Self-recovery housing for development: scaling up crisis preparedness and humanitarian shelter response

该项目直接建立在之前的两个GCRF奖项之上：1个NERC复原力基金会奖：促进更安全的建筑——利用科学、技术、通信和人道主义实践支持家庭和社区自我恢复。2英国学术城市与基础设施：更安全的自我恢复：促进灾后弹性城市重建。商业案例中描述了这两个项目的主要发现。欲了解更多GCRF往届奖项的调查结果，请参见：https://www.odi.org/publications/10963-self-recovery-disasters-interdisciplinary-perspectiveEarthquakes。风暴、洪水和冲突对基础设施、服务、农业和生计造成了难以估量的破坏。住房的破坏往往是最明显的，对家庭来说也是最具破坏性的，通常有数十万所房屋被毁。户主自己总是第一个做出反应；他们从不被动，从灾难发生后的第一天起，避难所恢复的迹象就非常明显。大多数人——多达80%或90%——很少或根本没有得到国际社会的援助，而且是他们自己恢复进程的主要推动力。这个过程被称为“自我恢复”。以前的GCRF奖项支持由ODI领导的跨学科团队，与CARE International UK， BGS， UCL和拉夫堡大学合作。他们发展了对自我恢复过程的理解，并在实践中为支持自我恢复的过程提供了人道主义援助的理论基础。在很大程度上，由于这项工作，自我恢复现在是人道主义住房部门话语的一个战略要素，许多灾害反应旨在支持这一不可避免的进程。认识到以人为本的方法的价值，摆脱了公约以产品为基础的模式，菲律宾援外社气旋后自我恢复项目获得了2018年世界人居奖，以表彰其对自我恢复的关注。建造了一万六千座房屋，每一座都是独特的，反映了每个家庭的优先事项和手段。https://www.world-habitat.org/world-habitat-awards/winners-and-finalists/post-haiyan-self-recovery-housing-programme/The尊重机构和选择的首要地位的自我恢复方法与当前的人道主义和发展问题非常一致，例如“人道主义发展联系”、强调本地化、参与和以现金为基础的反应的大交易、仙台减少灾害风险框架、可持续发展目标和全球住房集群战略。这将在业务案例中进一步解释。然而，在制定实践指南方面做得很少。除了为技术教育材料的开发提供指导的“为更好的住房提供选择”协议外，没有出版的工具或指导方针为住房项目的自我恢复提供实施框架。本项目解决了这一差距。将对该议定书进行调整，使其成为一种备灾工具。将设计一种“环境分析”方法，以结合自我恢复方法所必需的适应性和多样性。将制定监测和评价工具，重点放在以幸存者为主导的指标上，包括对良好住房方案的广泛定义，其中包括健康、生计、卫生、保护和基于性别的暴力，以及对结构安全和建筑质量的传统关注。该方法将包括实地工作和案例研究以及行动研究或实时研究，这将直接支持快速发生的灾害反应，直接有助于灾后立即制定战略。人道主义部门将彻底审查所有产出，并将其直接纳入实践。

This project builds directly upon two previous GCRF awards: 1 NERC Resilience Foundation Award: Promoting Safer Building - Using science, technology, communication and humanitarian practice to support family and community self-recovery. 2 British Academy Cities and Infrastructure: Safer self-recovery: promoting resilient urban reconstruction after disasters. The key findings of both these projects are described in the Business Case. For more on the findings of previous GCRF awards see: https://www.odi.org/publications/10963-self-recovery-disasters-interdisciplinary-perspectiveEarthquakes, storms, floods, and conflict cause untold damage to infrastructure, services, agriculture and livelihoods. The destruction of housing is often most visible, and the most devastating to the families, with often hundreds of thousands of homes destroyed. Householders themselves are invariably the first to respond; they are never passive, and signs of shelter recovery are very apparent from the first days after a disaster. The majority - as many as 80 or 90% - receive little or no assistance from the international community and are the main drivers of their own recovery process. This process has been termed 'self-recovery'. The previous GCRF awards supported interdisciplinary teams led by ODI in collaboration with CARE International UK, BGS, UCL and Loughborough University. They developed the understanding of the self-recovery process and advanced the theoretical basis for humanitarian assistance to the process of supporting self-recovery in practice . In large part as a result of this work, self-recovery is now a strategic element of the humanitarian shelter sector discourse with many disaster responses purporting to support this inevitable process. In recognition of the value of a people-centred approach that moves away from the convention product-based modalities, the CARE Philippines post-cyclone self-recovery project won the 2018 World Habitat Award in acknowledgment of its self-recovery focus. Sixteen thousand houses were built, each one unique and reflecting the priorities and means of each family. https://www.world-habitat.org/world-habitat-awards/winners-and-finalists/post-haiyan-self-recovery-housing-programme/The self-recovery approach that respects the primacy of agency and choice aligns well with current humanitarian and development concerns such as the 'humanitarian development nexus', the Grand Bargain's emphasis on localisation, participation and cash-based responses, the Sendai Framework on Disaster Risk Reduction, the Sustainable Development Goals and the Global Shelter Cluster strategy. This is further explained in the Business Case. However, very little has been done to develop guidance for practice. With the exception of the protocol 'Informing Choice for Better Shelter' that delivers a guide for the development of technical educational material, there are no published tools nor guidelines that provide an implementation framework for self-recovery in shelter projects.This project addresses this gap. The protocol will be adapted to become a preparedness tool. A methodology for 'context analysis' will be designed to incorporate the adaptability and diversity essential to a self-recovery approach. Monitoring and evaluation tools will be developed that focus on survivor-led indicators and that include a broad definition of good shelter programming that includes health, livelihoods, sanitation, protection and gender-based violence as well as the conventional focus on structural safety and construction quality.The methodology will include field-work and case studies as well as action research, or real time research, that will directly support rapid-onset disaster responses contributing directly to development of strategies in the immediate aftermath of a disaster. All outputs will be thoroughly scrutinised by the humanitarian sector and incorporated directly into practice.