies in Gujarat allow investigating the long-term outcomes of the ODHR (13 years after the disaster), Bihar allows for the medium-term outcomes (6 years after the disaster). This research has been conducted in two stages and includes 80 in-depth interviews were conducted, including 34 CSO members, professionals and government official, 37 beneficiaries and 9 nonbeneficiaries.

The research findings from the four ODHR projects prove that the Indian CSOs have been able to link ODHR projects to long-term disaster resilience impacts in ways that have international significance. The CSO practice {\textendash} from 2001 to 2008 {\textendash} had also evolved from being {\textquoteleft}facilitators{\textquoteright} to {\textquoteleft}enablers{\textquoteright}, seeking to build the capacities of locals from the early stages of reconstruction. These findings suggest that the projects where CSOs ensured: 1) systems based\ and strategic envisioning, 2) social mobilisation, 3) proposing minor technical modifications, and 4) sustaining capacity building efforts beyond reconstruction completion or beyond one project life cycle, had the potential to leave a legacy of disaster resilience (self-organising and capable residents). The findings were assimilated in a novel ODHR framework and illustrated in spiral form for use by practitioners, globally. The development of this framework is the most significant outcome of this PhD. However, the author urges practitioners to customise the framework to suit a particular context and to address its systemic challenges, prior to use. The most significant finding of all was a need to enhance people{\textquoteright}s capabilities {\textendash} their freedom to choose {\textendash} to maintain their own disaster resilience.

}, url = {https://researchbank.rmit.edu.au/eserv/rmit:162406/Vahanvati.pdf}, author = {Mittul Vahanvati} } @article {bnh-7443, title = {A new model for effective post-disaster housing reconstruction: Lessons from Gujarat and Bihar in India}, journal = {International Journal of Project Management}, volume = {35}, year = {2017}, month = {07/2017}, abstract = {

This paper critiques the traditional project management (PM) approach for post-disaster reconstruction work in relation to long-term effectiveness at strengthening disaster resilience of communities. While assessments of post-disaster reconstruction projects normally occurs within a few years of the disaster this paper is based on a study of four {\textquoteleft}good practice{\textquoteright} reconstruction projects, 15years after the earthquake and seven years after the flooding disaster from the Indian states of Gujarat and Bihar respectively. This extended timeframe enabled the examination of long-term outcomes related to disaster resilience of communities. The comparison of the four case study projects through extended timeframe enabled authors to articulate critical success factors contributing to project{\textquoteright}s effectiveness. The research found that the best long-term outcomes were achieved when the agencies implementing post-disaster housing reconstruction projects: 1) adopted an {\textquoteleft}agile{\textquoteright} approach to project planning and implementation; 2) allocated\ ample time\ for gaining and maintaining community trust; iii) provided multiple materials, technologies and skilled labour choices to ensure hazard-safety of housing, and (iv) continued community capacity building beyond the completion of the reconstruction work. These imperatives have prompted the development of a progressive, spiral model for effective post-disaster housing reconstruction project management which is presented in this paper.

}, keywords = {Community capacity, Housing reconstruction, India, Post-disaster project management, Project life-cycle, resilience}, doi = {10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.02.002}, url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0263786317301618}, author = {Mittul Vahanvati and Martin Mulligan} } @article {bnh-7444, title = {An owner-driven reconstruction in Bihar}, journal = {International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment}, volume = {8}, year = {2017}, month = {06/2017}, abstract = {

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to identify {\textquotedblleft}key processes{\textquotedblright} during the owner-driven reconstruction (ODR) process by implementing agencies, to enhance the long-term disaster-resilience of housing and community.

Design/methodology/approach

A mixed methods methodology and {\textquotedblleft}case-study{\textquotedblright} approach is adopted to compare good practice reconstruction projects in India in the past 15 years. This paper discusses findings from investigations conducted in two settlements of Bihar {\textendash} Orlaha and Puraini, after major flooding in 2008. The sites were visited during 2012 and 2014.

