Navigating multidimensional household recoveries following the 2015 Nepal earthquakes

• Published in: World development Vol. 135; p. 105041
• Main Authors: Spoon, Jeremy, Gerkey, Drew, Chhetri, Ram Bahadur, Rai, Alisa, Basnet, Umesh
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Oxford Elsevier Ltd 01.11.2020; Elsevier Science Publishers; Pergamon Press Inc
• Subjects: Access; Analysis; Asia; Camps; Clearing houses; Clusters; Development aid; Disaster recovery; Disasters; Districts; Earthquakes; Economic conditions; Households; Infrastructure; Integrated social and environmental systems; Intervals; Measures; Mountains; Multidimensional scaling; Natural disasters; Nepal; Non-metric multidimensional scaling; Nonlinear dynamics; Ordination; Polls & surveys; Quantitative analysis; Relocation; Residential areas; Resilience; Rural areas; Seismic activity; Seismology; Settlements & damages; Workshops; Nepal; Non-metric multidimensional scaling; Asia; Nepal; Disaster recovery; Integrated social and environmental systems; Resilience
• ISSN: 0305-750X; 1873-5991
• DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105041

•Unique dataset features a random sample of 400 households over two short-term post-disaster time-intervals.•Presents new method for analyzing recovery as a multidimensional phenomenon, combining >30 recovery indicators with outreach.•Empirical analysis of linear and non-linear recovery dynamics.•Disaster recovery was more difficult for households dependent on agropastoral livelihoods and that experienced displacement.•Quantatative analysis contextualized with qualitative research on displacement, liminality, access , aid, and work exchange. Natural disaster recovery is multidimensional and takes time depending on vulnerabilities. Change occurs as households embedded within integrated social and environmental systems adapt or transform. We focus on the April/May 2015 Nepal earthquakes to understand rural natural disaster recovery. We conducted household surveys on critical earthquake impacts and recovery trajectories with 400 randomly selected households in four clusters of settlements in two districts with catastrophic impacts to all houses and infrastructure. To track rapid change in the short-term, we completed surveys at two intervals—approximately 9 months and 1.5 years. Using non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) ordination, our analysis explores relationships among critical recovery indicators, households, and clusters of settlements. Disaster recovery for these rural mountain households and settlements was spatially and culturally heterogenous, context specific, and changing over time, for better and worse. First, households dependent on place-based agropastoral livelihoods had more challenges recovering compared to households with more diverse market-based livelihoods. Second, the experiences of households in displacement camps were distinct from non-displaced households. Third, accessibility was a determining factor in recovery but not consistently. Fourth, households in the planned dam inundation zone were stagnant waiting for relocation. We presented results to research participants and stakeholders 2.5 years after the earthquakes in a series of research return workshops, which linked the results of our quantitative analysis with study participant experiences and perspectives. Our research contributes to the disaster and development aid literature in four ways by: 1) providing a unique dataset with a random sample over two time intervals collected immediately following a natural disaster; 2) offering a methodology that documents and analyzes recovery as a multidimensional phenomenon; 3) empirically illustrating linear and non-linear disaster recovery dynamics; and 4) capturing the complexity of variation at the household and settlement levels while also identifying patterns that resonate on the ground.