Climate Change, Disasters, and Internal Displacement in Asia and the Pacific [1 ed.] 0367857871, 9780367857875

Table of contents :
Cover
Half Title
Series Page
Title Page
Copyright Page
Table of Contents
Editors
List of contributors
Foreword
Acknowledgements
Acronyms
Table of treaties and international legal and policy documents
Chapter 1 Internal displacement in the context of disasters and climate change in Asia and the Pacific: Introduction to the volume
Internal displacement in the context of disasters and climate change
Displacement in the context of disasters and climate change in Asia and the Pacific
Framing the issue: Merging human rights and political ecology in the study of disaster displacement
Human rights in disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation at international and regional levels
Structure of the volume
Notes
References
International legal and policy documents
Chapter 2 The role of national law and policy in addressing displacement in the context of disasters and climate change in Asia and the Pacific
Introduction
The Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement: A human rights-based framework in need of support
A human rights-based approach to displacement in the context of disasters and climate change
National law and policy relevant to disaster displacement in Asia and the Pacific
Obstacles to implementation of national legal and policy frameworks in particular situations of disaster displacement
Conclusion
Notes
References
International legal and policy documents
National legal and policy documents
Prevention of and preparedness for displacement
Chapter 3 Thailand: Flooding disaster, people’s displacement, and state response: A case study of Hat Yai municipality
Introduction
Research method
Recent major flood disasters in Thailand
Legal framework on disaster management in Thailand
Flooding in Hat Yai City
Physical infrastructure approach
Soft infrastructure approach
Disaster and displacement
Conclusion
Notes
References
International legal and policy documents
National legal and policy documents
Chapter 4 The Philippines: Beyond resilience: Protecting the rights of internally displaced persons in Dulag, Leyte, in the wake of Super Typhoon Haiyan
Introduction
The study site and research methods
The domestic legal framework
Dulag, Leyte, and Typhoon Haiyan
Conclusion and ways forward
Notes
References
International legal and policy documents
National legal and policy documents
Protection during evacuation and throughout displacement
Chapter 5 Vanuatu: Protecting the rights of vulnerable groups during evacuation: A case study of Cyclone Pam and Mataso Island in Vanuatu
Introduction
Method
The legal, policy, and governance framework in Vanuatu
Case study of March 2015 Tropical Cyclone Pam, Mataso Island
Analysis of the role played by law and policy
Notes
References
International legal and policy documents
National legal and policy documents
Appendix 1: List of interviews
Chapter 6 Cambodia: Unpacking the nature of displacement due to flooding in Phreah Kunlong through a human rights-based approach
Introduction
Methodology and approach
Socio-economic background in relation to flooding
Community disaster preparedness
Mobility dynamics
Benefits and drawbacks of movement
Unpacking displacement
Conclusion
Notes
References
International legal and policy documents
National legal and policy documents
Chapter 7 Bangladesh: Flood-related displacement in Fulchhari upazila
Introduction
The legal framework
Displacement due to the 2017 flood in Fulchhari upazila
Conclusion
Note
References
International legal and policy documents
National legal and policy documents
Appendix 1: List of interviews
Chapter 8 Indonesia: Human rights, persons with disabilities, and the politics of disaster displacement in post-eruption Mt. Sinabung
Introduction
Framing the study: A socially grounded human rights-based approach
The legal and policy frameworks: Governing disaster displacement in Indonesia
Local complexity and the rights of persons with disabilities during evacuation: The case of Mt. Sinabung
Reflections from Mt. Sinabung: Protecting the rights of persons with disabilities during and after evacuation in the context of recurrent displacement
Notes
References
International legal and policy documents
National legal and policy documents
Appendix 1: List of interviews
Durable solutions
Chapter 9 Nepal: Protracted displacement from Haku Village, Rasuwa District in the aftermath of the 2015 earthquakes
Introduction
Method
Research study site: Rasuwa district
Displacement and durable solutions
Concluding remarks
Notes
References
International legal and policy documents
National legal and policy documents
Chapter 10 Solomon Islands: Flooding, displacement, and durable solutions: The April 2014 flood in Honiara
Introduction
Method
Solomon Islands legal framework relating to disasters and displacement
The April 2014 flood in Honiara
The role of law and policy: What more could have been done?
Conclusion
Notes
References
International legal and policy documents
National law and policy
Conclusion: A research and policy agenda for addressing displacement in the context of disasters and climate change
Policy implications emerging from the research
Avenues for further research
Notes
Index

Citation preview

Climate Change, Disasters, and Internal Displacement in Asia and the Pacific

This book examines how states in eight countries across Asia and the Pacifc address internal displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. The Asia and the Pacifc region accounts for the majority of global disasterrelated displacement, but the experience of the millions of individuals displaced differs according to gender, age, ethnicity, (dis)ability, caste, and so forth and is dependent on the legal, administrative, social, and economic structures and processes in place to support them. This book adopts a human rights-based approach, investigating the role of law and policy in preventing displacement, protecting people who are displaced, and engendering durable solutions across cases drawn from Thailand, Cambodia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Nepal, Bangladesh, Vanuatu, and the Solomon Islands. The specifc cases in the book also refect critically on the term ‘displacement’ and the wider normative framework within which this phenomenon is conceptualised and addressed. The book will be of interest to students, researchers, and practitioners working at the intersection of human rights, human mobility, development, disaster risk reduction and management, and climate change adaptation. Matthew Scott leads the People on the Move thematic area at the Raoul Wallenberg Institute of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, Lund University, Sweden. Albert Salamanca is a Senior Research Fellow and leads the Climate Change, Disasters and Development Cluster of Stockholm Environment Institute – Asia, based in Thailand.

Routledge Studies in Development, Displacement and Resettlement

This series is concerned with the complex global issue of forced migration, from its causes and resulting implications to potential responses and solutions. With the numbers of forcibly displaced people around the world hitting record levels in recent years, including refugees, internally displaced persons and asylum seekers, this is an issue that affects not only those communities and countries that people are feeing from, but also those they are feeing to. The series will explore the various mechanisms by which people undergo forced movement, such as war, confict, environmental disaster, development projects, persecution, ecological degradation, famine, human traffcking and ethnic cleansing. It also seeks to promote a fuller understanding of the implications of forced displacement and how scholars, policy-makers, NGO advocates and those working in the feld can collectively develop adequate responses. Development-Induced Displacement and Resettlement New Perspectives on Persisting Problems Edited by Irge Satiroglu and Narae Choi Global Implications of Development, Disasters and Climate Change Responses to Displacement from Asia Pacifc Edited by Susanna Price and Jane Singer Repairing Domestic Climate Displacement The Peninsula Principles Edited by Scott Leckie and Chris Huggins Refugee Dignity in Protracted Exile Rights, Capabilities and Legal Empowerment Anna Lise Purkey Climate Change, Disasters, and Internal Displacement in Asia and the Pacific A Human Rights-Based Approach Edited by Matthew Scott and Albert Salamanca

Climate Change, Disasters, and Internal Displacement in Asia and the Pacific A Human Rights-Based Approach Edited by Matthew Scott and Albert Salamanca

First published 2021 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2021 selection and editorial matter, Matthew Scott and Albert Salamanca; individual chapters, the contributors The right of Matthew Scott and Albert Salamanca to be identifed as the authors of the editorial material, and of the authors for their individual chapters, has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identifcation and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Scott, Matthew, 1978– editor. | Salamanca, Albert M., editor. Title: Climate change, disasters, and internal displacement in Asia and the Pacifc: a human rights-based approach/edited by Matthew Scott and Albert Salamanca. Description: Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon; New York, NY: Routledge, 2021.| Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifers: LCCN 2020025117 (print) | LCCN 2020025118 (ebook) | ISBN 9780367857875 (hardback) | ISBN 9781003015062 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Environmental refugees—Asia. | Environmental refugees—Pacifc area. | Global environmental change—Social aspects—Asia. | Global environmental change—Social aspects—Pacifc area. Classifcation: LCC HV640 .C55 2021 (print) | LCC HV640 (ebook) | DDC 363.738/74095—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020025117 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020025118 ISBN: 978-0-367-85787-5 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-003-01506-2 (ebk) Typeset in Goudy by Deanta Global Publishing Services, Chennai, India

Contents

Editors List of contributors Foreword Acknowledgements Acronyms Table of treaties and international legal and policy documents 1 Internal displacement in the context of disasters and climate change in Asia and the Pacifc: Introduction to the volume

vii viii xii xiv xvi xviii

1

MATTHEW SCOTT AND ALBERT SALAMANCA

2 The role of national law and policy in addressing displacement in the context of disasters and climate change in Asia and the Pacifc

18

MATTHEW SCOTT

Prevention of and preparedness for displacement 3 Thailand: Flooding disaster, people’s displacement, and state response: A case study of Hat Yai municipality

55 57

CARL MIDDLETON AND ORAPAN PRATOMLEK

4 The Philippines: Beyond resilience: Protecting the rights of internally displaced persons in Dulag, Leyte, in the wake of Super Typhoon Haiyan RYAN JEREMIAH D. QUAN

79

vi

Contents

Protection during evacuation and throughout displacement 5 Vanuatu: Protecting the rights of vulnerable groups during evacuation: A case study of Cyclone Pam and Mataso Island in Vanuatu

99

101

TESS VAN GEELEN AND MARGARETHA WEWERINKE-SINGH

6 Cambodia: Unpacking the nature of displacement due to fooding in Phreah Kunlong through a human rights-based approach

121

RATANA LY

7 Bangladesh: Flood-related displacement in Fulchhari upazila

138

MD ABDUL AWAL KHAN

8 Indonesia: Human rights, persons with disabilities, and the politics of disaster displacement in post-eruption Mt. Sinabung

156

AHMAD RIZKY MARDHATILLAH UMAR, EZKA AMALIA, AND ANDIKA PUTRA

Durable solutions 9 Nepal: Protracted displacement from Haku Village, Rasuwa District in the aftermath of the 2015 earthquakes

179

181

BALA RAJU NIKKU

10 Solomon Islands: Flooding, displacement, and durable solutions: The April 2014 food in Honiara

202

JOSEPH DANIEL FOUKONA

Conclusion: A research and policy agenda for addressing displacement in the context of disasters and climate change

222

MATTHEW SCOTT AND ALBERT SALAMANCA

Index

229

Editors

Matthew Scott leads the People on the Move thematic area at the Raoul Wallenberg Institute of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law. He focuses on legal and policy aspects of internal and cross-border displacement in the context of disasters and climate change and currently leads two projects in the Asia-Pacifc region focusing on these issues. He also coordinates the institute’s activities relating to refugees and other displaced persons across Africa, Asia-Pacifc, Europe, and MENA regions. Matthew sits on the advisory committee of the Platform on Disaster Displacement and the editorial committee of the Yearbook of International Disaster Law and is a founding member of both the Nordic Network on Climate Related Displacement and Mobility and the Asia Pacifc Academic Network on Disaster Displacement. He has nearly 20 years of experience working in the feld of international migration and forced displacement, including with UNHCR, the Australian Department of Immigration and Citizenship, and as a specialist immigration and asylum legal aid lawyer. His academic work has been published by Cambridge University Press, the International Journal of Refugee Law, Refugee Survey Quarterly, Forced Migration Review, and specialist edited volumes. He holds a PhD in Public International Law from Lund University. Albert Salamanca is a Senior Research Fellow at the Stockholm Environment Institute’s Asia Centre where he leads its Climate Change, Disasters and Development Cluster. He has over 15 years of experience working on natural resources management, sustainable livelihoods, and climate change adaptation issues in several countries in Southeast Asia. His current research interests are on the themes of resilience, risk and vulnerabilities, mobility and spatial linkages, disaster displacement, indigenous knowledge, and settlement change. He previously managed SEI’s initiative on Transforming Development and Disaster Risk, the Regional Climate Change Adaptation Knowledge Platform, and the Partnership in Governance Transition: the Bali Cultural Landscape. He has a PhD in Geography from Durham University (UK).

Contributors

Ezka Amalia is a Research Associate at ASEAN Studies Center, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Gadjah Mada. She was the Research Manager at the ASEAN Studies Center, UGM (2018-2019). Her research interests focus on the topics of ASEAN regionalism, migration and international development issues. She holds a BA in International Relations from Universitas Gadjah Mada (2013) and an MA in International Development from Nagoya University, Japan (2018). She is currently serving as an Offcer of the External Relations Division 3, ASEAN Political-Security Department, ASEAN Secretariat. Joseph Daniel Foukona is an Assistant Professor at the University of Hawaii, Manoa. Prior to joining the University of Hawaii, he worked as a Senior Lecturer at the University of the South Pacifc. He has a strong record in university and professional teaching and mentoring. He has a strong research focus on land, law, and history. He has undertaken research on customary land tenure, climate change and disaster displacements and relocation, urban land, land reform, constitutional, and governance issues. Through research, training, and teaching experience, Dr Foukona has a detailed working knowledge of land law, land issues, development and governance issues, legal history, and systems in the Pacifc region. His work has been recognised through professional associations, publications, and academic awards. Md Abdul Awal Khan has been serving as an Associate Professor at the Department of Law, Independent University, Bangladesh (IUB). He obtained his PhD at the School of Law, Western Sydney University, Australia, in 2015. After completing his PhD, Dr Khan joined the School of Law, Western Sydney University, Australia, as a Research Fellow in 2015. He also served as a visiting researcher at the School of Global Studies, University of Gothenburg, Sweden, and Department of Social Sciences, University of Roehampton, London, UK, as an Erasmus Mundi Visiting Scholar in 2017. Dr Khan obtained LLB (Honours) and LLM degree from the University of Rajshahi, Bangladesh. He has published articles in well-reputed international journals. His area of expertise includes climate change law and policy, human rights, and international law.

Contributors

ix

Ratana Ly is a PhD Candidate at the University of Victoria, Canada and a Senior Research Fellow at the Center for the Study of Humanitarian Law at the Royal University of Law and Economics, Cambodia. Ratana’s research interests include law and society, human rights and the environment, transnational regulations, business and human rights, labour migration, and international criminal law. Before starting her PhD, Ratana obtained a bachelor’s degree in law from the Royal University of Law and Economics in 2011, and a master’s degree in International Law from Nagoya University, Japan, in 2013. She then worked as a researcher at the Center for the Study of Humanitarian Law, focusing on international human rights-related subjects. Carl Middleton is an Assistant Professor and Deputy Director for Research on the Master of Arts in International Development Studies (MAIDS) Programme, and Director of the Center for Social Development Studies (CSDS) in the Faculty of Political Science of Chulalongkorn University, Thailand. Dr Middleton’s research interests orientate around the politics and policy of the environment in Southeast Asia, with a particular focus on nature-society relations, environmental justice and social movements, transdisciplinary research, and the political ecology of water and energy. His most recent book, coauthored with Jeremy Allouche and Dipak Gyawali, is titled The Water–Food– Energy Nexus: Power, Politics and Justice (Earthscan-Routledge 2019). Recent co-edited books are Living with Floods in a Mobile Southeast Asia: A Political Ecology of Vulnerability, Migration and Environmental Change (Earthscan 2018; with Rebecca Elmhirst and Supang Chantavanich) and Knowing the Salween River: Resource Politics of a Contested Transboundary River (Springer 2019; with Vanessa Lamb). Bala Raju Nikku hails from India and currently serving as an Assistant Professor at the Thompson Rivers University School of Social Work and Human service in Canada. Since 1994, Bala has continued to serve in academia and grassroots social work practice in India, Nepal, and Malaysia, and has held adjunct positions in the UK and Thailand. As the Founding Director of the Nepal School of Social Work (2005–2011), Bala led the School of Social Work. In 2015, Bala was awarded a COFUND Senior Research Fellowship at Durham University, UK. He served on the executive boards of International Association of Schools of Social Work and the Asian and Pacifc Association of Social Work Education. Bala is currently serving as a member of the editorial boards of International Social Work Journal (Sage); Practice: Social Work in Action (Routledge); and as Founding Editor of the Canadian International Social Work and Policy Review. He can be contacted at [email protected]. Orapan Pratomlek is a Project Coordinator for the Center for Social Development Studies (CSDS), Chulalongkorn University. She holds a MA in InternationalNGO Studies from the Faculty of Social Sciences, Sungkonghoe University, Seoul, Republic of Korea. Her interest and work focus on issues related to the environment, social development, human rights, and empowerment. She was

x

Contributors an intern at the May 18 Memorial Foundation, Gwangju, South Korea, in order to contribute towards the development and promotion of democracy and human rights in South Korea and more widely in Asia. She is currently conducting research on creative tourism in Prachuap Khiri Khan – Ranong, Thailand and Myeik – Kawthoung, Burma. Aim of this research is to cooperate with the community, government, and civil society in both countries to develop a community tourism plan that supports community environmental sustainability and economic development.