Findings

One of the key processes that lead to the success of the ODR process in terms of its effect on the long-term disaster-resilience in Bihar is community mobilisation it functions primarily as an information and communication device promoting the success (or otherwise) of the reconstruction project.

Originality/value

The findings are based on empirical evidence gathered during in-field investigations and interviews to post-disaster reconstructed villages. While these findings represent a snapshot of diverse and complex disaster experiences in the Indian context, the comparison offers insight on how to turn the rhetoric surrounding {\textquotedblleft}owner-driven{\textquotedblright} or {\textquotedblleft}built back better{\textquotedblright} into positive long-term community outcomes.

}, keywords = {Built Environment, owner driven, Participatory approach, post-disaster reconstruction, resilience}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1108/IJDRBE-10-2015-0051}, url = {https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IJDRBE-10-2015-0051/full/html}, author = {Mittul Vahanvati and Beau Beza} } @inbook {bnh-7235, title = {Participation for Disaster Resilience}, booktitle = {Community Engagement in Post-Disaster Recovery}, year = {2017}, publisher = {Routledge Taylor and Francis Group}, organization = {Routledge Taylor and Francis Group}, chapter = {6}, address = {United Kingdom}, abstract = {

This chapter addresses the question of how to enhance community participation in post-disaster housing reconstruction in order to enhance future {\textquoteleft}disaster resilience{\textquoteright}. Four {\textquoteleft}good practice{\textquoteright} reconstruction projects from the Indian states of Gujarat and Bihar are compared, to examine the long-term impact of different participatory approaches. The findings suggest a need to address strategic issues that go beyond one project life cycle of reconstruction projects. These findings are organised into an {\textquotedblleft}operational framework for community participation for resilience{\textquotedblright}, which can hopefully be a valuable tool for a wide range of disaster management agencies.

}, keywords = {community engagement, disaster, Housing, recovery, resilience}, issn = {9781315534213}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315534213}, url = {https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9781315534213/chapters/10.4324/9781315534213-6}, author = {Mittul Vahanvati} } @conference {bnh-7445, title = {Rural housing resilience in India: Is it reliant on appropriate technology or labour skills?}, booktitle = {Sustainable Futures Conference}, year = {2016}, month = {09/2016}, address = {Nairobi, Kenya}, abstract = {

The aim of this paper is to identify key approaches to housing reconstruction in India which demonstrate success in the: i) (re)building of resilient houses, ii) enabling of house-hold autonomy, and iii) enhancing of artisanal skills over the longer term (i.e. greater than 7 years since disaster). With the rising frequency and complexity of natural hazards, the need for resilience to be {\textquoteright}built in{\textquoteright} to housing reconstruction projects is urgent. To achieve the research aim, a mixed methods methodology and {\textquoteright}case study{\textquoteright} approach is used. Four good practice reconstruction projects in India are selected for comparative analysis, these are: i) Hodko and Patanka in Gujarat (post 2001 earthquake), and ii) Orlaha and Puraini in Bihar (post 2008 floods). This paper discusses findings from empirical investigations conducted using an analytical lifespan framework with the timescale tools reflecting an Input, Output, Results and Impact examination. The findings suggest that for reconstruction to be successful and, importantly, effective in terms of housing resilience the {\textquoteright}process{\textquoteright} must support the confidence of local households, use/employ the local labour fource and the up-skilling of these builders (who may also need on-going support for linkages to livelihood)

}, keywords = {Housing, Reconstruction, recover, resilience}, url = {https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Rural-housing-resilience-in-India\%3A-Is-it-reliant-on-Vahanvati-Beza/4fed0ed10a0f077fba67e1d28195aea0677097f8}, author = {Mittul Vahanvati and Beau Beza} } @book {bnh-7485, title = {Co-Building with Bamboo}, year = {2015}, publisher = {Grass giants}, organization = {Grass giants}, address = {Melbourne}, abstract = {

Our new book celebrating 10 years of building with bamboo. Co-building is the process of building something together with community members who have no stake in the outcome. This book shows how we have evolved our design and construction approach over the past 10 years. Our co-building with bamboo included over\ 500 participants\ in\ 35 workshops\ building\ 23 structures.

