Previous relief effort hampered by rivalries between agencies, delivery of inappropriate aid and difficulty in managing the large sums of money donated.
Disaster experts warn on avoiding 2004 mistakes in Philippines Typhoon Haiyan relief
SYDNEY // Mistakes made in the relief effort after the catastrophic 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami must not be repeated with the super typhoon that has smashed the Philippines, disaster experts warned on Monday.
The humanitarian response to the tsunami, which left about 275,000 dead and wreaked havoc across Indonesia, India, Sri Lanka and Thailand nine years ago, sparked heated debate about the size, form and deployment of assistance.
Some observers, including the British Red Cross, complained that the relief effort was hampered by rivalries between agencies, delivery of inappropriate aid, and difficulty in managing the huge sums of money donated.
Others said much of the reconstruction funding that was promised was never actually distributed, while money was squandered due to corruption, mismanagement, and unnecessary duplication of aid efforts.
Survivors of Super Typhoon Haiyan – which is feared to have have killed more than 10,000 people – are growing increasingly desperate for aid and countries and organisations are scrambling to mobilise and donate.
But Martin Mulligan, chief investigator on a research project conducted for AusAID, the Australian government’s overseas aid agency, on what could be learned from the post-tsunami recovery in Sri Lanka and southern India, said it was important to get it right this time.
“It is always the most vulnerable people who bear the brunt of such ferocious disasters and I’m not convinced that the disaster response ‘industry’ has learnt the lessons on how to rebuild devastated communities,” he said.
“The immediate post-tsunami relief effort was impressive but many mistakes were made – perhaps inevitably – in the targeting of aid for long-term social recovery,” he said.
“Aid organisations undoubtedly have more to learn from post-tsunami success stories about how to work within traumatised communities in order to ensure that aid funding is well targeted and effective.”
Paul Arbon, director of the government-run Torrens Resilience Institute in South Australia that was set up to improve the capacity of organisations to respond to disasters, agreed more thought must be put into the relief effort.
“Foremost, it is important that we make donations with thought and care,” he said.
“Typically, the well-meaning efforts of communities around the world result in an unmanageable influx of all kinds of goods into disaster zones and this creates a logjam in ports and airports that disables more targeted disaster relief.”
Mr Arbon added that “the most difficult phase of disaster relief will occur over the coming months and years when communities will struggle to find the support that they need as the world’s attention moves on to the next disaster or crisis”.
A humanitarian forum being held in Sydney this week, originally intended to look at the Syrian crisis, will now focus on the international response to the Philippines disaster, with the chief of the Australian Red Cross warning that it would take years to rebuild.
“Whole communities smashed, horrific loss of life,” Robert Tickner said, adding that anyone who wanted to help should make a cash donation rather than sending goods, which may not be what is immediately needed.
“It’s better to buy locally and stimulate the local economy,” he said.
* Agence France-Press