Andika Putra is a Research Associate at the ASEAN Studies Center, Universitas Gadjah Mada previously served as a Program Manager at the Centre. He holds a Bachelor of Laws from the International Program for Law and Sharia, Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta, Indonesia (2016), and an LLM degree in law and globalization from Maastricht University, the Netherlands (2020). He is currently pursuing a Master in Legal Studies at the Faculty of Law, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia. His main research interests include international human rights law in general and the nexus between human rights and environmental protection in particular. The topic of his thesis research is the extraterritorial human rights obligation (ETOs) in the case of transboundary haze pollution in Southeast Asia. Ryan Jeremiah Donato Quan is a Human Rights and Labour Law Professor at the Ateneo de Manila University School of Law (ALS). He is currently the Program Offcer of the ALS Graduate Legal Studies Institute. He previously directed the Ateneo Human Rights Center’s Internship Program. Ryan also teaches at De La Salle University-Manila (DLSU-Manila) College of Law, Far Eastern University Institute of Law, and Ateneo de Zamboanga University College of Law. He is a legal specialist (adviser) at the Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines. Ryan holds Development Studies and Legal Management degrees from DLSU-Manila (2004). He obtained his Juris Doctor degree from the ALS (2008) and was admitted to the Philippine Bar in 2009. In 2015, he was conferred a Master of Laws in International Human Rights Law, summa cum laude, by the University of Notre Dame (Indiana, USA), where he was a scholar of its Klau Center for Civil and Human Rights. Ahmad Rizky Marthadullah Umar is a PhD Candidate at the School of Political Sciences and International Studies, University of Queensland, Australia, and Research Associate at the ASEAN Studies Center, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia. He was the Executive Secretary of the ASEAN Studies Center between January – December 2017, and a Research Fellow at the Earth Systems Governance (ESG) Project. In 2020, he became visting fellow at the Australian National University and the National Library of Australia. His recent essay on postcolonial citizenship was shortlisted for Northedge Prize 2020. Umar has published peer-reviewed articles at Asian Politics and Policy, Asian Review, and Studia Islamika, as well as book chapters published by ISEAS

Contributors

xi

and Brill. His current PhD thesis investigates the history of the idea of Asia in world politics since the 19th century, and his research interests lie in the intersection between International Relations, Asian Studies, and Global Environmental Politics. Tess Van Geelen (BA, LLB(Hons)) is a Legal Offcer at the Australian Law Reform Commission. Prior to joining the Commission, Tess was a Visiting Researcher at the University of the South Pacifc in Vanuatu, funded by the Australian Government’s New Colombo Plan Scholarship. Tess has worked as a Research Assistant in the Law Faculty at Queensland University of Technology since 2016 and was the 2018 Climate Change and Energy Security Research Fellow with Young Australians in International Affairs. Tess has published peer-reviewed work on human rights, climate change law, wetland protection, and corporate responsibility for human rights. Tess also worked in international development for several years, leading projects in Uganda and Kenya from 2012 to 2015. Margaretha Wewerinke-Singh is an Assistant Professor of Public International Law at Leiden University and an Adjunct Senior Lecturer in Environmental Law at the University of the South Pacifc. Her research broadly speaking focuses on the role of law in realising sustainable development. Her recent book, State Responsibility, Climate Change and Human Rights (Hart Publishing) explains when and where state action related to climate change may amount to a violation of human rights. Margaretha’s research builds on more than a decade of involvement in legal processes relating to sustainable development and human rights. Amongst other things, she has acted as a legal adviser to governments at international climate change negotiations, represented non-governmental organisations at the UN Human Rights Council, and advised the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the nexus between climate change and human rights in Africa. She serves as the Deputy Regional Director for Europe of the Global Network on Human Rights and the Environment.

Foreword

This much-awaited volume addresses internal displacement in the context of disasters and climate change across Asia and the Pacifc. Adopting a human rights-based approach, the review of legal and policy frameworks, combined with research into how these frameworks are implemented in specifc instances of displacement, has generated a rich qualitative foundation enabling the identifcation of areas that warrant particular attention from a policy perspective. States and practitioners involved in the protection of internally displaced persons will fnd this volume rich in analysis and examples that currently lead the way. Indeed, internal displacement caused by natural hazards and the effects of climate change has only recently been a subject of interest. What makes this publication of immense interest is that it traces the development of a human rights-based approach to disaster- and climate change-related displacement. In doing so, it demonstrated how the phenomenon is addressed in eight countries across the Asia and the Pacifc region. These eight cases likewise address more in-depth cross-cutting issues that enable policy-makers, practitioners, and readers to obtain a comprehensive view of challenges and opportunities relating to the protection of internally displaced persons. A human rights-based approach is necessary to mitigate the effects of climate change on populations and address internal displacement. Effective responses to the human rights challenges related to climate change-induced internal displacement will require the international community to move beyond the traditional humanitarian assistance and reactive governance models. In the face of the increased frequency and intensity of natural hazards, governments have a responsibility to take reasonable preventive action to reduce exposure, minimise vulnerabilities, and avoid or limit the adverse impact of hazards. The consequences of hazards can be prevented or substantially mitigated by disaster risk reduction strategies, which should be integrated into national development policies and programmes. This publication, therefore, highlights the importance of developing a better understanding of the phenomenon of displacement in the context of disasters and climate change, the need for systematic integration of displacement

Foreword

xiii

considerations into disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation law and policy, and also looks at challenges related to their implementation. As importantly, this volume stresses the importance of hearing voices of academics working in the region. Avenues that appear particularly open to further research are identifed. The concluding chapter highlights ways forward in both policy and research. We need more academic research on this topic. As the UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons, it is my intention to highlight these issues for reasons of urgency and reality to millions of lives and will dedicate my 2020 thematic report to the UN General Assembly on climate change and internal displacement to further increase the policy scope on this issue. This publication is a tremendous boost to this endeavour. I look forward to this ground-breaking work to permeate the realms of policy and practice. Cecilia Jimenez-Damary UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons (Davao City, the Philippines)

Acknowledgements

This volume is one of the major outputs of a two-year research initiative generously supported by Sida, the Swedish Development Cooperation Agency. The research formed a part of the wider human rights and environment programme implemented by the Raoul Wallenberg Institute of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law. From the outset, the aim of the research has been to contribute to global and regional processes addressing displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. A crucial partner in this endeavour was the Platform on Disaster Displacement (PDD), where Atle Solberg and Sarah Koeltzow provided valuable introductions, insights, and inspiration over the duration of the research. Walter Kälin, the Envoy of the Chair of the PDD, also shared information and expertise on a number of occasions. For early exchanges that helped to shape the direction of the research, particular thanks go to Helena Olsson and Morten Kjaerum (RWI), Thomas Gammeltoft-Hansen (Copenhagen University), Zeke Simperingham, Helen Brunt and Hervé Gazeau (IFRC), Sriprapha Petcharamesree (Institute of Human Rights and Peace, Mahidol University), Erica Bower (UNHCR). Katia Chirizzi (OHCHR), Andy Raine (UNEP), and Charlotta Bredberg (Sida). Ongoing exchanges with Cecilia Jimenez-Damary (UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons), Nina Birkeland and Silvia Llosa (Norwegian Refugee Council), Justin Ginnetti and Bina Desai (Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre), David James Cantor (Refugee Law Initiative, University of London), Mo Hamza (Department of Risk Management and Societal Safety, Lund University), and Loretta Hieber Girardet (UNDRR AsiaPacifc) have also shaped the research initiative. Particular thanks are also due to the Faculty of Law at Ateneo de Manila University, the Philippines, for hosting our mid-term workshop, and to the Center for Social Development Studies at Chulalongkorn University, which hosted our fnal workshop and consultation with international and regional actors in Bangkok in November 2018. We would also like to thank Tasneem Siddiqui and her team at the Refugee and Migratory Movements Research Unit, Bangladesh, for the opportunity to contribute to the revision of the National Strategy for the Management of

Acknowledgements

xv

Disaster- and Climate-Induced Internal Displacement, and for inviting members of the research team to present insights during the consultation event held in Dhaka in October 2019. Thanks are also due to the Faculty of Law at Independent University Bangladesh for their hospitality and support during this visit. Consultations in the Pacifc would not have been possible without the generous collaboration of Sabira Coelho (IOM) and Robert Vaughan (OHCHR) in Fiji, and Willy Missack (Oxfam) and the Vanuatu Climate Action Network in Vanuatu. Finally, the research, editorial, and organisational support of numerous colleagues within the Raoul Wallenberg Institute and the Stockholm Environment Institute has proven invaluable, including Mostafa Sen, Victor Bernard, Sri Aryani, Jason Squire, Farai Chikwanha and Jack Musgrave (RWI), and Karlee Johnson and Nicole Anschell (SEI).

Acronyms

ACCCRN BLAST BNPB BPBD CEDAW CERPA CIID CRC CRPD CSCMMP DSWD DDPM DMA DMRD ESA EWS FBOs FOPA FTE FVTF GBKP GoN HCC ICCPR ICESCR IDPs IOM LGU MAPDRR

Asian Cities Climate Change Resilience Network Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Trust Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana (National Disaster Management Agency) Local Disaster Management Agencies Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women Children’s Emergency Relief and Protection Act Climate-Induced Internal Displacement Convention on the Rights of the Child Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Cyclone Shelter Construction, Maintenance and Management Policy Department of Social Welfare and Development Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Disaster Management Act 2012 Disaster Management and Relief Division Emergency Shelter Assistance Early Warning Systems Faith-Based Organisations Festival of Pacifc Arts Fixed Term Estates Flood Victim Task Force Karo Protestant Church Government of Nepal Honiara City Council International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Internally Displaced Persons International Organization for Migration Local Government Unit Myanmar Action Plan on Disaster Risk Reduction

Acronyms MDMC MEND MLHS MoDMR MSWRR MDRRM MDRRMC NDRRMC NDRRMF NCCAP NCDW NDMO NDRMP NPCCDID NRA NSMDCIID ONWR PC RBM RID RHU SIG SOD SOPs SNDRC SNAP TOL UNDAC UNOCHA VDC VGD VGF

xvii

Muhammadiyah Disaster Management Center Mass Evacuation in Natural Disaster Ministry of Lands, Housing and Survey Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief Ministry of Social Welfare, Relief and Resettlement Municipal Disaster Risk and Reduction Management Municipal Disaster Risk Reduction Management Council National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Framework National Climate Change Action Plan 2011–2028 National Grassroots and Disabilities Organization (NGDO), National Council for Women with Disabilities National Disaster Management Offce National Disaster Risk Management Plan National Policy on Climate Change and Disaster-Induced Displacement National Reconstruction Authority National Strategy on the Management of Disaster and Climate Induced Internal Displacement 2015 Offce of National Water Resources Protection Committee Rehabilitasi Berbasis Masyakarat Royal Irrigation Department Rural Health Unit Solomon Islands Government Standing Orders on Disaster Standard Operating Procedures Southern Natural Disaster Research Center Strategic National Action Plan Temporary Occupation Licences United Nations Disaster Assessment and Coordination Team United Nations Offce for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs Village Development Committee Vulnerable Group Development Vulnerable Group Feeding

Table of treaties and international legal and policy documents

1948 1966 1966 1966 1979 1989 1989 1992 1998

1998 1999 2006 2007 2015 2015 2015

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (adopted 10 December 1948) UNGA Res217 A(III) International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 23 March 1976) 999 UNTS 171 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 3 January 1976) 993 UNTS 3 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (adopted 7 March 1966, entered into force 4 January 1969) Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (adopted 18 December 1979, entered into force 3 September 1981) 1249 UNTS 13 Convention on the Rights of the Child (adopted 20 November 1989, entered into force 2 September 1990) 1577 UNTS 3 UN General Assembly. International Decade for Disaster Risk Reduction. A/ Res/44/236 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (adopted 9 May 1992, entered into force 21 March 1994) 1771 UNTS 107 Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. Addendum to Report of the Representative of the Secretary-General, Mr Francis M. Deng, submitted pursuant to Commission resolution 1997/39. UN Commission on Human Rights. (E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2) Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in DecisionMaking and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (adopted 25 June 1998, entered into force 30 October 2001) 2161 UNTS 447 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (‘CEDAW Optional Protocol’) (adopted 6 October 1999, entered into force 22 December 2000) 2131 UNTS 83 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (adopted 13 December 2006, entered into force 3 May 2008) 2515 UNTS 3 UN General Assembly. United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. A/RES/61/295 UNFCCC, Decision 1/CP.21, Adoption of the Paris Agreement, in Report of the Conference of the Parties on its Twenty-First Session, held in Paris from 30 November to 13 December 2015 (FCCC/CP/2015/10/Add.1) UN General Assembly. Resolution 69/283, Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 (A/CONF.224/CRP.1) UN General Assembly. Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015 (A/RES/70/1)

1

Internal displacement in the context of disasters and climate change in Asia and the Pacifc Introduction to the volume Matthew Scott and Albert Salamanca

This is a volume focusing on internal displacement in the context of disasters and climate change in Asia and the Pacifc. It is the product of two years of research, coordinated by the Raoul Wallenberg Institute of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, in collaboration with academic partners based in universities and research institutions across the region. The focus on internal displacement in the context of disasters and climate change is justifed by the fact that every year, an average of 24 million people are newly internally displaced in the context of natural hazard events worldwide, with more than 75 per cent of such displacement taking place in the region (IDMC 2019). As with any form of displacement, displacement in the context of disasters and climate change has signifcant implications for the enjoyment of human rights. It, therefore, follows that the research, commencing on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the adoption of the 1998 Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (the Guiding Principles), adopts a human rights-based approach. The Guiding Principles were developed to address a recognised lack of clarity about how states ought to address the challenges presented by internal displacement (UN Commission on Human Rights 1991). A product of extensive academic research and widespread consultation, the Guiding Principles do not create new law, nor do they purport to bind states (Kälin 1998). Rather, they represent a consolidation of international law that is relevant to the situation of internally displaced persons. The key sources include international refugee law, international human rights law, and international humanitarian law (Kälin 2008). Paragraph two of the Introduction to the Guiding Principles defnes internally displaced persons as: [P]ersons or groups of persons who have been forced or obliged to fee or to leave their homes or places of habitual residence, in particular as a result of or in order to avoid the effects of armed confict, situations of generalized violence, violations of human rights or natural or human-made disasters, and who have not crossed an internationally recognized State border. Although the Guiding Principles are thus clearly as applicable to persons displaced in the context of disasters as they are to those displaced in the context

2

Matthew Scott and Albert Salamanca

of armed confict, the 20 years that have followed since the adoption of the Guiding Principles have seen an overwhelming focus on the latter, with more limited engagement with how these principles apply when people have to leave their homes in situations triggered by foods, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, cyclones, and so forth. At the same time, more people are displaced every year by disasters than they are by armed confict (IDMC 2019). Chapter 2 considers this state of affairs in more detail. The starting point for this volume is that the Guiding Principles are effective in providing a coherent framework for thinking about the kinds of measures that may be required to prevent and prepare for displacement, protect people during evacuation and throughout displacement, and facilitate durable solutions in the context of disasters and climate change, but that, as with confict-related displacement, these principles need to be integrated into national and sub-national law, policy, and practice in order to have an impact. Additionally, the Guiding Principles must be complemented by more detailed standards and guidelines, including from the feld of disaster risk reduction and management (DRRM), climate change adaptation (CCA), and sustainable development. Consequently, the research entailed consolidation of key standards and guidelines relevant to displacement in the context of disasters and climate change (see Scott 2019a), and also examined national legal and policy frameworks relating to DRRM and CCA in the eight countries that are the focus of this volume.1 The countries include Cambodia, Thailand, the Philippines, Indonesia, Nepal, Bangladesh, Vanuatu, and the Solomon Islands. Although examination of other sectoral law and policy would have added further depth to the analysis, it was recognised at an early stage in the project that analysing even this narrow set of legal and policy documents relating to DRRM and CCA was already a signifcant undertaking, and that analysis of other frameworks could form the basis for future projects. Indeed, as noted in the conclusion to this volume, the review of law and policy, together with insights from the case studies described in more detail below, points to a clear research agenda focusing on the intersection of displacement, sustainable development and climate change adaptation, and examining the role of authorities and other actors involved in urban planning, housing policy, environment, and sustainable development. Research results show extensive integration of human rights principles in general, as well as key international standards and guidelines relating to disaster displacement in particular, across legal and policy frameworks in the region, although with variations between countries. At the same time, the research indicates that displacement is not consistently integrated into the legal and policy frameworks relating to DRRM and was even less integrated into legal and policy documents focusing on CCA. Instead, displacement tends to appear in scattered references to elements such as evacuation, reconstruction, and planned relocation. Thus, with some exceptions, most of the eight countries considered in this volume do not have a consistent legal and policy framework that addresses the prevention of and preparedness for displacement, protection during evacuation and throughout displacement, and facilitation of durable solutions. There

Internal displacement in Asia-Pacifc 3 remains considerable scope for integrating displacement into national-level legal and policy frameworks, including through consistent references to key international standards and guidelines. However, integration of key international standards and guidelines into domestic legal and policy frameworks does not, in itself, guarantee that states will take effective measures to address the issues. Implementation of both international and national level law and policy is a perennial issue, and this research initiative, therefore, set out to examine the extent to which both international and national level law and policy actually played a role in specifc instances of disaster displacement. Identifying examples of good practice at the local level, our research also points to cases where sub-national plans, procedures, and practices could be more attuned to displacement risk, and particularly in relation to the differential exposure and vulnerability of people in situations of potential vulnerability, including women, persons with disabilities, and people living in informal settlements, amongst others. In sum, the research that is presented in this volume addresses two questions. First, it enquires into the extent to which key international standards and guidelines relating to displacement in the context of disasters and climate change are integrated into domestic legal and policy frameworks. Second, and more in focus in this volume, it asks about how these frameworks contribute towards the prevention of and preparedness for displacement, protecting people during evacuation and throughout displacement, and facilitating durable solutions in particular sub-national contexts. The compilation of eight case studies contributes new insight into the phenomenon of displacement in the context of disasters and climate change and the role of law and policy in addressing this challenge.