}, keywords = {bamboo, community, construction, recovery}, issn = {978-0-9944338-0-0}, url = {https://www.giantgrassdesign.com/store/p1/co-building_with_bamboo.html}, author = {Mittul Vahanvati and Munir Vahanvati} } @conference {bnh-7447, title = {Owner-Driven Reconstruction in India: A case-study of Kosi River Floods in Bihar}, booktitle = {5th International conference on building resilience}, year = {2015}, month = {07/2015}, address = {Newcastle, Australia}, abstract = {

An Owner-Driven Reconstruction (ODR) approach was adopted in the Indian state of Bihar, post 2008 Kosi River floods. This ODR was unique as it was piloted prior to policy formation. The paper discusses preliminary observations from empirical investigations conducted in two settlements of Bihar - Orlaha and Puraini, during 2012 and 2014. The aim was to identify {\textquoteleft}key processes{\textquoteright} or effectiveness of ODR approaches that enhance long-term disaster-resilience of housing and community autonomy. From the case-study investigations, one of the themes {\textendash} community facilitation is discussed, with its positives and negatives for future replication.

}, keywords = {disaster recovery, India, Owner-Driven-Reconstruction, Participation, resilience}, url = {https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/38780899/ANDROID_Doctoral_School_Proceedings_2015.pdf?1442351518=\&response-content-disposition=inline\%3B+filename\%3DProceedings_of_the_ANDROID_Doctoral_Scho.pdf\&Expires=1603196280\&Signature=cV4Dxewt0EFvZIrIiow2VHjBYNu}, author = {Mittul Vahanvati and Beau Beza} } @conference {bnh-7446, title = {Reviving people{\textquoteright}s trust in Bamboo technology: A case-study of Orlaha settlement reconstruction in Bihar, after the 2008 Kosi floods}, booktitle = {World Bamboo Congress}, year = {2015}, month = {09/2015}, address = {Damyang, Korea}, abstract = {

There is a growing body of literature suggesting significance of technical and social guidance during post-disaster housing reconstruction projects. Social process during reconstruction includes considerations of community participation or owner-driven approaches. Technical process includes considerations for achieving a balance between the world-views of beneficiaries and facilitators in terms of multi-hazard safe house form, material, technology, and its cultural, environmental and financial appropriateness. Research suggests that it is the approaches/ process to reconstruction implementation, on which, relies the long-term effectiveness of housing reconstruction projects at imparting disaster-resilience to at-risk communities (Barenstein \& Iyengar 2010; Jha et al. January 2010; Lizarralde et al. 2010; Lyons, Schilderman \& Boano 2010; Schilderman \& Lyons 2011). However, empirical evidence suggests that despite the benefits of and socio-technical support by civil society agencies for re-adoption of traditional materials and technologies for multi-hazard safe housing reconstruction, it often proves challenging. This paper focuses on the technological and social process of reconstruction in the settlement of Orlaha in Triveniganj block in Supaul district of the Indian state of Bihar, post 2008 Kosi floods. The paper presents preliminary observations from two field-works that were conducted during November-December months in 2012 (Stage-1) and 2014 (Stage-2). The paper examines whether the process of housing reconstruction enabled reviving household{\textquoteright}s faith in bamboo {\textendash} a local traditional material for achieving multi-hazard resistance as well as met their aspirations? The research asks questions such as; what is the condition of housing, 5 years since completion of reconstruction? How satisfied are households with their housing? What are the reasons for successful uptake or failure? The paper examines whether and how a convergence can be achieved between technology and social perception. To this end, the paper{\textquoteright}s findings indicate that post-disaster context offers a small window of opportunity during which local households are open for changing their perceptions for achieving multi-hazard resistant housing, provided the technical assistance is accompanied with social assistance.

}, keywords = {community, Flood, Reconstruction, recover, resilience}, url = {http://toc.proceedings.com/28028webtoc.pdf}, author = {Mittul Vahanvati and Munir Vahanvati} }