A Periodic Needs Assessment for Community Recovery and Resilience

LONGITUDINAL STUDY OF MERAPI DISASTER IMPACT

Actors & Legal Basis

Longitudinal Study of Merapi Disaster impact are colaboration research conducted by Forum for Disaster Risk Reduction the Special Region of Yogyakarta Province and Central Java Province, Survey Meter, National Agency for Disaster Management, United Nations Development Programme, Pujiono Centre and Disaster Reseach and Management Centre of UPN Yogyakarta Legal basis in this research are (1) Disaster Management Law, number 24/2007; (2) Government Regulation number 21/2008 concerning Implementation of Disaster Management, (3) Ministry Regulation (issued by the Head of National Agency for Disaster Management) number 17/2010 on Guidelines for Rehabilitation and Reconstruction and (4) number 5/2012 on the Monitoring and Evaluation Guide for Rehabilitation and Reconstruction

Methodology, Benefits & Purposes

Longitudinal study is a periodic assessment BENEFITS: (1) Supports evidence-based in the disaster affected areas to policy, (2) Supports the development determine the level of socio-economic planning, (3) Supports the monitoring of the recovery and community resilience by development impacts, (4) Measures collecting information the same important aspects of development such as respondents over time on community disaster resilience and economic recovery. and household level. PURPOSES: (1) Measuring the impacts of the program. (2) Measuring the accuracy of the target program.(3) Measuring the capacity of the disasteraffected people in facing future disasters. (4) Identifying the need for financial support at the central and local levels. (5) Monitoring regularly the development of community resilience (6) Providing data and recommendations periodically for the improvement of policies

Sampling
The population are households and communities who live in Merapi affected area before the eruption Selected study area was done purposely, that is activity areas of Disaster Risk Reduction Forum of Yogyakarta Special Region Province Yogyakarta and Central Java Province. Sampling method is stratified multistage random sampling. The stratification is based on Disaster Prone Area of Merapi and Affected Area map of 2010 Merapi Eruption by the Geological Agency of Indonesia, Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources

Selection Process
Research area is divided into strata: 1. Area directly affected by eruption and suffered damage (ATLL); 2. Area affected by eruption but no extensive damage( ATL ); 3. Area affected by cold lahar (ATLH); 4. Control area Sample Selection Process for treatment area as follows: (1) Villages are randomly selected in each strata proportional to the number of villages in each strata (ATL,ATLL,ATLH); (2) In each selected village, a number of subvillages are selected proportional to the number of subvillages in the particular village; (3) In each selected subvillage 30 households are selected randomly; (4) Selected household is household who live in the selected subvillage shortly before Merapi erruption 2010

2 RESULT & SYNTHESIS

Impact 1
ECONOMIC IMPACT. The eruption has negative impact toward economy of the community. ATLL communities has direct relationship tendency between income and occupation as farmer and breeder. Lower intensity occurred in ATL communities then down into ATLH. INCOME CHANGES. The community was able to adapt their income with their needs. ATLL communities has the lowest adaptation ability in correspond with the biggest severity and loss level. Meanwhile, ATLH communities has good adaptation ability and even able to passing the income before eruption.

Impact 2
PHYSICAL IMPACT. ATLL and ATLH has same tendency. Both of them had losses in public service and access. SOCIAL IMPACT. It might be not peculiar if school facility of ATLL and ATL communities had damaged almost of all aspects (95%). However, the decreasing of ATLL communities participation about 82.7 % and 56.7% in ATL communities is a serious problem. This is the true failure of risk reduction activities.

Emergency Response 1
EMERGENCY RESPONSE FINANCING. During emergency response, ATLL communities caught all of organizations interest. NGO intervention in ATLL communities was 29 times above ATL, and Governmental Organization was 6 times. In other side, wee should be proud with the mobility of emergency response of NGO.

DISASTER REPONSE COORDINATION. Coordination meeting and discussion were held during disaster response. Is this a clue of a presence of contingency plan that implemented by parties around Mt. Merapi?

Emergency Response 2
REHABILITATION & RECONSTRUCTION. Biggest allocation spent on housing for ATL communities, which had ruined during eruption. The allocation later was given to infrastructural financing in ATL area, which after that, balanced economy and intersectoral field need to be allocated in ATLL and ATL communities. How about ATLH? It seems this program did not stands on ATLH communities.

Preparedness
COMMUNITY PREPAREDNESS. Prevalent level of understanding has been shown by the understanding and ownership of evacuation way, vehicle, and lamp which have a role as daily tools. The question is, why community did not have enough first aid and communication radio? HAZARD ASSESSMENT. ATLL communities has good implementation and understanding on threat assessment. This is reasonable because intervention of governmental organization and NGO, which those were implemented occasionally on 3th disaster-prone area (KRB 3).

Preparedness
REGULATION. It appears that the regulation did not much reach the communitys place. ATLL and ATLH communiies has shown a little understanding on spatial regulation KNOWLEDGE. Generally, the community grasped some practical knowledge on preparedness, forbidden area, and selfdefense ability from gas or volcanical sediment. However, these knowledge were not based on strong local understanding. INFORMATION SOURCES. The leader of a village is the key player in disseminating the knowledge and information, while Tim Siaga role is not really dominant? .

3 RECOMMENDATIONS

Recomenndation 1
ECONOMY, PHYSICAL & SOCIAL IMPACT. Need suitable adaptation skill in social economical strengthen (the access and control, volume increasing, and diversity). Re-strengthen on public service access should consider adaptation ability of the communities DISASTER RESPONSE COORDINATION. Routine coordination are needed (in order to be a habit) before disaster happened via disaster management plan, emergency plan, contingency plan, evacuation plan, and etc.

Recommendation 2
EMERGENCY RESPONSE, REHABILITATION, AND RECONSTRUCTION FINANCING. Handling the process of rehabilitation and reconstruction should be wise, stands on do not harm principle. Inequity will trigger conflicts between ATLL, ATL, and ATLH communities, and even lay community which unharmed. Need coordination between governmental organization, NGO, and business life in order to avoid overused and malfunction resources. Related with social impact, especially on public participation, rehabilitation and reconstruction on economical and physical things should be reconsidered.

Recommendation 3
COMMUNITY PREPAREDNESS & HAZARD UNDERSTANDING. Analysis on strengthen pattern are needed, therefore community are able to obtain better information and faster decision, and able to help effectively. Knowledge assessment for preparedness need to be widen for all the communities in 1st, 2nd, and 3rd disaster-prone area. COMMUNITY UNDERSTANDING, INFORMATION SOURCE, & REGULATION. Local knowledge need to be developed with science knowledge therefore it could form a habit and safe. Regulation need to be enlarged with political education, which seldom to be implemented recently. Because of the leader of the village role as key actor in disseminating the knowledge and information, optimization are needed. This is also an opportunity for tim siaga, governmental organization, NGO, and university together.

THANK YOU
Honorary Council of Forum for Disaster Risk Reduction The Special Region of Yogyakarta

Eko Teguh Paripurno

paripurno@upnyk.ac.id

SOURCE: Bambang Sulistianto, Longitudinal Studi as a Periodic Needs Assesment for Community Recovery and Recilience Bondan Sikoki, Longitudinal Study Merapi Eko Teguh Paripurn, Synthesis and Recommendation of Longitudinal Studi of Merapi Disaster