Internal displacement in the context of disasters and climate change This volume is concerned with displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. However, these two phenomena are not of the same order. Climate change is a term used to describe ‘a change in the state of the climate that can be identifed (e.g., by using statistical tests) by changes in the mean and/or the variability of its properties and that persists for an extended period, typically decades or longer’ (IPCC 2018). One consequence of climate change is that some natural hazard events, such as foods, heatwaves, and droughts, are becoming more frequent and intense in some parts of the world (IPCC 2018). Other consequences of climate change include rising sea levels and associated salination of soil and freshwater resources, as well as changes in seasonal rainfall and temperatures. Not only does climate change contribute to making hazard events and processes more frequent and intense, but it also contributes in direct and indirect ways towards increasing exposure and vulnerability (IPCC 2014). Thus, climate change can be understood as an amplifer of natural hazards (IPCC 2018). The phenomenon itself is one step removed from the human impacts. A human rights-based approach to displacement in the context of

4

Matthew Scott and Albert Salamanca

disasters and climate change is concerned with the human experience of displacement, and the connection such displacement has to certain drivers of displacement. Cyclones, foods, rising sea levels, and so forth, can all be drivers of displacement, as can economic, political, social, and historical factors. Climate change, as the Foresight report (Government Offce for Science 2011) made clear, amplifes these drivers in myriad ways. Focusing on disasters helps to bring attention closer to the human factors that are in play when people are displaced in the context of disasters and climate change. However, as discussed further in the conclusion to this volume, additional research avenues have opened up that can explore, for instance, the impacts of climate change adaptation measures as a cause of displacement. Although slower onset processes such as drought, changes in seasonal rainfall and temperature, ocean acidifcation, and sea-level rise also have direct human rights implications, the relationship between these phenomena and displacement is more diffcult to trace than the displacement that arises in the context of more sudden-onset disasters associated with foods, cyclones, and other hazards. For the latter, the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre has developed a robust methodology for measuring the scale of displacement (IDMC 2020a). For the former, methodologies that can accurately trace the role played by slower onset processes in individual decisions to move are still being developed (IDMC 2020b). The UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons, Cecilia Jimenez-Damary, will make displacement in the context of slower onset disasters the focus of her 2020 address to the UN General Assembly (UN OHCHR 2020). This, too, opens an avenue for further research, as discussed in the conclusion to this volume. Consequently, the case studies that make up the core of this volume all focus on displacement in the context of more sudden-onset hazard events, while remaining keenly aware of the direct and indirect role that climate change is playing in global, regional, and national displacement dynamics. This focus brings the role of disaster risk reduction and management authorities, as well as legal and policy frameworks that regulate their conduct, more into focus than the role of other relevant actors and frameworks. However, whether a particular hazard event relates to climate change or not is of little consequence for affected individuals. Thus, in selecting case studies for this volume, authors did not limit themselves to the consideration of climate-related hazards alone, and some contributors identifed geophysical events, including earthquakes and volcanic eruptions, as appropriate cases in which to explore the role of law and policy in preventing and preparing for displacement, protecting people during evacuation and throughout displacement, and facilitating durable solutions.

Displacement in the context of disasters and climate change in Asia and the Pacifc Asia and the Pacifc is a region highly exposed to a range of natural hazards, with risk increasing as a consequence of climate change. Hazards are clustered

Internal displacement in Asia-Pacifc 5 around four disaster hotspots. These are around countries in the transboundary river basins of South and mainland Southeast Asia, which are food- and drought-prone; countries in the so-called ‘Ring of Fire’ in North and East Asia and archipelagic Southeast Asia where the occurrence of earthquakes, landslides, tsunamis, and typhoons is frequent; the Small Island Developing States in the Pacifc, which experience tropical cyclones, El Niño events, earthquakes, and landslides; and the sand and dust-storm corridors in South, Southwest, and Central Asia, which are also affected by foods and drought (UNESCAP 2019). Climate change and extreme weather events have rendered the disaster riskscape in Asia and the Pacifc more complex and uncertain, making disaster forecasting and disaster risk reduction diffcult, as historical information cannot easily be used as a basis for analysis and actions (UNESCAP 2019). The 1.5°C report, published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2018, offers a sobering reminder on the state of our climate. The report confrmed that, by 2017, global temperature had risen by 1°C relative to pre-industrial levels (1850–1900), primarily as a result of human activities, and an increase of 1.5°C can be expected by 2040 if current trends continue (IPCC 2018). A 1°C temperature change has been shown to have already had critical impacts on organisms and ecosystems and on human systems and well-being. Increases of 2°C, or 4°C, which can be expected before 2100 if rapid actions are not taken now to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, will have increasingly dramatic impacts. Coral reefs will be decimated by rising temperatures and ocean acidifcation. Heatwaves will be more frequent, especially affecting poor and marginalised communities in cities. Coastal cities and many Small Island Development States will see more fooding. Climate change will also push more people, especially in Asia and Africa, into poverty (IPCC 2018). Beyond 2°C, planetary thresholds will be breached and become irreversible and the Earth System will be tipped over into a situation known as the ‘hothouse earth,’ leading to ‘serious challenges for the viability of human societies’ (Steffen et al. 2018, p. 5). This is the context in which disaster displacement takes place. The phenomenon is not monolithic. Some people are displaced for short periods, spending a few nights in a local evacuation centre. Others have been displaced for years, with durable solutions seemingly out of reach. Some countries, such as the Philippines and Indonesia, experience high levels of displacement every year, whereas for other countries, numbers vary signifcantly from year to year (IDMC 2020c). Floods, storms, and earthquakes feature prominently amongst the drivers of displacement in the region, and worldwide these three hazards accounted for 50, 34, and 12 per cent, respectively, of all people displaced by disasters in the period between 2008 and 2018 (IDMC 2019). During this period, 1,831 disasters are recorded as having taken place in Asia and the Pacifc, affecting more than 1.5 billion people (CRED and Guha-Sapir 2020). The fact that 210 million or 15 per cent of those people affected by disasters in the region were displaced in that context (IDMC 2019) highlights how signifcant the issue is, even if, at the national level, displacement fgures often do not exceed even 1 per cent of the population. That 210 million people were displaced by disasters in the region between 2008 and 2018 does not mean that these were all different individuals. Rather,

6

Matthew Scott and Albert Salamanca

displacement risk, like disaster risk generally, disproportionately affects people living in exposed and vulnerable social conditions (see the next section for discussion). Consequently, many people will have been displaced multiple times during this period, as pointed out in a number of case studies in the volume, including in the Indonesia and Bangladesh chapters. This is because displacement risk is also closely tied to levels of social and economic development, as further demonstrated by accounts of reduced displacement risk in the Cambodia and Thailand chapters of this volume. Recognising the social dimension of displacement risk, our research is grounded in a political-ecological understanding of disasters, as further developed below.

Framing the issue: Merging human rights and political ecology in the study of disaster displacement From the outset of this research initiative, researchers agreed on a set of principles that would inform the way each of the case studies was undertaken. We agreed that this study would not focus exclusively on legal and policy frameworks but needed to engage with the dynamics of disaster displacement in particular localities. The idea of combining an examination of law and policy with an engagement with lived experience invited us to consider our perceptions of the social context in which disasters unfold. Central to this set of discussions was the view that disasters are not natural. Against the centuries-old paradigm that posits ‘natural disasters’ as the nearly unavoidable, indiscriminate consequence of the forces of nature, this political-ecological understanding of disasters as social processes embedded in and refecting existing dynamics of power and discrimination resonated clearly with the human rights principles that frame the study. A political-ecological approach to disasters understands that disasters happen when natural hazard events interact with vulnerable and exposed social conditions (Wisner et al. 2004). Decisions about where settlements are located, how buildings are constructed, how water is managed, and so forth play signifcant roles in determining the human impact of natural hazard events, including associated displacement. Equally, the impact of disasters is not the consequence of random chance. Rather, disasters have a differential impact across race, gender, class, age, and other divides. The now-classic articulation of this perspective by Wisner et al. (2004) explains: The crucial point about understanding why disasters happen is that it is not only natural events that cause them. They are also the product of social, political and economic environments … where people live and work, and in what kind of buildings, their level of hazard protection, preparedness, information, wealth and health have nothing to do with nature as such, but are attributes of society. So people’s exposure to risk differs according to their class (which affects their income, how they live and where), whether they are male or female, what their ethnicity is, what age group they belong to, whether they are disabled or not, their immigration status, and so forth. (p. 6)

Internal displacement in Asia-Pacifc 7 Understanding disasters as deeply social processes (see also Bankoff 2003; Cedervall Lauta 2015; Hewitt 1983; Oliver-Smith 1996) also provides a coherent foundation for articulating a human rights-based approach. Whereas the political ecology approach understands disasters as social processes involving a variety of historical and contemporary actors, including the state, a human rights-based approach focuses somewhat more narrowly on the role of the state as the actor with primary responsibility for addressing disaster risk faced by people living within its jurisdiction. Disasters are not solely the consequence of natural hazard events but unfold as a result of acts and omissions by state and non-state actors. Seen in this light, the familiar principle of international law that recognises states as having duties to take steps to the maximum of available resources to prevent foreseeable harm (UN CESCR 1999; Scott 2019b) establishes a clear obligation for states to engage in disaster risk reduction initiatives, including by taking steps to prevent and prepare for displacement. Further, when people have already been affected by hazard events, the state, through its myriad institutions, has a duty to address the impacts of the disaster on the full enjoyment of substantive human rights, including the right to health, the right to shelter, the right to food, the right to be free from violence, and so forth, both during evacuation and throughout displacement. There are also compelling, human rights-based reasons for states to resolve disaster situations in a manner that reduces exposure and vulnerability to future hazards, thus contributing towards durable solutions to displacement. These obligations to address the human rights implications of disasters are permeated by the cross-cutting non-discrimination and equality duty, which requires not only the eradication of overtly discriminatory laws, policies, and practices, but also tackles deeply rooted structural or systemic discrimination, which is a root cause of exposure and vulnerability to disaster-related harm. This political ecology-informed human rights-based lens is further informed and enhanced by an appreciation of intersectionality, as developed below. Intersecting inequalities, disasters, and durable solutions The chapters in this volume highlight how disasters intersect with existing inequalities, which made the pursuit of durable solutions challenging. For instance, the Indonesia and Bangladesh case studies look at discrimination against persons with disabilities in a variety of disaster situations and provide detailed consideration of how national legal and policy documents drawing specifc attention to the rights of persons with disabilities can be neglected in actual situations of displacement. The Indonesia case study discusses how ‘the logic of ableism’ affects how authorities (fail to) address the particular situation of persons with disabilities in preparedness and response measures. In the case studies in Cambodia and also in Nepal, Bangladesh, and the Philippines, women’s differential experience of displacement is considered, particularly around issues of privacy, the design of evacuation sites, and hygiene kits that do not take into consideration women’s personal needs. In Bangladesh, women’s personal need to defecate privately is hampered by the lack of private

8

Matthew Scott and Albert Salamanca

sanitation facilities where open felds are the only options. In the Philippines, despite being aware of national policies relating to gender-responsive design and management of evacuation centres, authorities felt they lacked the resources to provide safe spaces. In the Cambodia case study, decisions to leave home to move to an evacuation zone also have a gender dimension, as men, during fooding, leave their residences to accompany and take care of their livestock in the evacuation zone, while some women are left at home to take care of children and family members who cannot move. Other gender-related issues, which cut into the broader notion of masculinity, include the tendency, identifed in the Cambodia study, of women being the primary targets for disaster-related trainings as ‘men know what to do’ and the cultural practices in Bangladesh where men eat frst, exposing women and children to hunger during displacement. Gender issues also arise in the notion that only men can guard private properties during displacement so that they are more likely to remain in their residences while the rest of family members move to the evacuation sites. In the following case studies in this volume, various themes of intersecting inequalities are discussed. Responding to these inequalities necessitates unpacking those attendant intersectionalities so that solutions are not simplistic, shortsighted, and discriminatory but rather take into consideration the needs of different types of men, women, boys, and girls. This calls for attention to be paid to issues of power and structures in society, and how they impinge on the capacities, capabilities, and needs of different types of people. Leaving no one behind Article 1 of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) states that: All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood. Article 2 continues: Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. These principles have informed the overarching principle of Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals which proclaim that: no one will be left behind. Recognizing that the dignity of the human person is fundamental, we wish to see the Goals and targets met for all nations and peoples and for all segments of society. And we will endeavour to reach the furthest behind frst. (UNGA 2015a, para. 4)

Internal displacement in Asia-Pacifc 9 Based on UDHR and the SDGs alone, there is enough basis to widen our understanding of gender and truly refect what a gendered intervention or action should look like. A study by Djoudi et al. (2016) showed that much of existing gender analysis in climate change adaptation literature specifcally prioritises heteronormative understandings of gender to the detriment of non-normative genders and sexualities (NNGS), which include LGBTQI+ minorities and other non-Western gender identities such as vaka sa lewa lewa in Fiji, waria in Indonesia, bakla in the Philippines, and fa’afafne in Samoa. The dominance of heteronormativity in development has already been questioned (Jolly 2011). Indeed, other genders do exist, and they are as much human as heterosexual men and women. They are imbued with the same bundle of rights. Similarly, persons with disabilities, the elderly, and Indigenous Peoples also have the right to enjoy the same bundle of rights as the cisgender, abled, young, and non-Indigenous Peoples majority. But having a right to enjoy rights is not equivalent to enjoying them, and, as noted above, widespread discrimination in everyday life contributes to differential exposure and vulnerability in situations of disaster. In times of disasters, people marginalised in everyday life often have their concerns sidelined by humanitarian approaches that cater to the needs of the majority and relief and recovery efforts conducted under pressure by the scale of the disaster and limited resources, as well as the strong tendency to favour the able-bodied majority and implement uniform interventions. Not only that, the varying capacities and capabilities of different groups are also often not recognised in both normal times and during disasters. Indigenous Peoples, for instance, often possess unique knowledge systems of their environment that have been shown to help them manage disaster risk, such as the case of the Mamanwa in Eastern Visayas who survived the onslaught of Typhoon Haiyan with minimal loss and damage (Cuaton and Su 2020). In Vanuatu, indigenous structures of governance – the chiefy structure – have a role to play in disaster management (see Chapter 5). Also in the Philippines following Typhoon Haiyan, NNGS have played a role in relief and recovery efforts (McSherry et al. 2015; Gaillard et al. 2017). In general, there has been little research and policy action of how NNGS are affected by disasters and the role they can play in recovery (Dominey-Howes et al. 2014; Gormain-Murray et al. 2014). Recognition as a frst step in responding to intersecting inequalities in disaster displacement When sex interacts with societal structures, it produces different types of identities which are reifed and fxed through rituals of recognition and daily practice such that they become socially constructed as gender (Butler 1990). Like prisms, when gender shines through class, race, age, ability, locations, HIV status, religion, politics, migrant status, sexuality, and other characteristics, intersecting inequalities emerge. Certain genders tend to beneft more than others. The frst step in addressing intersecting inequalities is recognising citizenship and presence in places where people are located (Schlosberg and Carruthers 2010; Schlosberg 2012; Holland 2015). Recognising that the world is not only composed of or

10

Matthew Scott and Albert Salamanca

belongs to, although ruled and defned by, the majority enables social and environmental justice (Schlosberg 2004). Once we have recognised that different kinds of people exist, we should understand how disasters affect them and how their conditions, their vulnerabilities, will be amplifed by the impacts of climate change, and when disaster displacement occurs, how their rights will be respected, protected, promoted, and fulflled, as well as how their contributions can be harnessed. In the case of non-normative genders and sexualities in relation to Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines, various researchers (McSherry et al. 2015; Gaillard et al. 2017) have shown how their needs were not addressed in the numerous humanitarian and emergency interventions following the devastation, which, as shown in Chapter 4, killed thousands of people, damaged millions, and displaced at least 14,000 households in Tacloban City alone (Palagi and Javernick-Will 2018). The skills that these people can contribute to the rebuilding effort were not considered at all. Even the livelihoods assistance provided was not suited to their gendered preferences. They were treated as a pariah before the typhoon; they were treated just the same after, when the recovery was meant to ‘Build Back Better.’ Building back better demands that solutions are durable and respond to the needs of different genders, sexualities, abilities, ages, ethnicities, social classes, migration status, and faiths. This volume strives to remain attentive to this crosscutting intersectionality dimension.

Human rights in disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation at international and regional levels The focus in this volume on a human rights-based and gender-equal approach to internal displacement in the context of disasters and climate change further aligns well with other international processes. Notably, paragraph 19(c) of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNGA 2015b) recognises the centrality of human rights to disaster risk reduction and management: Managing the risk of disasters is aimed at protecting persons and their property, health, livelihoods and productive assets, as well as cultural and environmental assets, while promoting and protecting all human rights, including the right to development. Paragraph 19(d) continues: Disaster risk reduction requires an all-of-society engagement and partnership. It also requires empowerment and inclusive, accessible and non-discriminatory participation, paying special attention to people disproportionately affected by disasters, especially the poorest. A gender, age, disability and cultural perspective should be integrated in all policies and practices, and women and youth leadership should be promoted.

Internal displacement in Asia-Pacifc 11 Similarly, the Preamble to the Paris Agreement (UNFCCC 2016) states: Acknowledging that climate change is a common concern of humankind, Parties should, when taking action to address climate change, respect, promote and consider their respective obligations on human rights, the right to health, the rights of indigenous peoples, local communities, migrants, children, persons with disabilities and people in vulnerable situations and the right to development, as well as gender equality, empowerment of women and intergenerational equity. Both of these key international frameworks also highlight the specifc issue of displacement. The document adopting the Paris Agreement calls for ‘recommendations for integrated approaches to avert, minimize and address displacement related to the adverse impacts of climate change’ (UNFCCC 2016, para 49). The Sendai Framework makes multiple references to different aspects of displacement, from prevention through to durable solutions (IDMC 2017). This Framework therefore provides an important, disaster-specifc complement to the Guiding Principles. The Sendai Framework is also crucial because of the commitment of states and the actors responsible for the management of disaster risk to achieving its objectives. Unlike the Guiding Principles, which, owing to their application in confict situations, are not always treated as uncontentious, the Sendai Framework, much like the Sustainable Development Goals, refects potentially less contentious ambitions to improve the human condition. A space for discussing and actively integrating human rights principles opens up in this context in a way that is simply not available if relying on the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement in isolation. Hence, although in analytical terms the Guiding Principles provide the cornerstone of the approach to addressing displacement from a human rightsbased perspective, in practical terms, the Sendai Framework is actually at the forefront. Declarations at the regional and sub-regional level also refect a commitment to adopting a human rights-based approach to disaster risk management, in general, and disaster displacement, in particular. For example, the 2018 Asian Ministerial Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction called on states to: Ensure a human rights-based, people-centred and whole-of-society approach in development, implementation and monitoring of national and local disaster risk reduction strategies inclusive of women and girls, children and youth, persons with disabilities, older persons, displaced and migrant populations, and those in vulnerable situations such as the poor and marginalized. (AMCDRR 2018, para 11) Similarly, the Framework for Resilient Development in the Pacifc (SPC 2016), after expressly grounding itself in a human rights-based approach,2 identifes a number of ways in which states, regional organisations, and others should address

12

Matthew Scott and Albert Salamanca

the specifc issue of disaster displacement. For example, under Goal 1: Strengthened integrated adaptation and risk reduction to enhance resilience to climate change and disasters, national and sub-national governments and administrations are to: Integrate human mobility aspects, where appropriate, including strengthening the capacity of governments and administrations to protect individuals and communities that are vulnerable to climate change and disaster displacement and migration, through targeted national policies and actions, including relocation and labour migration policies. In light of the foregoing, there is a very strong normative basis at international and regional levels for adopting a human rights-based and gender-equal approach to displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. As noted above and discussed in more detail throughout the remainder of the volume, our research found that the same can be said of many national-level legal and policy frameworks relating to disaster risk management and, albeit to a lesser degree, climate change adaptation.

