Reconstruction – what’s happening and what next?

Reconstruction Priorities

• Housing reconstruction

• Construction materials – problem & opportunity

• Cultural Heritage – Risk loosing cultural identity (and touristic attraction)

• Economic development (tourism; agriculture~?; construction materials)

• Project monitoring (WASH and Trails)

• IDPs / displacement

• Geo-hazard / landslides

NGO supported reconstruction – following Government’s “17 designs”, but incompatible with local architecture and rural agricultural livelihoods

The Tamang Heritage Trail

“Our fathers tell us that they want to erase our Tamang culture –none of these designs look like our houses. They want us to look like them.” – Galjung VDC homeowner, on the 17 approved housing designs

Runs through many earthquake affected communities

Pre-earthquake Tamang Heritage Trail publicity

An opportunity for DFID coherence: reconstruction of vernacular; tourism; job creation in local construction materials; basic services.

Retrofitting isn’t an option – it’s a necessity

• Most families have not waited for the Government and quickly reconstructed.

• Without retrofitting these buildings are highly unsafe – for generations to come (and unsuitable for tourism if not earthquake-compliant).

Details of daily life in the mountainsDesigns that match the people live in rural areas, for generations.Should recovery force these people to live in different style of housing

Or… Introduce designs to make traditional houses safe?

Gorkha: Different than Rasuwa’s Tamang trail, but also local heritage. Very good stone work and carpentry – only needs simple changes. Now it requires RETROFITTING to avoid future tragedy.

Watermills everywhere:

Huge tourist attraction!

Some positive examples

Safer local construction

Gorkha

Yet in the same village – completely unsafe construction continues

Government approved reconstruction – sporadic at present. For those that can secure loans or pre-financing.

A recent JICA study found 85% of reconstructed homes did not meet safety standards.

The old and the new: how modern, urban architecture doesn’t match rural vernacular – and could undermine social norms and ways of whole families living together.

Meanwhile, locals taking their own initiative, rebuilding in their traditional way, have limited guidance on how to integrate earthquake safety measures. Renewed emphasis on safe vernacular architecture is needed.

A Government / DUDBC technician – living in a village in Haku, Rasuwa, guiding people on how to rebuild following official guidance; to meet inspection guidelines and receive 2nd and 3rd tranche payments.

How to further support Govt. technicians?

- Training in retrofitting - NRA request: more senior

engineers for professional development

- HRRP district coordination

Rate of reconstruction not uniform – further North being left behind due to distance and prices of materials; relevance of “17 designs”.

• Moving away from traditional architecture threatens traditional ways of living together.

• People are being forced to chose between the official “17 designs” and preservation of their culture.

The Housing Grant is challenging for the most poor; many spent first 50,000 NPR on urgent needs. Additional finance or loans are needed to get construction started. The poorest most likely to live where resources are more expensive

Local materials supply

• Stone • Slate roof tiles • Wood • Compressed earth blocks

Need research & value chain assessments

Potential for significant local employment

Traditional roofing – locally sourced materials

- Slate and stone used for centuries- An integral part of local cultural

heritage- Materials research and value chain

analysis needed- Potential for local employment

Wooden shingles – traditional in some villages

Building Materials – Wood

Vital for reconstruction

High potential for inflation

Isolated communities: local options only

Potential for small scale industry in suitable forested areas.

Research needed on constraints to supply per region, options / alternatives. (Practical Action?)

Langtang – A sawmill was brought in by an INGO – could this be expanded to improve and increase wood supply?

• Distances and poor trails increase the price of goods• Promoting local production and distribution will save money and

create jobs

Source: Practical Action, 2016

*We are aiming to accomplish this in cooperation with INGOs, NGOs and other humanitarian actors in Nepal

A rare opportunity for women to work and earn a fair wage

Homes built to a high standard of earthquake – safety using these blocks

Restoring safe drinking water. Part of DFID-funded “Quick Wins” projects

The source is not protected as the catchment tank was damaged by the earthquake. Repair work starts in Feb

WASH Quick Wins Community work force – preparing for a new water supply system

Critical trails rehabilitationAnother DFID Quick Wins effort – to repair over 125 km of damaged and dangerous foot trails.

Trail repair work under way in Rasuwa district. Once complete mules can be used to carry goods, reducing the cost of transport; making medical evacuations safer, school access easier and providing jobs for many months.

At left: landslide risk – a challenge to be addressed.Right: newly built steps

View of the trail work from across the valley.

Approximately 1km of trail will be reconstructed in this community.

Denuded landscapes. Once covered in forest, now bare. Leaving communities highly exposed to landslides, drought, food insecurity and other crisis.

Geological Surveys: DFID supporting NRA to evaluate which areas are unsafe for reconstruction, resettlement or return.

Over 80 people died in this community when the earthquake triggered a major landslide.

Re-settlement Integration

Displaced population

Earthquake or landslide causing displacement

Return

Potential Solutions for Displaced Communities

Life in Displacement – these are the lucky ones, finding shelter in a small army-built structure. With no land or work, whole families break rock to earn just enough money to survive.

Ward 2 - partially

displaced

Ward 1 -

reconstructing

Displacement into

agricultural land

Resettlement above

Ward 1

Ward 4 -

destroyed

IDPs and Geo-hazard Surveys

• DFID supporting an Oxfam-led NGO consortium to ascertain extent of displacement

• And to support the Government to develop a policy on resettlement

• To communicate with communities on where it is safe to rebuild

• And where return is too risky – and Govt. enabled resettlement is a necessity

What do we take away – and take forward?

• Local cultural heritage at risk of disappearing in “urban” style reconstruction

• Many villages already reconstructed – without safety measures – in local style

• Need for retrofitting to avoid future tragedy

• Local construction materials = enormous job creation opportunity

• Tourism in Tamang areas offers high potential – discuss

• Champion resettlement for the displaced and most vulnerable

• Should we focus in on these highland areas and make a big impact in a target area – through an integrated approach?