Karunasena, G and Rameezdeen, R (2010) Post-disaster housing reconstruction: Comparative study of donor vs owner-driven approaches. International Journal of Disaster Resilience in the Built Environment, 1(2), pp. 173-191. ISSN 1759-5916
Abstract
Purpose: This paper aims to report the findings of a study, which analysed the strengths and limitations of two distinct concepts used for post-disaster housing reconstruction, namely, the donor-driven and owner-driven approaches. Design/methodology/approach: Data were gathered through interviews, questionnaire survey and observations from government, non-government organizations and the beneficiaries of owner-driven and donor-driven programmes in one of the affected districts. Findings: The paper reveals that beneficiary satisfaction is higher on owner-driven approach compared to the donor-driven approach. Further, imposition of the buffer zone, non-availability of suitable land and capacity constraints of the construction industry are identified as critical factors affecting the success of donor-driven housing programme. Research limitations/implications: It was assumed that the quickest and most effective way to rebuild houses after a disaster is to employ the "donor-driven" approach, where the government or an external funding agency leads the reconstruction process with the help of consultants and contractors procured for the project. Contrary to this popular view, this paper finds that there are limitations in this approach and that it may lead to housing that does not respond to needs of victims. Originality/value: This paper examines the strengths and weaknesses of the two strategies used in housing reconstruction and highlights the need for building regulations and technical assistance as key to overcome limitations of the owner-driven approach.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction works; housing; Sri Lanka; tidal waves |
| Index terms: | land, construction industry, donor, housing reconstruction, comparative study, funding, construction work, buffer, Sri Lanka, owner, critical factor, building regulation, reconstruction, satisfaction, agency, tidal wave, housing, post-disaster housing reconstruction, methodology, questionnaire, strategy, programme, survey, interview |
| Subjects: | Geography, financial risk, management, economic development, post-disaster and reconstruction, research methods, industry analysis, regulatory law, project controls, sociology, building construction, construction type, risk assessment, data collection methods, research design and methodology, environmental science, economic analysis, project delivery, real estate economics, operations management |
| Topics: | Time Control, Legal Issues, Urban Studies, Risk Management, Stakeholder Management, Construction Technology, Sustainability, Business Strategy, Cost Management, Research Practice, Geographical Context, Project Management, Engineering Principles |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here