Structure of the volume The volume is structured to align with the 1998 Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. Hence, the frst part focuses on the prevention of and preparedness for displacement. The second part focuses on protection during evacuation and throughout displacement. The third part focuses on durable solutions. However, authors have not restricted themselves to addressing only one isolated element of the displacement scenario they selected, and most of the chapters, therefore, address at least two of the three phases. Nonetheless, each chapter has a particular emphasis and the location of each chapter within the volume refects this. Chapter 2 sets out the analytical framework for the volume. It draws on the drafting history of the Guiding Principles and examines reports from successive UN mandate holders on internally displaced persons to demonstrate the gradual development of a human rights-based approach to disaster displacement, informed by signifcant developments in the felds of international disaster law in general and disaster risk reduction in particular. Within this framework, the chapter also presents key comparative insights arising from the review of the legal and policy frameworks operating in the eight countries that are in focus in this study. The case studies then commence with two chapters focusing on measures to prevent and prepare for displacement. Carl Middleton and Orapan Pratomlek’s analysis of measures to prevent and prepare for food-related displacement in Hat Yai province in Thailand is presented in Chapter 3. In this case, the authors detail effective practices for reducing displacement risk but point to certain marginalised sectors of the population, particularly those living in informal settlements, who continue to be exposed and vulnerable to displacement risk.

Internal displacement in Asia-Pacifc 13 In Chapter 4, Ryan Quan examines preparedness measures taken in Dulag municipality, Leyte province, both before and in the aftermath of Typhoon Haiyan in 2013. Despite being aware of key international standards and guidelines, municipal DRRM actors in this case highlight signifcant budgetary limitations to preventing displacement and protecting people during evacuation and throughout displacement. This case study is also one of several to raise the complex issue of forced evacuation. Part 2 opens with an examination by Tess Van Geelen and Margaretha Wewerinke-Singh of the evacuation of women from Mataso Island in Vanuatu in the aftermath of Cyclone Pam in 2015. At the time, Vanuatu did not have a robust legal and policy framework to address displacement. Despite now being at the forefront of legal and policy development in this area, key issues that arose in the 2015 case study appear unresolved, including the question of how to ensure the protection of the rights of women and girls during evacuation. Until this point, each of the case studies has addressed a clear-cut case of internal displacement, primarily focusing on preventing and preparing for displacement, and protecting people during evacuation and throughout displacement. In Chapter 6, Ratana Ly’s study of the strategies employed by people in Phreah Kunlong village in Cambodia in response to severe fooding calls the utility of the defnition of internal displacement into question. In this study, a fuid and dynamic combination of movement and stasis characterise individual and group responses to fooding. Ly asks whether describing certain individuals as ‘displaced’ has any utility when individuals who do not move may be equally if not more in need of assistance and calls for a more generalised human rights and sustainable development approach. The particular situation of landless people comes into focus in Chapter 7, in which Md Abdul Awal Khan examines food-related displacement in Fulchhari upazila in Gaibandha district in Bangladesh. This chapter examines strategies used by individuals to avoid having to move and describes a situation where the implementation of national-level legal and policy frameworks lags far-behind ambition. This chapter also pays particular attention to the situation of persons with disabilities and their families and highlights the distinctive challenges faced by people who do not own the land they live on. In Chapter 8, Ahmad Rizky Mardhatillah Umar, Ezka Amalia, and Andika Putra consider the complexity of multi-level governance in Indonesia’s decentralised disaster management system. Taking the recurrent displacement of people as a consequence of ongoing eruptions of the Mt. Sinabung volcano, the authors describe how Indonesia’s robust and ambitious legal and policy framework, which also contains detailed provisions relating to the rights of persons with disabilities, does not have the intended impact at the local level. Key factors include institutional complexity and, in relation to the rights of persons with disabilities, a ‘logic of ableism’ that excludes persons with disabilities from consideration. The fnal section of the volume focuses on durable solutions to displacement. In Chapter 9, Bala Raju Nikku describes both short- and longer-distance displacement dynamics in the aftermath of the 2015 earthquakes in Nepal. Considering

14

Matthew Scott and Albert Salamanca

the particular experience of indigenous Tamang people living in Haku VDC in Rasuwa district, he examines obstacles to the achievement of durable solutions for people who remain close to their, now-destroyed, homes, as well as challenges faced by people who moved from this remote location to the urban centre of Kathmandu. Nikku argues that, despite having had a policy on internal displacement in place since 2007, Nepal has not taken adequate steps to facilitate durable solutions to internal displacement. In Chapter 10, Joseph Foukona traces the displacement of people living in informal urban settlements in Honiara, the capital of the Solomon Islands. After a period in temporary shelter, displaced people were given the option of relocating to a newly zoned part of the city. However, without property rights, and with limited livelihood options, many people simply returned to exposed and vulnerable informal settlements. While Foukona recognises the advances made in recent legal and policy developments, the failure to adequately address disaster risk in informal settlements and the protracted challenges associated with land title in the capital and elsewhere in the country means that internal displacement will continue to be a prominent feature in a country that is amongst the most exposed and vulnerable to disasters and the adverse impacts of climate change. The volume concludes by offering suggestions for further research, as well as more policy-oriented recommendations that can contribute to the best possible prevention of and preparedness for displacement, the protection of people during evacuation and throughout displacement, and the facilitation of durable solutions.

Notes 1 Reports are available at https://rwi.lu.se/disaster-displacement/. 2 See FRDP 2017–2030 Goal 1, Priority Action i(f): Strengthen capacities at all levels of government, administration and community through inclusive gender analysis, responsive decision-making systems, and human rights-based approaches to ensure effective delivery of development initiatives.

References AMCDRR (2018) Ulaanbaatar declaration. Available at: https://www.preventionweb.net/ english/professional/policies/v.php?id=59168 (Accessed: 11 May 2020). Bankoff, G. (2003) Cultures of disaster: society and natural hazard in the Philippines. London: RoutledgeCurzon. Butler, J. (1990) Gender trouble: feminism and the subversion of identity. Abingdon: Routledge. Cuaton, G.P. and Su, Y. (2020) ‘Local-indigenous knowledge on disaster risk reduction: insights from the Mamanwa indigenous peoples in Basey, Samar after Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines’, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 48, p. 1–11. Cedervall Lauta, K. (2015) Disaster law. Abingdon: Routledge. CRED and Guha-Sapir, D. (2020) EM-DAT: the emergency events database. Université catholique de Louvain. Available at: https://emdat.be (Accessed: 13 May 2020).

Internal displacement in Asia-Pacifc 15 Djoudi, H., Bruno L., Chloe V., Kiran A., Maria B., and Bimbika B.S. (2016) ‘Beyond dichotomies: gender and intersecting inequalities in climate change studies’, Ambio, 45(S3), pp. 248–62. Dominey-Howes, D., Gorman-Murray, A. and McKinnon, S. (2014) ‘Queering disasters: on the need to account for LGBTI experiences in natural disaster contexts’, Gender, Place & Culture, 21(7), pp. 905–18. Gaillard, J.C., Kristinne S., Benigno C.B., Soledad Natalia M.D., Andrew G.-M., Fagalua S., Vaito'a T. (2017) ‘Beyond men and women: a critical perspective on gender and disaster’, Disasters, 41(3), pp. 429–47. Gorman-Murray, A., McKinnon, S. and Dominey-Howes, D. (2014) ‘Queer domicide’, Home Cultures, 11(2), pp. 237–61. Government Offce for Science (2011) Foresight: migration and global environmental change. London: Government Offce for Science. Hewitt, K. (ed.) (1983) Interpretations of calamity from the viewpoint of human ecology. Boston, MA: Allen & Unwin Inc. Holland, B. (2015) ‘Recognition, participation, and power in the global struggle for environmental justice: the emerging politics of environmental rights and opportunities’, Politics, Groups, and Identities, 3(4), pp. 692–6. IDMC (2017) Positioned for action: displacement in the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction. Available at: https://www.internal-displacement.org/publications/posi tioned-for-action-displacement-in-the-sendai-framework-for-disaster-risk-reduction (Accessed: 16 May 2020). IPCC (2014) Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ——— (2019) Disaster displacement: a global review 2008–2018. Available at: https:// www.internal-displacement.org/sites/default/fles/publications/documents/201905-di saster-displacement-global-review-2008-2018.pdf (Accessed: 13 May 2020). ——— (2020a) Methodology. Available at: https://www.internal-displacement.org/da tabase/methodology (Accessed: 13 May 2020). ——— (2020b) Monitoring methodology for displacement associated with drought. Available at: https://www.internal-displacement.org/sites/default/fles/publications/documents /202001-Drought%20displacement.pdf (Accessed: 13 May 2020). ——— (2020c) Global internal displacement database. Available at: https://www.internal -displacement.org/database (Accessed: 16 May 2020). ——— (2018) Global warming of 1.5°C: an IPCC special report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty. IPCC. Available at: https://www. ipcc.ch/sr15/ (Accessed: 20 July 2020) Jolly, S. (2011) ‘Why is development work so straight? Heteronormativity in the international development industry’, Development in Practice, 21(1), pp. 18–28. Kälin, W. (1998) ‘The guiding principles on internal displacement – introduction’, International Journal of Refugee Law, 10(3), pp. 557–562. ——— (2008) The guiding principles on internal displacement: annotations. Washington, DC: American Society of International Law. McSherry, A. (2015) ‘From deviant to bakla, strong to stronger: mainstreaming sexual and gender minorities into disaster risk reduction in the Philippines’, Forum for Development Studies, 42(1), pp. 27–40.

16

Matthew Scott and Albert Salamanca

Oliver-Smith, A. (1996) ‘Anthropological research on hazards and disasters’, Annual Review of Anthropology, 25(1), pp. 303–328. Palagi, S. and Javernick-Will, A. (2018) Summary of survey: thirteen Tacloban City relocation sites. Boulder, CO: Global Projects and Organizations Research Group and Mortenson Center in Engineering for Developing Communities. Schlosberg, D. (2004) Reconceiving environmental justice: global movements and political theories,’ Environmental Politics, 13(3), pp. 517–40. ——— (2012) ‘Climate justice and capabilities: a framework for adaptation policy’, Ethics & International Affairs, 26(4), pp. 445–61. Schlosberg, D. and Carruthers, D. (2010) ‘Indigenous struggles, environmental justice, and community capabilities’, Global Environmental Politics, 10(4), pp. 12–35. Scott, M. (2019a) Background brief: key international standards and guidelines relating to displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. Lund: Raoul Wallenberg Institute. Available at: https://rwi.lu.se/publications/background-brief-key-internat ional-standards-and-guidelines-relating-to-displacement-in-the-context-of-disasters-a nd-climate-change/ (Accessed: 11 May 2020). ——— (2019b) ‘Accountability for state failures to prevent sexual assault in evacuation centres and temporary shelters: a human rights-based approach’, in Kinnvall, C. and Rydstrom, H. (eds.) Climate hazards, disasters, and gender ramifcations. Abingdon: Routledge. SPC (2016) Framework for resilient development in the Pacifc: an integrated approach to address climate change and disaster risk management 2017–2030. Available at: https://ww w.preventionweb.net/english/professional/policies/v.php?id=50272 (Accessed: 20 July 2020). Steffen, W., Rockström, J., Richardson, K., Lenton, T.M., Folke, C., Liverman, D. and Schellnhuber, H.J. (2018) ‘Trajectories of the earth system in the anthropocene’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115 (33), pp. 8252–8259. doi:10.1073/pnas.1810141115 UN CESCR (1999) General comment no. 12: the right to adequate food. E/C.12/1999/5. UN Commission on Human Rights (1991) Internally displaced persons. E/CN.4/ RES/1991/25. UN ESCAP (2019) The disaster riskscape across Asia-Pacifc: Asia-Pacifc disaster report 2019. Bangkok: United Nations. UN FCCC (2016) Report of the Conference of the parties on its twenty-frst session, held in Paris from 30 November to 13 December 2015: decisions adopted by the conference of the parties: Paris Agreement. FCCC/CP/2015/10/Add.1. UN OHCHR (2020) Call for inputs: internal displacement in the context of the slow-onset adverse effects of climate change. Available at: https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/IDP ersons/Pages/CallforInputs_IDPs_climate_change.aspx (Accessed: 27 May 2020). Wisner, B., Blaikie, P., Cannon, T. and Davis, I. (2004) At risk: natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters. Abingdon: Routledge (second edition).

Internal displacement in Asia-Pacifc 17

International legal and policy documents 1948 1966 1966 1979 1989 1998

1998

2006 2007 2015a 2015b

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (adopted 10 December 1948) UNGA Res217 A(III) International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 23 March 1976) 999 UNTS 171 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 3 January 1976) 993 UNTS 3 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (adopted 18 December 1979, entered into force 3 September 1981) 1249 UNTS 13 Convention on the Rights of the Child (adopted 20 November 1989, entered into force 2 September 1990) 1577 UNTS 3 Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. Addendum to Report of the Representative of the Secretary-General, Mr. Francis M. Deng, submitted pursuant to Commission resolution 1997/39. UN Commission on Human Rights (E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2) UN Commission on Human Rights. 1998. Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. Addendum to Report of the Representative of the Secretary-General, Mr. Francis M. Deng, submitted pursuant to Commission resolution 1997/39 (E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2) Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (adopted 13 December 2006, entered into force 3 May 2008) 2515 UNTS 3 UN General Assembly. United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. A/RES/61/295 UN General Assembly. Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015 (A/RES/70/1) UN General Assembly. Resolution 69/283, Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 (A/CONF.224/CRP.1)

2

The role of national law and policy in addressing displacement in the context of disasters and climate change in Asia and the Pacifc Matthew Scott

Introduction This chapter introduces the analytical framework for the research initiative as a whole. Each of the case studies in the volume adopts a human rights-based approach to the study of law, policy, and practice relating to displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. The principal reason for adopting this approach is because human rights are at the heart of the 1998 Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (the Guiding Principles), which have been repeatedly recognised by actors at international, regional, and national levels as an effective tool for addressing internal displacement (MacGuire 2018). However, although the Guiding Principles provide an indispensable cornerstone for a human rightsbased approach to addressing internal displacement, important limitations need to be recognised. This chapter, therefore, begins with an overview of what the Guiding Principles offer, and where there are limitations when it comes to addressing displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. This part of the chapter shows that insights from the feld of disaster risk reduction and management (DRRM), combined with guidance from human rights-based international standards and guidelines and practical recommendations by UN mandate holders considering particular instances of disaster-related displacement, provide critical complements to the Guiding Principles that states can draw upon when seeking to prevent and prepare for displacement, protect people during evacuation and throughout displacement, and facilitate durable solutions in the context of disasters and climate change. Additionally, building displacement considerations into measures designed to promote the realisation of the Sustainable Development Goals, and to further adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change, can help to tackle some of the root causes of displacement and overcome structural obstacles to durable solutions. The Guiding Principles, on their own, do not provide suffcient guidance to states. This chapter highlights the critical role of national law and policy in addressing internal displacement in the context of disasters and climate change and

Law and policy addressing displacement

19

argues that, in light of the insights gained from a detailed review of law and policy across eight countries in Asia and the Pacifc, there is a strong case to be made for enhancing the systematic integration of displacement-specifc measures into existing legal and policy frameworks. The chapter demonstrates the prevalence of human rights-based approaches to addressing different phases of displacement in legal and policy documents relating to DRRM and, to a lesser extent, climate change adaptation (CCA) from across Asia and the Pacifc. This analysis suggests that integrating specifc provisions relating to the prevention of and preparedness for displacement, protecting people during evacuation and throughout displacement, and facilitating durable solutions to displacement can readily be achieved within existing legal and policy frameworks, even if such measures do not in any way guarantee enhanced outcomes on the ground. Particularly in relation to DRRM, the frameworks often already refect key human rights principles and tend to be structured in a similar manner to the Guiding Principles by addressing measures to prevent and prepare for disasters, protect people during disasters, and help people to rebuild in the aftermath of disasters. However, although a more systematic integration of displacement considerations into DRRM and CCA law and policy is important and achievable, this strategy is on its own inadequate. As disaster displacement is the consequence of a natural hazard event interacting with exposed and vulnerable social conditions (consider Wisner et al. 2004), addressing the longer-term structural conditions that underpin the differential exposure and vulnerability of individuals, communities, and societies requires a more wide-reaching approach. For instance, agencies tasked with managing disaster risk cannot, on their own, tackle the structural challenges relating to discrimination on grounds such as ethnicity, gender, and age. They cannot, on their own, address the complex political and social issues relating to poverty, unequal land ownership, informal urban settlements, and non-compliance with building regulations. These and other issues constitute ‘root causes’ of disaster displacement, and also stand in the way of the achievement of durable solutions to displacement. They are also the issues that tend to receive far less attention in the legal and policy frameworks relating to DRRM and CCA that were considered as part of the research underpinning this volume. Integrating displacement considerations into DRRM and CCA law and policy is therefore a necessary but not suffcient measure to address displacement risk. It is also wholly inadequate for addressing existing displacement, which, owing to structural factors such as those identifed above, may be protracted (see Peters and Lovell 2020). In countries facing protracted disaster-related displacement, there is good reason to consider adopting legal and policy measures focusing expressly on displacement. This step, as will be discussed later in the chapter, has been initiated in Vanuatu and Bangladesh. However, as will be discussed later in this chapter, only a minority of countries in the region, and indeed in the world, have adopted bespoke legal and policy documents on internal displacement (Global Protection Cluster 2020). Another complementary approach entails integrating displacement considerations into wider sustainable development initiatives, and the widespread endorsement of the Sustainable Development Goals

20

Matthew Scott

(UNGA 2015a) offers a distinctive opportunity for states and other actors to invest in measures to tackle those structural factors that underpin exposure and vulnerability.

The Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement: A human rights-based framework in need of support The Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement were adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations two decades ago, following a broad consultative process led by the Representative of the United Nations Secretary-General on Internally Displaced Persons, Francis Deng. Starting in 1992, Deng’s task was to clarify how existing international law, including international refugee law, international human rights law, and international humanitarian law, applied in situations where people were forced from their homes but did not cross an international border (see Deng 1993, p. 4). The resulting Guiding Principles demonstrate how states have obligations under international law to protect people from and during displacement and to facilitate durable solutions to displacement. These different phases of displacement are addressed in Sections 2–5 of the Guiding Principles. Section 1 addresses overarching principles of nondiscrimination and highlights the core responsibility of the state to address the phenomenon of internal displacement. Although they were developed during the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (UNGA 1989), and Francis Deng was appointed in the same year as the adoption of the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Guiding Principles refect less concern for displacement in the context of disasters and climate change than they do for displacement in the context of armed confict, communal violence and the systematic violation of human rights. It is clear from the early analytical reports underpinning the Guiding Principles, together with the focus refected in the frst decade of reports by the Representative of the Secretary-General on the human rights of internally displaced persons (frst Francis Deng and from 2005 Walter Kälin) that armed confict was the primary concern of the international community. The frst analytical report by the Secretary-General (UN Economic and Social Council 1992) briefy identifes ‘natural disasters’ as one of the causes of internal displacement, but two of the three paragraphs in the section relate to the relocation of populations by the Ethiopian government between 1984 and 1988, with a narrative focusing on the political and military motivations behind such conduct. The frst report by Francis Deng, submitted to the Commission on Human Rights in 1993 (Deng 1993), identifes both similarities and differences between displacement in the context of confict (and other forms of physical violence) and displacement arising in the context of ‘natural disasters’: Displacement of large numbers of persons as a result of natural or man-made disasters such as foods, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, and nuclear or chemical accidents may lead the population to experience some of the same

Law and policy addressing displacement

21

problems as those who have been forced to leave their homes because of war, persecution, generalized violence and similar reasons because of the sudden and large-scale nature of the migration. There are also important distinctions: in most instances, they presumably would not suffer from discrimination, nor is there a priori any reason to presume that the authorities would be unwilling to respect their rights and provide needed assistance within the limits of available resources or with contributions from the international community. However, there have been well-documented cases of massive displacement resulting from a combination of natural causes and racial, social or political causes, in which serious and widespread human rights violations occurred. For these reasons, it would be preferable to include this particular type of category of displacement within the scope of the mandate on the internally displaced pending the availability of more information which might necessitate a different approach. (p. 15) Writing some years later, in the year the Guiding Principles were adopted by the General Assembly, Walter Kälin considered that ‘displacement caused by natural disasters’ raised ‘few human rights related questions’ (Kälin 1998, p. 558), suggesting that Deng’s original equivocation on the inclusion of disaster-related displacement in the Guiding Principles may have been well-founded. However, particularly in the aftermath of the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, this perspective changed considerably and will be described in more detail below. Examining the 39 country reports produced by the Representative of the Secretary-General between 1993 and 2009,1 the prioritisation of confict-related displacement over disaster-related displacement is evident. First, the choice of countries strongly refects the concerns of the UN Security Council, with 65 per cent of countries visited being the subject of resolutions during the period.2 Countries not the subject of UN Security Council resolutions during the period, including Colombia, Indonesia, Mexico, Nepal, Peru, the Philippines, the Russian Federation, Sri Lanka, Turkey, and Uganda, all suffered from protracted armed confict. Second, confict-related displacement was actively prioritised by the Representative even when disaster displacement was also prevalent in the country, as noted in the reports on Colombia, Mozambique, Armenia, Georgia, Indonesia, Sudan, Mexico, the Philippines, Turkey, Uganda, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Although mention is made of populations displaced by disasters in these countries, neither the phenomenon nor the human rights considerations that arise in this context are explored in any depth in these reports. A notable increase in attention to disaster-related displacement was triggered by the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, which prompted a report by the Representative of the Secretary-General Walter Kälin on the human rights dimensions of disaster-related displacement (Kälin 2005). This report represents the frst signifcant engagement by a UN mandate holder with the phenomenon of internal displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. The

22

Matthew Scott

report uses the framework established by the Guiding Principles to address issues relating to protection from and during displacement, and in relation to durable solutions. Signifcantly, refecting the limitations of the Guiding Principles themselves, as well as the lack of clear guidance from the only nascent international disaster law framework,3 the report provides extremely limited guidance on the steps that states may take to reduce displacement risk, noting only the observation by the Special Rapporteur on the Right to Housing that homes should be built in accordance with building codes in order to reduce the risk of them collapsing, highlighting that individuals should have access to legal remedies for loss of property, and recognising the potential role of early warning systems (Kälin 2005, p. 11–12). The similarities with confict-related displacement are more apparent in the recommendations relating to the protection of persons during displacement and include particular attention to the non-discrimination obligation, the question of forced evictions, arbitrary displacement and other restrictions on freedom of movement, family unity, access to education, loss of documentation, and procedural issues relating to active and meaningful participation. In relation to durable solutions, the Special Representative points to the challenges relating to returns to homes that continue to be exposed to disaster risk, together with the human rights challenges presented by the introduction of exclusion zones, along with issues relating to property rights. The Guiding Principles thus provide a framework for analysis, but in the context of disasters and climate change, there is a need to draw from other sources in order to be able to make relevant recommendations in the context of disasters and climate change. This approach is refected in later reports by the UN mandate holders on the human rights of internally displaced persons, as discussed later in the chapter.

A human rights-based approach to displacement in the context of disasters and climate change In addition to the temporal framing of state obligations in relation to the prevention stage, the protection during displacement stage, and the durable solutions stage, the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement also refect key elements of a human rights-based approach. Before providing some examples of how these principles apply in the context of disaster- and climate-related displacement, a brief sketch of the normative content of these elements is in order. Key elements of a human rights-based approach The focus adopted in this study on the state as the primary duty bearer with responsibility for addressing displacement risk does not diminish the critical role played by civil society, the private sector, religious organisations, and other nonstate actors, who will often be the frst to respond in a disaster. Indeed, in some parts of Asia and the Pacifc, the state is a remote actor and disaster risk management falls primarily on communities themselves. Although human rights law

Law and policy addressing displacement

23

almost exclusively binds only states, the approach described below can readily be adopted by non-state actors as well. Under international human rights law, state obligations extend beyond merely ‘respecting’ rights by not engaging in unlawful interference with their enjoyment. States have additional duties to both ‘protect’ and ‘fulfl’ human rights (Eide 1987). In the context of confict- and disaster-related displacement, respecting human rights might entail fnding a proportionate balance between the duty to protect life through a process of planned relocation and the right of individuals and communities to freedom of movement and residence (UNHCR, Brookings, Georgetown University 2015). The duty to protect rights means that states need to have mechanisms in place to regulate the conduct of third parties, including both individuals as well as groups, companies, and other non-state actors. With gender-based violence widely understood to increase in situations of disaster displacement, this duty to protect human rights means taking steps to reduce the risk of foreseeable harm, for example, in relation to gender-based violence in evacuation centres and temporary shelters (Scott 2019a). Finally, the duty to fulfl human rights means that the state may be required to directly provide food, shelter, water, and other forms of material assistance when individuals and groups are unable to enjoy the minimum core of economic and social rights on their own (UN CESCR 1999). This principle is particularly relevant in situations of disaster. In order to accurately sketch the scope of state obligations to prevent and prepare for displacement, protect people during evacuation and throughout displacement, and facilitate durable solutions, the typology described above can be complemented by the identifcation of four distinctive elements of a human rights-based approach. Drawing upon and consolidating existing formulations (see Cubie and Hesselman 2015), this volume condenses a human rights-based approach into four key elements. These include • • • •

Governance Procedural Substantive Non-discrimination and equality

The governance element focuses on the existence and quality of the legal and policy framework, as well as principles of transparency, access to justice, and accountability. Does the legal and policy framework expressly adopt human rights standards? Is displacement mainstreamed throughout the relevant legal and policy framework? What standard operating procedures have been developed to address the prevention of and preparedness for displacement, protection during evacuation and throughout displacement, and facilitation of durable solutions? Which actors are responsible for the implementation of relevant measures, and what mechanisms are in place for affected individuals to complain about or appeal against decisions or courses of action? These are some of the questions that should be asked when adopting a human rights-based approach.

24

Matthew Scott

The procedural element focuses on consultation with and participation of people who have an interest in the particular matter at hand. Individuals have a right under international human rights law to participate in public life (UN CCPR 1996). In the context of displacement, the principle of free, prior, and informed consent (UN OHCHR 2013) is highly relevant and relates to situations such as planned relocation and forced evacuation, both of which are discussed in more detail in this volume. The centrality of participation to DRRM cannot be overstated and applies to measures relating to each of the three stages in the analytical framework based on the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. The procedural element of the human rights-based approach also includes the right to information. This right, which is closely connected to the transparency obligation, requires states to make information available to the public, both by avoiding restrictions on access that are not for a legitimate purpose, as well as by taking positive steps to disseminate information in accessible formats.4 This right is of critical importance in the context of disasters and climate change, where people have a right to know the kind of risks that they are exposed to, the measures in place to protect them, and to have access to early warning when hazard events take place (see Riccardi 2018). The substantive element entails the direct and intentional reference to human rights at all levels, including in law, policy, and practice. Relevant rights include, but are not limited to, the right to life, the right to work, the right to adequate food, the right to adequate shelter, the right to health, the right to water, and the right to social security. Other rights have been established that focus specifcally on the rights of persons with disabilities, women, Indigenous Peoples, minority ethnic groups, and children. These rights have been recognised by the vast majority of states in the international community in treaties such as the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the 2006 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and others included in the Table of Treaties and International Legal and Policy Documents included at the beginning of this volume. What these rights mean in practice has been developed in detail by treaty monitoring bodies in General Comments and General Recommendations,5 as well as in expressly human rights-based standards and guidelines, such as the Sphere Standards (2018) and the IASC Operational Guidelines on the Protection of Persons in Situations of Natural Disasters (2011). However, although substantive human rights have informed the development of key international standards and guidelines relating to protection during evacuation and throughout displacement, a human rights-based approach calls for consideration of substantive rights at each of the three stages of displacement. Preventing and preparing for displacement means taking steps to address the root causes of displacement, including economic and social inequality, access to resources, livelihoods, shelter, and so forth. It also entails taking steps to enhance ‘hard’ infrastructure, including food control systems, homes, and evacuation centres. Tackling the particular exposure and vulnerability of informal urban settlements, including through risk-sensitive upgrading initiatives, also falls within

Law and policy addressing displacement

25

this context as part of the right to shelter (see UN CESCR 1991). Substantive rights also inform the question of durable solutions to displacement, as refected in the set of eight key features articulated and further elaborated in international standards and guidelines, in particular the IASC Framework on Durable Solutions (2010). Finally, the non-discrimination and equality element is so widely endorsed by states that it has been recognised by some as having attained the status of customary international law (Inter-American Court of Human Rights 2003; International Court of Justice 1971; Lillich 1984). Unsurprisingly, the legal and policy framework in each of the eight countries of this study refected this principle. In practice, what the obligation represents is a duty on the part of states to refrain from conduct that unjustifably treats some people worse than others on account of a particular characteristic such as their ethnicity, disability, gender, age, religious belief, and so forth. Equally, the non-discrimination and equality obligation requires states to take positive steps to address existing patterns of discrimination and reasons for inequality. Taking positive steps to ensure equality of treatment for all, irrespective of gender, age, disability, ethnicity, and other characteristics entails measures relating to each of the other three elements of the human rights-based approach. For example, it entails taking account of the particular situation of persons with disabilities when drafting national and local law, policy, plans, and procedures. It requires positive measures to ensure the full, active, and meaningful participation of women at all levels of disaster management and CCA. It recognises that children, older people, persons with disabilities, people with non-normative genders and sexualities, and others may face particular challenges accessing humanitarian relief, and therefore require additional support in situations of displacement and in reaching a durable solution to displacement. As noted in the introduction to this volume, a human rights-based and gender-equal approach also entails the recognition and promotion of individual capabilities, rather than casting people who fall outside of the majority as ‘vulnerable.’ A human rights-based approach thus focuses on the responsibility of states to take steps, to the maximum of available resources, to prevent and prepare for displacement, protect people during evacuation and throughout displacement, and facilitate durable solutions in a manner that promotes the full and equal enjoyment of human rights by all, tailoring interventions according to intersecting gender, age, ethnicity, or other factors that can contribute to differential exposure and vulnerability. The relevance of this approach is becoming increasingly apparent to members of the international human rights treaty monitoring bodies, with a specifc General Recommendation being issued by the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (2018), and multiple comments about state’s overarching DRRM and CCA obligations in Concluding Observations.6 In what follows, this human rights-based approach is further developed, addressing the three phases of displacement as outlined in the Guiding Principles.

26

Matthew Scott

Prevention of and preparedness for displacement From the outset, consideration of displacement in the context of disasters and climate change requires measures not only to prevent displacement but to prepare for it as well. One consequence of the initial framing of the relationship between disasters, human rights, and internal displacement is that, beyond calling on states to avoid ‘arbitrary displacement,’ Section 2 of the Guiding Principles on ‘Principles Relating to Protection from Displacement’ does not in any way refect the kinds of measures that states can take to address the risk of displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. The Guiding Principles are also silent on how states may prepare for displacement in this context. This is not surprising given the attention of the legal team drafting the document to the crime of ‘ethnic cleansing’ when developing the content of this duty to prevent displacement (Deng and Cohen 2018. See also Morel et al. 2012; Adeola 2016). Principle 5 could be read as enjoining states to engage in DRRM and CCA work, but this was not within the frame of reference of the relevant actors at the time, and the international legal landscape has developed considerably since then. Principle 5 reads: All authorities and international actors shall respect and ensure respect for their obligations under international law, including human rights and humanitarian law, in all circumstances, so as to prevent and avoid conditions that might lead to displacement of persons. It is now an established principle of international law that states have a duty to take steps to reduce the risk presented by foreseeable hazards. Draft Article 9 of the International Law Commission’s Draft Articles on the Protection of Persons in Situations of Disasters (2016) provides: 1. Each State shall reduce the risk of disasters by taking appropriate measures, including through legislation and regulations, to prevent, mitigate, and prepare for disasters. 2. Disaster risk reduction measures include the conduct of risk assessments, the collection and dissemination of risk and past loss information, and the installation and operation of early warning systems. This provision refects fndings of the European Court of Human Rights in cases such as Budayeva v Russian Federation and Öneryildiz v Turkey, as well as judgments from the International Court of Justice in the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons and the Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project cases (Valencia-Ospina 2013). With a DRRM obligation established under international law, Principle 5 of the Guiding Principles invites an interpretation that emphasises the obligations of states to take steps to reduce the risk of disaster- and climate-related displacement. This insight complements the annotations to the Guiding Principles, prepared by Walter Kälin (Kälin 2008), which focus exclusively on armed confict and other ‘tensions and disturbances’ (Kälin 2008, p. 25).

Law and policy addressing displacement

27

The only provisions in Section 2 that are specifcally relevant to disasters are found in Principles 6 and 7. Principle 6 prohibits displacement ‘unless the safety and health of those affected requires their evacuation’ and Principle 7 requires ‘the free and informed consent of those to be displaced,’ along with the involvement of ‘those affected, particularly women, in the planning and management of their relocation’ in situations other than during the emergency stages of a disaster. Clearly, the focus is on constraining the potentially malign conduct of state actors, rather than providing guidance on the kinds of measures that responsible actors can take to actively reduce displacement risk. Principles 6 and 7 are highly relevant when considering issues of forced evacuations that arise in some of the case studies in this volume (see the Vanuatu chapter by Van Geelen and Wewerinke-Singh, and Quan’s chapter on the Philippines), but they fall well short of addressing the myriad measures that states can take to reduce displacement risk arising from natural hazards and climate change. Measures that specifcally reduce displacement risk include risk-sensitive land use planning to avoid settlements in hazard-prone areas, identifcation of individuals and groups who are particularly exposed and vulnerable to displacement risk, targeting resilience-building programmes to those at risk, formally recognising informal settlements and including them in DRRM and CCA planning, monitoring displacement risk and ensuring incorporation of this issue in early warnings, amongst many others (UNDRR 2019a). There is a clear need, in this context, to look beyond the Guiding Principles, to the signifcant established and emerging body of international standards and guidelines relating to DRRM and CCA. This point was already recognised in the 2008 Brookings Institution manual for law and policy makers on protecting internally displaced persons (Brookings Institution 2008), which notes: states have the primary responsibility to protect the people and property in their territory from natural disasters through measures including the integration of risk reduction into development policies and the adoption or modifcation of legislation. (p. 45) The 2015 Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNGA 2015b) provides a cornerstone in this regard. Paragraph 17 sets the goal: Prevent new and reduce existing disaster risk through the implementation of integrated and inclusive economic, structural, legal, social, health, cultural, educational, environmental, technological, political and institutional measures that prevent and reduce hazard exposure and vulnerability to disaster, increase preparedness for response and recovery, and thus strengthen resilience. The Framework embeds DRRM within the wider project of sustainable development and poverty reduction refected in the Sustainable Development Goals (para 2), providing a powerful synergistic platform for enhancing measures to

