Abstract
The Tsunami disaster that struck most of the coastal communities in Sri Lanka displaced hundreds of thousands of people and destroyed most of their assets and properties. Many families lost one or more members leading to traumatization of those who survived.
Though the disaster did not distinguish between classes, ethnic or other divisions in society, the vast majority of the people adversely affected were the poor who were living in make- shift houses with minimal resources and assets. They were the most vulnerable because the poor had the least capacity to recover and adapt in the emergent situation after the disaster. They continue to be dependent on external assistance, both public and private. On the other hand, the well –to do people with links to institutions and resourceful individuals have been able to re-establish their livelihoods and residential facilities rapidly. Yet, many poor and the powerless people continue to live in temporary shelters and depend on hand -out, even after more than one year since the disaster.
The poor and the powerless displaced by development projects in Sri Lanka continued to suffer due to lack of institutional safeguards until about four years back. The formulation of a national Involuntary Resettlement Policy by the government of Sri Lanka in 2001 has improved the situation significantly. Displaced persons are entitled to be properly compensated under this policy. The lack of a similar institutional mechanism to address the problems faced by the victims of a disaster like the Tsunami has left many victims in a precarious situation with no clear perspective for their future. The paper documents the situation of disaster victims in a number of selected coastal communities in Southern and Eastern Sri Lanka affected by the Tsunami and examines how a formal institutional mechanism would have improved their lot. The paper also outlines the institutional issues of disaster management, in particular, the impact of the marginalization of local institutions on the implementation process, leading to inequities, tensions and exclusions within and across communities. While it is necessary to develop a comprehensive national policy framework and institutional mechanisms for implementation, it is equally important to empower local institutions and local communities to ensure equity, inclusion and people’s participation. The development of national policy itself should be based on wide public consultation, giving opportunities to actual and potential victims to express their views, desires and concerns.
The formulation of a national policy and the development of institutional mechanisms for implementation can be considered as an integral part of disaster preparedness given the increasing frequency of national disasters like floods, cyclones, droughts, earth slips, etc. A comprehensive policy can address issues of not only mitigation and rehabilitation of victims but also of prevention or reduction of adverse impacts of disasters.
|