Freeman, P K (2004) Allocation of post-disaster reconstruction financing to housing. Building Research & Information, 32(5), pp. 427-437. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
The allocation of a significant portion of post-natural disaster financing to housing reconstruction in poorer countries is examined. Many poorer countries are reliant on external assistance in the form of loans or grants to meet their post-disaster reconstruction needs. Today, half of all the post-disaster borrowing provided by the World Bank is earmarked for the reconstruction of housing. Should this high proportion of limited reconstruction funds be allocated to a fundamentally private sector need? Is such an allocation economically efficient? After exploring these questions, an alternative solution is examined for government funds to be allocated to high economic return projects (e.g. infrastructure) and to meeting the needs of the poor. The allocation of funding to housing, much of which is captured by the economic and social elite, seems a misallocation of scarce resources. This is particularly the case since the funding available for post-disaster reconstruction by the international financial institutions is constrained and unable to meet anticipated future demand.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | developing countries; disaster mitigation; disaster planning; disaster recovery; housing; post-disaster assistance; public policy; reconstruction funding; risk management |
| Index terms: | disaster recovery, housing, reconstruction, private sector, funding, World Bank, developing country, risk management, public policy, housing reconstruction, disaster planning, disaster mitigation, natural disaster, financing, post-disaster reconstruction |
| Subjects: | emergency and crisis management, construction type, public policy, economic analysis, industry analysis, building construction, post-disaster and reconstruction, development economics, risk assessment, institutional frameworks, environmental hazards |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Urban Studies, International Construction, Engineering Principles, Risk Management, Construction Technology, Business Strategy, Governance |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
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