28

Matthew Scott

prevent and prepare for displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. Adopted by the General Assembly in June 2015, the Sendai Framework addresses multiple aspects of displacement, from prevention through to durable solutions. Paragraph 27(k) promotes the formulation of public policies, where applicable, aimed at addressing the issues of prevention or relocation, where possible, of human settlements in disaster riskprone zones, subject to national law and legal systems. Paragraph 33(h) of the Framework calls on national and local actors: To promote regular disaster preparedness, response and recovery exercises, including evacuation drills, training and the establishment of area-based support systems, with a view to ensuring rapid and effective response to disasters and related displacement, including access to safe shelter, essential food and non-food relief supplies, as appropriate to local needs. One of the recommendations to emerge from the 2019 Global Platform on Disaster Risk Reduction called for greater integration of displacement considerations in DRR: Governments and the international community must do more to reduce the risk of disaster displacement before disasters strike. Disaster risk reduction strategies and policies should address the drivers and consequences of disaster displacement and contribute to durable solutions. (UNDRR 2019b, para 28) The Sendai Framework has been widely endorsed, including across Asia and the Pacifc. The 2018 Ulaanbaatar Declaration of the Asian Ministerial Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction, for instance, recognises ‘the importance of ensuring coherence among the global frameworks such as the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030’ amongst others (AMCDRR 2018). A human rights-based approach is expressly endorsed at paragraph 11. Similarly, the Framework for Resilient Development in the Pacifc situates itself as a regional contribution to the implementation of these same global frameworks (SPC 2016), and also expressly endorses a human rights-based approach across the Framework. As noted in the introduction to this volume, both of these highlevel documents recognise displacement in the context of disasters and climate change as a challenge requiring particular attention. Neither acknowledges the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, suggesting that integration of displacement into DRRM, CCA, and sustainable development frameworks may prove more expedient than seeking bespoke legal and policy frameworks focusing

Law and policy addressing displacement

29

on internal displacement, even if the latter has distinct advantages as recognised above and later in this chapter. UN mandate holders on internal displacement have been advocating better integration of displacement considerations into DRRM, CCA and development frameworks since Kälin’s 2005 report on tsunami-related displacement. Over the course of his mandate, Chaloka Beyani conducted a number of country visits during which he explored in detail the situation of persons displaced in the context of disasters and climate change. Following visits to Iraq (Beyani 2011) and Kenya (Beyani 2012a), which include considered engagement with the issue of disasterand climate change-related internal displacement, Beyani conducted the frst targeted country visit focusing expressly on this form of displacement. The purpose of his 2011 visit to the Maldives was ‘to examine the current situation of persons who were internally displaced as a result of the 2004 tsunami, and to assess in particular the achievement of durable solutions’ (Beyani 2012b, para 1). He also sought ‘to study issues related to risks of potential internal displacement in the future, including due to environmental factors and the effects of climate change’ (Beyani 2012b, para 1). In his report, the Special Rapporteur considers the legal and policy framework that the Maldives had developed since the tsunami, including a Disaster Management Bill and a Strategic National Action Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction and Climate Change Adaptation 2010–2020 (SNAP). He argues for more integration of displacement considerations into the Bill. While recognising that measures included in the SNAP, such as safe housing, coastal protection projects, risk-sensitive use of land and development strategies, amongst others, contribute to the prevention of displacement, Beyani recommends more express integration of displacement considerations and references key international standards and guidelines, such as the IASC Operational Guidelines for the Protection of Persons in Situations of Natural Disasters. The remainder of the report focuses on the DRRM measures that the Maldives is taking, which the Special Rapporteur commends. At the same time, he points to an important limitation: This singular focus on prevention has resulted in a failure to systematically put in place a national framework to actually address internal displacement, which is predicted to increase as a result of both sudden-onset and slow-onset natural disasters. (Beyani 2012b, para 37) He argues that: a policy, legal and institutional framework on internal displacement in line with the Guiding Principles and a human rights-based approach would be necessary components of a preparedness and climate change adaptation strategy. (Beyani 2012b, para 25)

30

Matthew Scott

Protecting people during evacuation and throughout displacement When it comes to Section 3 of the Guiding Principles on ‘Principles Relating to Protection During Displacement,’ the guidance is more evenly applicable to both confict- and disaster-related displacement, notwithstanding the fact that Principles 10, 11, and 13 are predominantly concerned with issues arising in the context of armed confict and other forms of physical violence. Subsequent provisions focus on substantive economic and social as well as civil and political rights, and include rights to freedom of movement and to seek asylum (Principles 14 and 15), rights relating to family and private life (Principles 16 and 17), rights to an adequate standard of living and health (Principles 18 and 19), the right to recognition as a person before the law (Principle 20), the right to private property (Principle 21), multiple civil and political rights relating to freedom of expression, assembly, voting, and others (Principle 22), and the right to education (Principle 23), along with principles in Section 4 on the delivery of humanitarian assistance. The predicament of being internally displaced gives rise to specifc challenges that are not experienced by individuals who, despite being affected by confict or disaster, do not move. In particular, evacuation centres and temporary shelters can, despite being intended as places of safety, for different reasons become places of exacerbated risk. Gender-based violence is widely reported in such places (Scott 2019a), as is discrimination in relief distribution (IFRC 2007). Issues relating to access to information, participation in centre management, and adaptation of facilities to address the particular situation of persons with disabilities all need to be taken into account by responsible authorities planning for and dealing with situations of internal displacement. A human rights-based approach draws attention to key considerations included in Section 3 of the Guiding Principles. The relevance of a human rights-based approach is clear from the intervention of several UN mandate holders7 in the aftermath of Cyclone Pam, which struck Vanuatu in 2015. Their observations warrant quoting at length, as they express the intersecting human rights challenges that are common to disaster displacement situations worldwide: Temporary housing is an essential aspect of an emergency response, however it must still meet human rights standards and it must not be the sole focus. Those who are staying with relatives or families should also be assisted appropriately. Longer-term housing needs must also be considered and planned for immediately. Lessons learned from past natural disasters around the world shed light on the way forward. In all phases of disaster response the right to adequate housing should be respected and protected. This means ensuring security of tenure; availability of services, materials, facilities and infrastructure; affordability, habitability and accessibility of housing; an appropriate location for housing; and cultural adequacy.

Law and policy addressing displacement

31

We are concerned over the conditions in evacuation centres, which reportedly vary enormously, with overcrowding, privacy and security identifed as serious issues. We are particularly concerned about the risk of sexual violence against women and girls, as lighting is lacking in most of the centres. In the coming months as the rebuilding process evolves, access to housing, land or space will become an important part of rehabilitation. We are particularly concerned for the most marginalized groups. They will need special attention – for example, women’s privacy needs and the rights and needs of those with disabilities must be addressed. An age perspective has also to be included in all stages of disaster management and policies, from their elaboration to their execution. (UN OHCHR 2013) This intervention highlights how principles developed in the wider feld of international human rights law help to add depth to the generality of the Guiding Principles. Perhaps again owing to the preoccupation with constraining the malign conduct of state actors, and particularly in the context of armed confict, what is missing from Section 3 is guidance relating to the protection of people during evacuation. The Guiding Principles do not assist planners and emergency responders in preparing for and responding to situations where potentially large numbers of people need to be moved from their homes to places of safety. Rather, the Guiding Principles move from provisions discouraging states from engaging in arbitrary displacement in Section 2 to provisions relating to the human rights of people who are displaced in Section 3. The space in between, during which people move from their homes to another location, is overlooked. Consequently, for states concerned with protecting people during this very preliminary stage of displacement, further guidance is required. Fortunately, some human rights-based guidelines, in particular, the MEND Guide (CCCM 2014) produced by the Camp Coordination and Camp Management Cluster, are available. This guide points to considerations relating to the development of evacuation plans, population preparedness and training, hazard monitoring, early warning, decisions to evacuate, and conditions in evacuation centres. Human rights considerations, particularly relating to the duty of states to ensure equality and non-discrimination by taking into account the particular situation of potentially vulnerable individuals, such as those with disabilities, elderly people, children, women, and so forth are of critical importance in this early stage of displacement. Indeed, well-managed evacuation can be seen as a measure to reduce the adverse impacts of displacement, even if, by defnition, it does not prevent displacement from happening in the frst place. Substantial additional guidance has also been produced by international humanitarian actors, in particular by the Global Protection Cluster Handbook

32

Matthew Scott

for the Protection of Internally Displaced Persons (2010), the Inter-Agency Standing Committee’s (IASC) Operational Guidelines on the Protection of Persons in Situations of Natural Disasters (2011), IASC Guidelines for Integrating Gender-Based Violence Interventions in Humanitarian Action (2015), and the Sphere Standards (2018), all four of which elaborate a range of relevant human rights-based considerations for states to take into account when seeking to fulfl their obligations to protect people who are internally displaced. The guidance produced by the IASC, in particular, represents a conscious effort to mainstream the Guiding Principles into the work of UN agencies and international humanitarian organisations (Kälin et al. 2010). Signifcantly, whereas the Guiding Principles are very short and general, the specifcity of these four documents makes them extend to more than 1,500 pages, creating a potential accessibility problem for states with more limited resources, particularly when it comes to implementation at the sub-national level. A key challenge for states dealing with internal displacement in the context of disasters and climate change relates to the incorporation of this vast body of key international standards and guidelines into sub-national emergency preparedness planning. Our research project was informed by a consolidation of these key international standards and guidelines (Scott 2019b), which could be of use to sub-national actors. Ongoing collaboration between RWI and the Asia Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC), Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI), and the Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB) focuses on integrating human rights into DRRM at national and sub-national levels across Asia and the Pacifc and includes a focus on different phases of displacement, including evacuation and camp management, as well as on how risk-sensitive land use planning can help to prevent displacement.8 The importance of legal and policy improvements notwithstanding, it is also important to recognise, as several authors in this volume do, that the scale of ambition refected in these standards is often unattainable at the local level. Although the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has emphasised that states are obliged to take steps to ensure the enjoyment of a ‘minimum core’ of such rights, even in situations of disasters (UN CESCR 1999), this ambition is often not even attained in everyday life, let alone in disasters (see Patel and Chadhuri 2019). However, as the Committee acknowledges: If the Covenant were to be read in such a way as not to establish such a minimum core obligation, it would be largely deprived of its raison d’être. By the same token, it must be noted that any assessment as to whether a State has discharged its minimum core obligation must also take account of resource constraints applying within the country concerned. Article 2 (1) obligates each State party to take the necessary steps ‘to the maximum of its available resources.’ In order for a State party to be able to attribute its failure to meet at least its minimum core obligations to a lack of available resources it must demonstrate that every effort has been made to use all resources that are at its disposition in an effort to satisfy, as a matter of priority, those minimum obligations. (UN CESCR 1990, para 10)

Law and policy addressing displacement

33

Yet again, the connection between the Sustainable Development Goals, DRRM, and a human rights-based approach to displacement are apparent. Beyani provides a clear example of this human rights-based approach to disaster displacement in his report on the Philippines in the aftermath of the 2013 Typhoon Haiyan. Visiting the country more than 18 months after the typhoon, Beyani describes conditions for some displaced people living in collective bunkhouses, some of which lacked running water or electricity and had inadequate waste management systems. In addition to the adverse health implications of such living conditions, Beyani also records a lack of access to healthcare, as well as a lack of specialised services for ‘the elderly, persons with disabilities or other vulnerable people, for whom bunkhouses could pose particular challenges, including relating to access and care’ (Beyani 2016, para 25). With displacement becoming protracted, youth complained of lack of access to education, and there was widespread concern about the lack of access to adequate livelihood opportunities. The risk of sexual violence in temporary shelters was voiced by many of the IDPs who spoke with the Special Rapporteur, owing both to the design of the shelters as well as their distance from other facilities, such as schools. Design faws also exposed residents to the risk of fre and fooding. Refecting on this visit, Beyani notes that ‘[i]nstitutional and policy frameworks have proved effective in the immediate crisis response and as the process of recovery began’ (Beyani 2016, para 91). He calls for the immediate needs of the IDPs to be addressed, including through enhanced cooperation and clarifcation of the respective roles and responsibilities between the national government and local government units. Although the examples from the bunkhouses demonstrate that national law and policy is not always implemented effectively in practice (a point consistently identifed in the chapters in this volume), the more enduring challenges relate to the achievement of durable solutions. Durable solutions The question of durable solutions, which is addressed in Section 5 of the Guiding Principles, emphasises the responsibility of the state to facilitate voluntary return home, local integration, or resettlement in another part of the country. Further guidance on what constitutes a durable solution has been developed by the InterAgency Standing Committee in its 2010 Framework on Durable Solutions, which recognises eight factors that need to be addressed. These include: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Safety and security Adequate standard of living Access to livelihoods Restoration of housing, land, and property Access to documentation Family reunifcation Participation in public affairs Access to effective remedies and justice

34

Matthew Scott

As will be described in more detail in the next section of this chapter, it is in relation to durable solutions that the national DRRM and CCA frameworks considered as part of the research initiative underpinning this volume tended to fall short. This makes sense. Although signifcant responsibility for taking steps to address disaster (and displacement) risk, and to protect people during and in the aftermath of a disaster can reasonably fall on DRRM and CCA actors (including in a coordinating role with other agencies focusing on, for instance, health, education, employment, and social security), achieving durable solutions to displacement is very much a question of sustainable development and climate change adaptation. It is in relation to the achievement of durable solutions, particularly in situations where displacement becomes protracted, that the development of legal and policy frameworks on internal displacement can be most helpful. Kälin’s 2009 report on disaster-related displacement in Somalia provides specifc guidance relating to durable solutions to disaster-related displacement. The Representative recommends: Durable solutions are also needed for those displaced by drought and other natural disasters. Many of these IDPs are pastoralists and nomads, who have lost all their livestock. Development interventions should aim to introduce supportive systems that would allow them a sustained living in rural areas, including those affected by drought or other natural disasters. (para 58) The same recognition of the need to integrate durable solutions within wider processes of sustainable development is a recurrent theme in subsequent reports of UN mandate holders addressing internal displacement following Kälin’s initial engagement with the issue in this 2009 report on Somalia. In addition to highlighting the central role of a ‘comprehensive national strategy’ on internal displacement in Kenya, Beyani calls for a number of development initiatives, including capacity building, the allocation of suffcient fnancial and human resources, support for livelihoods, and access to basic services. He further calls for ‘efforts in the areas of urban planning, national development strategies and land reforms [to] include a cohesive approach to internal displacement issues, and the rights of IDPs’ (Beyani 2012a, para 65). Following his 2011 visit, Beyani called on the Government of the Maldives to [s]pecifcally include internal displacement issues, including displacements outside of emergency contexts (in response to slow-onset natural disasters), into all relevant development plans and programmes, in line with a human rights-based approach and the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. (Beyani 2012b, para 71) However, while legal and policy frameworks play a crucial role in coordinating action, channelling funding, and promoting accountability, social and political factors play a determining role. This point is evident from the report of the Special Rapporteur following his visit to the Philippines:

Law and policy addressing displacement

35

Funding shortfalls, delays in allocation and distribution of funds and political challenges, including inadequate cooperation between national and local governments, are hampering essential recovery processes. Despite massive allocation of government funds and unprecedented international funding, progress has been slow or stalled in some locations. Allegations of corruption, unaccounted-for funds and mismanagement or redirection of funds must be investigated and the results made public. (Beyani 2016, para 94) The point is made even more clearly in a 2014 study on the challenges associated with securing durable solutions to the 2010 earthquake-related displacement in Haiti (Sherwood et al. 2014). The report, published by the Brooking Institution and IOM, records that almost 50 per cent of the population of Port au Prince, the Haitian capital, were displaced by the earthquake. Nearly 75 per cent described themselves as displaced four years after the earthquake. The authors explain: Extensive physical destruction, the massive nature of the displacement crisis, and the limited accessibility of urban land have hindered durable solutions. Forced evictions have further compromised many IDPs’ ability to fnd a place to settle, and to create a more stable life in the aftermath of the earthquake. Many of the socio-economic factors underlying exposure to displacement in the frst place are, not surprisingly, factors that also inhibit the durable resolution of displacement. These challenges have put certain IDPs at high risk of recurrent patterns of forced eviction, homelessness, disaster-related displacement, and extreme poverty. (p. 2) The same kind of development approach as advocated by the UN mandate holders is echoed by the authors of this report, with a particular emphasis on tailoring durable solutions to local realities. Alongside recommendations specifcally relating to housing market reform, they argue: Recognizing that displacement is not simply a humanitarian issue but an important development challenge, integrate displacement and durable solutions into relevant plans and policies at the local, national and international levels, including urban, housing, and development plans. Training and other forms of support may be necessary to achieve this goal. (p. 4) This fnal point echoes recommendations highlighted throughout this section that addressing displacement in the context of disasters and climate change entails the integration of displacement considerations into legal and policy frameworks relating to DRRM, CCA, and sustainable development, from national to local level, while recognising that social and political factors will also play a signifcant role in determining the extent to which people are protected from and during displacement, as well as the durability of any potential solutions to displacement. The remainder of this chapter provides an overview of the rich

36

Matthew Scott

legal and policy frameworks that were analysed as part of this research initiative. The following section demonstrates the kinds of ways in which displacement is integrated into national law and policy relating to DRRM and CCA,9 pointing out both strengths and limitations with regard to human rights-based standards that relate to this phenomenon. The fnal section provides a snapshot of some of the practical challenges that arise in specifc situations of disaster displacement where relevant law and policy is supposed to apply, providing a foretaste of the issues that are examined across the remainder of the volume.

National law and policy relevant to disaster displacement in Asia and the Pacifc Internal displacement is widespread across Asia and the Pacifc, yet none of the countries in Southeast Asia, South Asia, or the Pacifc has binding legislation on internal displacement, and only eight countries are identifed as having policy documents that focus on internal displacement (Global Protection Cluster 2020). Of these, only four (Nepal, Sri Lanka, Vanuatu, and Indonesia) address displacement in the context of disasters.10 With disasters responsible for the displacement of millions of people in the region every year, including nearly 25 million new displacements in 2019 alone (IDMC 2020), how states address displacement in the context of disasters and climate change is a pressing question. Clearly, adopting bespoke law and policy appears to be an exception, but our research demonstrates extensive, if not necessarily always systematic, treatment of displacement across DRRM and, albeit to a lesser extent, CCA frameworks. An earlier scoping study supported by the Platform on Disaster Displacement (Yonetani 2018) had identifed nearly 70 countries worldwide that, to some extent, address displacement within national legal and policy frameworks relating to DRRM, with evacuation the most common phase of displacement in focus. However, that study did not examine in any depth the specifc provisions of national legal and policy frameworks, but instead only provided an overview of the prevalence of key human mobility terms across a selection of documents. There is a clear need to dive deeper into these legal and policy frameworks to gain a more nuanced understanding of how states are addressing this phenomenon. To a substantial extent, the way DRRM and CCA legal and policy frameworks address displacement in the context of disasters and climate change remains an under-explored area of scholarship, which this volume contributes to developing. We asked two questions of the legal and policy frameworks examined for this research. First, we asked whether states consistently integrate measures to prevent and prepare for displacement, protect people during evacuation and throughout displacement, and facilitate durable solutions, or whether domestic legal and policy frameworks were less systematic in their treatment of different phases of displacement. Acknowledging the value of the human rights-based approach to addressing internal displacement that is refected in the Guiding Principles, we also asked to what extent domestic legal and policy provisions relating to displacement refect key international standards and guidelines. Thus, we were not

Law and policy addressing displacement

37

only interested in the question of whether displacement was addressed but also how it was addressed. These questions are answered in detail in a series of national law and policy reports produced by the Raoul Wallenberg Institute in collaboration with the academic partners who contributed to this volume.11 Each of the case studies in this volume contains a snapshot of the national legal and policy framework. Key insights from this research are summarised in fve sub-sections below. The frst sub-section begins with a general consideration of the extent to which the legal and policy frameworks of the eight countries included in this study refect a human rights-based approach to disaster displacement. Elements of such an approach include the express adoption of a human rights-based approach to DRRM and CCA, express mainstreaming of displacement across this framework, and more detailed standard operating procedures tackling specifc issues, such as the management of evacuation centres, the conduct of planned relocation, and so forth. After describing the legal and policy frameworks at this overarching level, the section turns to specifc measures identifed that relate to the three stages of displacement identifed in the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. Human rights and disaster displacement in national legal and policy frameworks For a region in which international human rights law is not always a welcome counterpart to the domestic legal and political order (Saul and Nasu 2011), it is noteworthy that a number of countries have adopted expressly human rightsbased approaches to DRRM and CCA. Although human rights language was clearly present in most of the national legal and policy frameworks surveyed as part of the research underpinning this volume, three countries stand out for their development of policy documents relating specifcally to displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. In Bangladesh, the National Strategy for the Management of Disaster- and Climate-Induced Internal Displacement (NSMDCIID) was originally drafted in 2015 by the Refugee and Migratory Movements Research Unit (RMMRU) of the University of Dhaka at the request of the Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief (MoDMR). However, the Strategy was never formally adopted and, at the time of writing in early 2020, a revised version was undergoing a consultative review process, including state and civil society actors.12 The Strategy, which expressly incorporates the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, describes a rights-based approach: An RBA to climate-induced internal displacement (CIID) is primarily based on rights and entitlements of the displaced population and enshrined under national and international human rights instruments including economic, social and cultural rights as well as the right to access to information and participation in decision-making. Furthermore, since poor and marginalized groups generally face disproportionate level of risk in any internal

38

Matthew Scott displacement situation, an RBA gives particular attention to prioritize their needs and ensure their protection. It also takes due cognizance of the principle of non-discrimination. (p. 10)

Similarly, Vanuatu’s 2018 National Policy on Climate Change and DisasterInduced Displacement represents Vanuatu’s commitment to addressing displacement from a human rights-based approach: the policy recognises the specifc vulnerabilities, rights, capacities and needs of populations affected by displacement (populations at-risk of displacement, displaced populations, internal migrants and host communities). It also acknowledges the risks of relocation if carried out without appropriate safeguards. (p. 18) Indonesia has also adopted a policy on internal disaster-related displacement. Although the 2018 Head of National Disaster Management Agency Regulation No. 03/2018 on the Handling of Internally Displaced Persons during Emergency Response13 uses the language of rights and includes provisions relating to participation, gender equality, and attention to people in vulnerable situations, it does not expressly adopt a human rights-based approach. Further, it does not invoke the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement and is not structured to address measures to prevent and prepare for displacement, protect people during evacuation and throughout displacement, and facilitate durable solutions. Although a number of important interventions are identifed, including measures relevant to the protection of both substantial and procedural rights, there are also important limitations in this policy. For instance, when describing the steps involved in relocation, the policy does not mention principles such as consultation, or free, prior, and informed consent, which are critical features of a human rightsbased approach. In contrast to the detailed policies developed in Bangladesh and Vanuatu, the Indonesia policy is brief and states that further detailed provisions will be set out in implementing instructions (para 23). However, Indonesia’s wider legal and policy environment does embrace human rights. Law No 8 of 2016 on Persons with Disabilities (Law 8/2016) expressly incorporates the 2006 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) into the domestic legal order, and includes provisions that address the obligation at Article 11 of the CRPD to take ‘all necessary measures to ensure the protection and safety of persons with disabilities in situations of risk, including situations of armed confict, humanitarian emergencies and the occurrence of natural disasters.’ As discussed further in the chapter on Indonesia, implementing regulations issued by the National Disaster Management Agency (BNPB) provide guidelines relating, for example, to early warning, protection during displacement, and assistance with resettlement. In relation to each of the three countries mentioned above, the displacement policies have either not yet been formally adopted by the government (in the case of Bangladesh) or were adopted only in 2018. It, therefore, remains too

Law and policy addressing displacement

39

early to tell how well they will be complied with in practice. Nepal and the Philippines are two other two countries that have policy documents that reference the Guiding Principles. Interestingly, although Nepal has had a Policy on Internal Displacement in place since 2007, this document is not referred to in any of the DRRM or CCA documents that make up Nepal’s legal and policy framework, making it a surprisingly peripheral document guiding the conduct of responsible actors in the aftermath of the 2015 earthquakes (see Nikku’s contribution in Chapter 9 of this volume). The reference in the Philippines framework is very brief, with the Guiding Principles included in a list of other documents that the 2011 National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Framework (NDRRMF) adheres to, including the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR) and the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, as well as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). In addition, displacement in the context of disasters and climate change is addressed, in different ways, in the following legal and policy documents: • • • • •

2011–2028 National Climate Change Action Plan 2010 Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act 2009–2019 Strategic National Action Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction 2016 Children’s Emergency Relief and Protection Act 2018 National Disaster Response Plans

Thus, displacement in the context of disasters and climate change is extensively addressed in the legal and policy framework relating to DRRM and CCA in the Philippines. At the same time, an initiative to introduce a law on internal displacement has been struggling through political processes for around a decade (Bermudez et al. 2018). The latest attempt to introduce a law on internal displacement was ultimately vetoed by the President, and, as Quan notes in his contribution to this volume, further progress has not been made since then. Cambodia’s legal and policy framework addresses displacement only to a limited extent, and not from a human rights-based approach. The National Action Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction (2014–2018) provides for the development of a policy for maintaining community ownership over the ‘safe grounds’14 and calls for a scoping study to identify appropriate community food shelters. Planned relocation is identifed as a Strategic Objective under the Cambodia Climate Change Strategic Plan 2014–2023 (CCCSP). Planned relocation is one of the increasingly popular measures that states are adopting to address the exposure of populations to disaster-related harm, including as a consequence of climate change (McAdam and Ferris 2015). However, this measure is often associated with serious human rights challenges, as affected groups are rarely consulted in a meaningful way, and inadequate safeguards are put in place to ensure that relocation is genuinely a last resort and that people will have access to adequate shelter, livelihoods, security, housing, land and property rights, education, and so forth

40

Matthew Scott

(McAdam and Ferris 2015). This is one area where the further integration of key international standards and guidelines into national law and policy would be particularly relevant. Thailand’s 2015 National Disaster Risk Management Plan contains extensive provisions relating to evacuation. Although the document does not expressly invoke a human rights-based approach, important features of this approach permeate the document. Notably, provisions in chapter 2 of the Plan, relating to evacuation shelters, expressly invoke the Sphere Standards (Sphere 2018), which, as noted above, themselves are expressly rights-based. Evacuation procedures also prioritise ‘vulnerable groups,’ including persons with disabilities, patients with special healthcare needs, the elderly, children, and women. The document also contains provisions that are relevant to the facilitation of durable solutions to displacement, including adopting an expressly participatory approach and taking steps to address underlying risk factors in order to ‘Build Back Better.’ The Plan also envisages a whole of government response, with responsibilities allocated to relevant ministries, such as the Ministry of Transport, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Social Welfare, and so forth. However, apart from the specifc focus on evacuation, the document does not focus expressly on displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. The Solomon Islands addresses displacement in its legal and policy framework, also with a particular focus on planned relocation. Planned relocation is identifed as a priority in the 2008 National Adaptation Programmes of Action and the 2012–2017 National Climate Change Policy, with the latter invoking ‘principles on the respect for culture and rights of indigenous people and gender equity and involvement of youth, children and people with special needs’ (p. 15). An interesting feature of the country’s 2018 National Disaster Management Plan is that it focuses on alignment with the regional Framework for Resilient Development in the Pacifc (FRDP), referred to earlier in this chapter. Priority action i(p) of Goal 1 of the FRDP calls upon national and sub-national governments and administrations to: Integrate human mobility aspects, where appropriate, including strengthening the capacity of governments and administrations to protect individuals and communities that are vulnerable to climate change and disaster displacement and migration, through targeted national policies and actions, including relocation and labour migration policies. (p. 15) Although the legal and policy framework in the Solomon Islands does not expressly incorporate the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, implementing agencies have acknowledged their relevance. The draft template on standard operating procedures for the National Protection Committee, established under the National Disaster Management Plan, suggests the following: To ensure quality response, the PC will ensure members are briefed on the NDMP and relevant government policies, guidelines and technical

Law and policy addressing displacement

41

standards. The PC will take account of international minimum standards and guidance for protection response, such as the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, and the IASC Guidelines on Protection of Persons in Situations of Natural Disasters. (p. 8) Here is a clear example of the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement informing the conduct of national and potentially sub-national actors, without needing to be adopted in a bespoke legal or policy document. Unfortunately, the National Disaster Management Plan itself does not refect the systematic treatment of displacement advocated by the Guiding Principles, and durable solutions are, in particular, quite absent from the country’s legal and policy framework. This lack of attention to durable solutions at the national law and policy level has implications for how responsible actors address displacement in the context of disasters and climate change, as developed by Joseph Foukona in Chapter 10 of this volume. Having a legal and policy framework in place that expressly integrates the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement contributes to the coherent treatment of displacement in national legal and policy frameworks. Without such a cornerstone document, displacement is less systematically addressed. However, many of the legal and policy frameworks that are not based on the Guiding Principles nevertheless contain robust, rights-based provisions that contribute to the prevention of and preparedness for displacement, protection during evacuation and throughout displacement, and, perhaps to a lesser extent, towards the facilitation of durable solutions. Examples of such measures are provided in the sub-sections below. Prevention of and preparedness for displacement Perhaps unsurprisingly given the scale and scope of intervention required to tackle root causes, most legal and policy frameworks surveyed for this volume simply reiterate the importance of taking such measures, rather than setting out an action plan that might be implemented to achieve the objective. In the Philippines, for example, the 2011 National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Framework sets out to ‘provide a common direction towards addressing underlying causes of vulnerability to help reduce and manage the risks to disasters’ (p. 3). It also highlights the indivisibility of DRRM and sustainable development. The framework expressly recognises the principle that ‘hazards become disasters only if vulnerable people and resources are affected by them’ (p. 4). Similarly, in Nepal, strengthening the capacity of people ‘to reduce their vulnerability and to enhance social cohesion’ is identifed as a recovery outcome in the 2016–2020 Post Disaster Recovery Framework. Notably, Nepal’s 2007 National Policy on Internal Displacement provides for ‘campaign-oriented programmes on displacement prevention by providing development security and social services to all Nepali people.’ However, as noted by Bala Raju Nikku

42

Matthew Scott

in Chapter 9 of this volume, this Policy has not been mainstreamed into wider DRRM law and policy and does not appear to have informed the response to the high levels of internal displacement resulting from the 2015 earthquakes. Whereas addressing the exposure and vulnerability of individuals and groups presents complex challenges relating to underlying processes of discrimination, marginalisation, and inequitable distribution of resources, the exposure and vulnerability of infrastructure can, subject to budgetary constraints, be more concretely addressed. Although many policies focus on identifcation and enhancement of evacuation centres and temporary shelters (consider national law and policy reports for Cambodia (Bernard 2020), Vanuatu (Van Geelen et al. 2020), and Nepal (Nikku and Scott 2020)), others take a more holistic approach. Indonesia and the Philippines, for example, emphasise the importance of risksensitive land use planning and enhancement of general infrastructure (Umar and Scott 2020; Quan and Scott 2020). Additional preparedness measures are articulated in the two human rightsbased policy documents that are expressly focused on displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. The Bangladesh National Strategy for the Management of Disaster- and Climate-Induced Internal Displacement contains over 40 actions that contribute to the prevention of displacement, including measures relating to the collection of disaggregated displacement risk data, risk forecasting, livelihood diversifcation, infrastructure upgrading, and risk-sensitive land use planning (Khan and Scott 2020). Similarly, Vanuatu’s National Policy on Climate Change and Disaster-Induced Displacement contains measures such as ensuring Provincial Disaster and Climate Risk Management Plans include planning for people living in informal settlements and other populations affected by displacement, revisiting rural and urban building codes and implementation practices to ensure they promote and support disaster risk reduction efforts, and exploring affordable micro-insurance and ‘climate insurance’ models to provide additional safety nets to remedy the loss of income, damage to housing, infrastructure, crops, and other assets from disasters (Van Geelen et al. 2020). Protection during evacuation and throughout displacement Unsurprisingly, given the historical focus within disaster management circles on emergency response, measures relating to the protection of persons during evacuation and throughout displacement were far more prevalent in national legal and policy frameworks than measures relating to the prevention of and preparation for displacement. Indeed, legal and policy frameworks in all of the eight countries refected in this volume contained references to evacuation and different elements of protection during displacement, even if the concept of displacement was not always directly refected in the text. Key elements of a human rightsbased approach were often refected in this context, even if human rights were not expressly invoked. Texts included references to substantive rights such as food, shelter, and health, as well as procedural rights relating to participation and

Law and policy addressing displacement

43

consultation, and attention to the particular situation of potentially vulnerable groups, refecting adherence to the non-discrimination and equality element. Some provisions, such as those refected in Bangladesh’s Standing Orders on Disaster, contain detailed guidance, for example, relating to the responsibilities of particular actors at local, provincial, and national levels (Khan and Scott 2020). More common, however, is for national-level provisions to refer to more local-level planning processes for more detailed guidance, including on the running of evacuation centres. In the Philippines, for example, s. 12(3)(16) of the 2010 Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act provides that the Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Offce shall: ensure that there is an effcient mechanism for immediate delivery of food, shelter and medical supplies for women and children, endeavour to create a special place where internally-displaced mothers can fnd help with breastfeeding, feed and care for their babies and give support to each other. Durable solutions Beyond the specifc policies on disaster- and climate-related displacement from Vanuatu and Bangladesh, the concept of durable solutions was rarely expressly invoked in national legal and policy frameworks, and several frameworks, such as those from the Solomon Islands and Cambodia, contained no reference to any of the forms of durable solution at all. Other frameworks contained scattered references to certain elements of durable solutions, such as resettlement or return, for instance in Indonesia and the Philippines. The benefts of having a bespoke legal or policy document focusing on displacement come through clearly at this point, as both the Bangladesh and Vanuatu policies contain robust provisions that have no parallel in the DRRM and CCA frameworks of other countries. For instance, refecting the cross-sectoral nature of durable solutions, Vanuatu’s Minister of Climate Change Adaptation, Meteorology, Geo-Hazards, Energy, Environment and Disaster Management, Hon. Ham. Lini Vanuaroroa, notes in his foreword to the country’s National Policy on Climate Change and Disaster-Induced Displacement: The Ministry urges other government and non-governmental partners leading sectoral-level interventions to use the displacement policy in mainstreaming displacement and migration considerations into their policies and operational plans in order to support durable solutions for communities affected by displacement. (p. 6) The phase ‘durable solution’ is referenced 55 times in the document, including with specifc reference to using the IASC Framework on Durable Solutions to facilitate monitoring and evaluation (p. 47). Similarly, the draft National Strategy for the Management of Disaster- and Climate-Induced Internal Displacement in Bangladesh also situates durable

44

Matthew Scott

solutions within a wider legal and policy framework, recognising urban development, rural development, land use policy, and housing policy as key sectors where the Strategy needs to be integrated (p. 22). The complexity of the phenomenon is also acknowledged: Different solutions may be used by different members of a family, as when some family members return to the place of origin (permanently or on a seasonal basis), while others work in another location. Solutions must therefore be fexible, and based on free and informed consent. (p. 11) Therefore, it follows that, while there is much to be gained by focusing on the integration of displacement considerations into DRRM and CCA frameworks, there is a distinct advantage in developing bespoke legal and policy documents focusing on the phenomenon of internal displacement. Although Deng was certainly correct in refecting on the potential differences between confict and disaster-related internal displacement, the potential for improved outcomes observed in confict-affected countries that adopted bespoke legal and policy frameworks on internal displacement (see Cardona-Fox 2018, MacGuire 2018) provides some further impetus for adopting such an approach in the context of disaster- and climate change-related displacement.

Obstacles to implementation of national legal and policy frameworks in particular situations of disaster displacement In practice, as the case studies in this volume demonstrate, multiple factors beyond national law and policy impact on how displacement (risk) is managed. Prominent amongst these reasons are issues of resources, capacity, and structural barriers. In several of the case studies, including Bangladesh, Indonesia, and Cambodia, we found that local actors had not heard of key legal and policy documents relating to disaster displacement, making all questions of their effcacy entirely moot. In other contexts, such as in the Philippines, DRRM actors were aware of both key international human rights standards, as well as specifc national-level requirements, but simply did not have the resources to take the steps they knew were required. At times, these limitations appear to present signifcant obstacles to the protection of people from and during displacement. At other times, resource constraints contributed to the development of innovative local-level solutions. A prominent example is the recruitment of local property owners to operate small-scale, community-based evacuation centres in their homes – a strategy identifed in the Philippines, Thailand, and Vanuatu. Although this strategy raises its own human rights issues, which are examined in the chapters in this volume, it also represents a potentially effective mechanism for enabling people to remain close to home, instead of having to move to evacuation centres where

Law and policy addressing displacement

45

potentially more signifcant human rights issues are present. This approach differs from the widespread phenomenon of community hosting observed in both confict and disaster-related displacement contexts worldwide, as it entails a more formal arrangement between the state, the property owner, and the individual who is (at risk of being) displaced. Further research on these mechanisms is indicated. In Bangladesh, despite detailed provisions relating generally to disaster management, and specifcally relating to the rights of persons with disabilities, individuals displaced in the context of fooding received limited relief, none of which was targeted to the particular situation of persons with disabilities (See Khan in Chapter 7 of this volume). A similar scenario played out in the context of evacuations relating to the eruption of Mt. Sinabung in Indonesia (see Umar, Amalia, and Putra in Chapter 8). In Nepal, people living in a remote part of Rasuwa district remained displaced three years after the 2015 earthquake, despite government initiatives to support reconstruction, and notwithstanding provisions on durable solutions in the 2007 Policy on Internal Displacement (See Nikku in Chapter 9). These cases identify obstacles relating to resources, public administration, and ways of seeing that systematically overlook certain groups in situations of vulnerability, such as persons with disabilities. As the challenges relating to implementation were identifed in the case studies that make up this volume, the limitations of the human rights-based approach also emerge. Although states may express a commitment to protect people from and during disasters and to facilitate reconstruction, implementation is intimately tied to questions of budgetary allocation and human and other resources. This state of affairs is most clearly articulated in legal and policy frameworks from Vanuatu and the Solomon Islands, both of which emphasise a ‘self-suffciency’ requirement in situations of disaster. The 2018 National Disaster Management Plan for the Solomon Islands, for example, emphasises: the driving philosophy for this plan is supporting self-help and avoiding dependence at whatever level is being dealt with – national, provincial, village and individual. (p. 12) Similarly, in Vanuatu, the 2016–2017 National Cyclone Support Plan provides for the public to be informed of the ‘self-suffciency requirement’ relating to ‘food, water, bedding, medical supplies… and toiletries’ (p. 20). This ‘self-suffciency’ requirement appears to operate across many of the countries that were included in the study, even if it was not often highlighted as clearly as in the Vanuatu and Solomon Islands frameworks. This is not surprising for a region where, in everyday life, 1.3 billion people are living in extreme poverty (Conceição et al. 2019) and the state is not always the primary source of authority or assistance (RWI 2020). The scale of support that individuals can hope to receive from the state is minimal, and this fact seriously undermines the potential for national law and policy to have an impact in particular instances of disaster displacement.

46

Matthew Scott

Against this backdrop, the notion highlighted earlier in this chapter that states are required under international human rights law to ensure the enjoyment of a minimum core of economic, social, and cultural rights, including in situations of disaster (UN CESCR 1990) is unlikely to resonate powerfully. Alternatively, there could be further gains to be made by engaging more closely with non-state actors, such as faith-based and civil society organisations, who are often at the forefront of relief efforts. As noted earlier, the human rights-based approach developed in this chapter is not exclusive to states and can readily be adopted by non-state actors as well. Other contexts identifed in this research provide potentially more concrete sites for emphasising the importance of adherence to a human rights-based approach, whether found in national law and policy or inspired by international standards and guidelines. A number of cases in this volume recount instances of the state actively assuming responsibility for the management of disaster displacement. In this kind of situation, where the state directs the response, the argument is even stronger that it needs to adhere to human rights principles. It is less a question of resource constraints in this context, and more a question of the procedure the state chooses to adopt, and the knowledge and commitment of responsible actors. Responding to Cyclone Pam in Vanuatu, or the 2014 foods in the Solomon Islands, or the 2018 eruption of Mt. Sinabung in Indonesia, state actors told people where to go and assumed responsibility for the management of evacuation centres. In each of these cases, our research reveals spaces where key international standards and guidelines, including in relation to participation, access to information, and the prohibition on arbitrary displacement, could have been more closely followed. Whereas in the frst two examples there was not then in place a relevant legal and policy framework for domestic actors to guide their actions, in the example of Mt. Sinabung in Indonesia, a host of relevant laws and policies directed the conduct of state actors towards the particular situation of persons with disabilities. Nonetheless, research suggests that the rights of persons with disabilities were not fully addressed in this context. Whereas some of the cases studies point to technical and fnancial measures that might be taken to address the displacement issues arising, others highlight the seemingly intractable nature of some displacement risk. The Thailand, Bangladesh, Nepal, and Solomon Islands studies relate to the particular situation of people living in informal settlements. With the population of urban areas expanding at an unprecedented rate in many parts of the world (UN Habitat 2016a), informal settlements are burgeoning, with signifcant implications for the enjoyment of human rights, including in the context of disaster displacement (McCallin et al. 2015). Often excluded from municipal DRRM initiatives, informal settlements are characterised by high levels of exposure and vulnerability (McCallin et al. 2015). In order to prevent displacement in the frst place, states will often need to take steps to upgrade existing infrastructure or to relocate populations to areas that are not exposed to hazards. The political and economic costs of such measures can be prohibitive. Consequently, living in an informal settlement presents itself as potentially a primary determinant of exposure to recurrent displacement, as people who lived in exposed and vulnerable informal

Law and policy addressing displacement

47

settlements before being displaced are unlikely to see their circumstances approximating the eight durable solutions indicators set out in the IASC Framework on Durable Solutions (2010). Indeed, with approximately one billion people living in informal settlements (UN Habitat 2016b), the scale and complexity of urban displacement risk warrant substantial, multidisciplinary academic and policylevel engagement.

Conclusion This chapter opened with an explanation for the adoption of a human rightsbased approach to addressing displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. Recognising the 1998 Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement as the cornerstone document setting out the key parameters for how states should protect people from and during displacement and facilitate durable solutions, the chapter also highlighted important limitations in this framework, including, in particular, in relation to measures relating to the prevention of and preparedness for displacement and the protection of people during evacuation and in relation to durable solutions. The case was made for a human rights-based approach to draw heavily on advances in felds including international disaster law and sustainable development, and in particular on the normative momentum generated by the adoption of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and the Sustainable Development Goals. With states across Asia and the Pacifc acknowledging the importance of addressing displacement in the context of disasters and climate change, the chapter considered select examples of the kinds of provisions states have adopted in DRRM and, to a lesser extent, CCA legal and policy documents. One reason why less focus is placed on CCA in this chapter, and indeed throughout the volume, is because the CCA legal and policy frameworks we reviewed as part of the research tended to engage less with displacement than the DRRM legal and policy frameworks. Additionally, as noted in Chapter 1, the volume is more immediately focused on displacement in the context of disasters, with climate change understood as playing a ‘risk amplifer’ role. Future research might examine forms of displacement more closely associated with climate change adaptation, such as planned relocation, as suggested in the conclusion to this volume. Although the research found widespread human rights language throughout these documents, and considerable guidance relating to different phases of displacement, displacement tended to be treated in an ad hoc manner, lacking the systematic approach that is provided when using the Guiding Principles as a framework document. Countries that had adopted an expressly human rightsbased policy on disaster- and climate change-related internal displacement had only done so very recently, making it too early to draw lessons about the extent to which such measures enhanced protection on the ground. Having established that law and policy across the region does address displacement, the remaining question, to which the remainder of this volume is devoted, asks about the role this legal and policy framework actually plays in addressing specifc instances of disaster displacement.

48

Matthew Scott

Notes 1 See https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/IDPersons/Pages/Visits.aspx (Accessed 24 April 2020). 2 See https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/content/resolutions-0 (Accessed 24 April 2020). 3 Kälin references the 2005–2015 Hyogo Declaration. This declaration was adopted at the same time as the Hyogo Framework for Action, which is the precursor to the 2015–2030 Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction. Paragraph 22 of the Hyogo Framework calls for ‘the implementation and strengthening of relevant international legal instruments related to disaster risk reduction,’ and this provided part of the impetus to the decision by the International Law Commission to include in 2006 the topic ‘Protection of Persons in Situations of Disasters’ in its programme of work. See Offcial Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-second Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/62/10), para 375. This process culminated in the presentation of the Draft Articles on the Protection of Persons in Situations of Disasters to the General Assembly. Whether the Draft Articles underpin an eventual convention, as recommended by the International Law Commission, remains to be determined. Thus, the feld of international disaster law has matured signifcantly in the 15 years since Kälin’s frst report on the role of the Guiding Principles in the context of disasters. This body of law provides an important complement to the Guiding Principles. 4 See the Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in DecisionMaking and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (adopted 25 June 1998, entered into force 30 October 2001) 2161 UNTS 447. 5 General Comments and General Recommendations are available on the website of the UN Offce of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, which includes pages for each of the treaty monitoring bodies. See https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/Pages/ HumanRightsBodies.aspx, accessed 4 May 2020. 6 See the National Law and Policy Reports on Displacement in the Context of Disasters and Climate Change at https://rwi.lu.se/disaster-displacement/, which include an entire section devoted to Concluding Observations from treaty monitoring bodies. 7 Ms Leilani Farha, Special Rapporteur on adequate housing; Mr Chaloka Beyani, Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons; Ms Catalina Devandas-Aguilar, Special Rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities; and Ms Rosa Kornfeld-Matte, Independent Expert on the enjoyment of all human rights by older persons. 8 See https://www.adpc.net/igo/contents/Publications/publications-Details.asp?pid=14 39 (Accessed: 28 May 2020). 9 The study began with a focus on the role of legal and policy frameworks relating expressly to DRRM and CCA play in addressing disaster- and climate change-related internal displacement. Addressing wider legal and policy frameworks, including those relating to sustainable development, was considered too ambitious a project at the time. The conclusion to this volume highlights this area as part of an agenda for further research. 10 The Global Protection Cluster (2020) identifes the National Strategy on the Management of Disaster- and Climate-Induced Internal Displacement as the basis for recognising Bangladesh as a country with a national policy on internal displacement. However, at the time of writing in early 2020, this policy had still not been formally adopted by the government. In addition, the Global Protection Cluster identifes Indonesia as not having a policy relating to disaster displacement. However, the Head of National Disaster Management Agency Regulation No. 03 Year 2018 on the Handling of Internally Displaced Persons during Emergency Response (currently only available in Bahasa Indonesia) sets out detailed provisions relating to the protection of persons during evacuation and throughout displacement and towards durable solutions. Consequently, Bangladesh has not been included amongst the countries.

Law and policy addressing displacement 11 12 13 14

49

Available at https://rwi.lu.se/disaster-displacement/. Personal communication with RMMRU, 23 April 2020. Currently only available in Bahasa Indonesia. See the description of this concept in Ly’s contribution in Chapter 6 of this volume.

References Adeola, R. (2016) ‘The right not to be arbitrarily displaced under the United Nations guiding principles on internal displacement’, African Human Rights Law Journal, 16, pp. 83–98. AMCDRR (2018) Ulaanbaatar declaration. Available at: https://www.preventionweb.net/ english/professional/policies/v.php?id=59168 (Accessed: 11 May 2020). Bermudez, R., Temprosa, F.T. and Benson, O.G. (2018) A disaster approach to displacement: IDPs in the Philippines. Available at: http://chr.gov.ph/a-disaster-approach-to-displacem ent-idps-in-the-philippines/ (Accessed: 4 May 2020). Bernard, V. (2020) Cambodia: national law and policy report on displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. Lund: Raoul Wallenberg Institute. Available at: https://rwi. lu.se/disaster-displacement/ (Accessed: 11 May 2020). Beyani, C. (2011) Report of the Representative of the Secretary-General on the human rights of internally displaced persons, Walter Kälin: addendum: visit to Iraq. A/HRC/16/43/Add.1. ——— (2012a) Report of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons, Chaloka Beyani: addendum: mission to Kenya. A/HRC/19/54/Add.2. ——— (2012b) Report of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons, Chaloka Beyani: addendum: mission to Maldives. A/HRC/19/54/Add.1. ——— (2016) Report of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons on his mission to the Philippines. A/HRC/32/35/Add.3. Brookings Institution (2008) Protecting internally displaced persons: a manual for law and policymakers, Washington DC: Brookings Institution. Available at: https://www.bro okings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/10_internal_displacement_manual.pdf (Accessed: 20 July 2020) Cardona-Fox, G. (2018) Exile within borders: a global look at commitment to the international regime to protect internally displaced persons. Leiden: Brill Nijhoff. CCCM Cluster (2014) MEND guide: comprehensive guide for planning mass evacuations in natural disasters: pilot document. Available at: https://www.preventionweb.net/publi cations/view/58230 (Accessed: 11 May 2020). Cubie, D. and Hesselman, M. (2015) ‘Accountability for the human rights implications of natural disasters’, Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, 33(1), pp. 9–41. Deng, F. (1993) Comprehensive study prepared by Mr. Francis M. Deng, Representative of the Secretary-General on the human rights issues related to internally displaced persons, pursuant to Commission on Human Rights resolution 1992/73. E/CN.4/1993/35. Deng, F. and R. Cohen (2018) ‘Developing the normative framework for IDPs’, International Journal of Refugee Law, 30(2), pp. 310–313. Eide, A. (1987) Report on the right to adequate food as a human right submitted by Mr. Asbjörn Eide, Special Rapporteur. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1987/23. Global Protection Cluster (2010) Handbook for the protection of internally displaced persons. Available at: https://reliefweb.int/report/world/handbook-protection-internally-disp laced-persons-enar (Accessed: 11 May 2020). ——— (2020) Global database of IDP laws and policies. Available at: https://www.globalprotect ioncluster.org/global-database-on-idp-laws-and-policies/ (Accessed: 11 May 2020).

50

Matthew Scott

IASC (2010) Framework on durable solutions for internally displaced persons. Available at: https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/other/iasc-framework-durable-solutionsinternally-displaced-persons (Accessed: 11 May 2020). ——— (2011) Operational guidelines on the protection of persons in situations of natural disasters. Available at: https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/meeting-humanitaria n-challenges-urban-areas/documents-public/iasc-operational-guidelines-protection (Accessed: 11 May 2020). ——— (2015) Guidelines for integrating gender-based violence interventions in humanitarian action. Available at: https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/working-group/ documents-public/iasc-guidelines-integrating-gender-based-violence-interventions (Accessed: 11 May 2020). IDMC (2020) Global report on internal displacement 2020. Available at: https://www.int ernal-displacement.org/global-report/grid2020/ (Accessed: 11 May 2020). IFRC (2007) World disasters report 2007: focus on discrimination. Available at: https://ww w.ifrc.org/en/publications-and-reports/world-disasters-report/wdr2007/ (Accessed: 11 May 2020). Inter-American Court of Human Rights (2003) Advisory opinion OC-18/03 of 17 September 2003, Juridical condition and rights of undocumented migrants, para 101. International Court of Justice (1971) Legal consequences for states of the continued presence of South Africa in Namibia (South West Africa) notwithstanding Security Council Resolution 276 (1970) (advisory opinion). ICJ Rep 16, 76. Separate Opinion of Judge Ammoun. Kälin, W. (1998) ‘The guiding principles on internal displacement – introduction’, International Journal of Refugee Law, 10(3), pp. 557–562. ——— (2005) ‘The guiding principles on internal displacement as international minimum standard and protection tool’, Refugee Survey Quarterly, 24(3), pp. 27–36. ——— (2008) The guiding principles on internal displacement: annotations. Washington, DC: American Society of International Law. ——— (2009) Report of the Representative of the Secretary-General on the human rights of internally displaced persons, Walter Kälin: addendum: mission to Somalia. A/HRC/13/21/Add.2. Kälin, W., Koser, K., Solomon, A. and Williams, R.C. (eds.) (2010) Incorporating the guiding principles on internal displacement into domestic law: issues and challenges. Washington, DC: American Society of International Law and The Brookings Institution. Khan, M.A.A. and Scott, M. (2020) Bangladesh: national law and policy report on displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. Lund: Raoul Wallenberg Institute. Available at: https://rwi.lu.se/disaster-displacement/ (Accessed: 10 May 2020). Lillich, R.B. (1984) ‘Civil rights’, in Meron, T. (ed.) Human rights in international law: legal and policy issues. Oxford: Oxford University Press. MacGuire, D. (2018) ‘The relationship between national normative frameworks on internal displacement and the reduction of displacement’, International Journal of Refugee Law, 30(2), pp. 269–286. McAdam, J. and Ferris, E. (2015) ‘Planned relocations in the context of climate change: unpacking the legal and conceptual issues’, Cambridge Journal of International Law, 4(1), pp. 137–166. McCallin, B., Scherer, I. and Duyne, J. (2015) Urban informal settlers displaced by disasters. IDMC. Available at: https://www.internal-displacement.org/sites/default/fles/publica tions/documents/201506-global-urban-informal-settlers.pdf (Accessed: 13 May 2020).

Law and policy addressing displacement

51

Morel, M., Stavropoulou, M. and Durieux, J. (2012) ‘The history and status of the right not to be displaced’, Forced Migration Review, 41, pp. 5–7. National Protection Committee of the Solomon Islands (n.d.) Standard operating procedures. Honiara Nikku, B. and Scott, M. (2020) Nepal: national law and policy report on displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. Lund: Raoul Wallenberg Institute. Available at: https://rwi.lu.se/disaster-displacement/ (Accessed: 11 May 2020). Patel, R.B. and Chadhuri, J. (2019) ‘Revisiting the Sphere Standards: comparing the revised Sphere Standards to living standards in three urban informal settlements in Nairobi, Kenya’, Journal of International Humanitarian Action, 4, pp. 1–10. doi:10.1186/ s41018-019-0054-y. Peters, K. and Lovell, E. (2020) Reducing the risk of protracted and multiple disaster displacements in Asia-Pacifc. ODI and UNDRR. Available at: https://www.undrr.org/ publication/reducing-risk-protracted-and-multiple-disaster-displacements-asia-pacifc (Accessed: 28 May 2020). Quan, R. and Scott, M. (2020) The Philippines: national law and policy report on displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. Lund: Raoul Wallenberg Institute. Available at: https://rwi.lu.se/disaster-displacement/ (Accessed: 11 May 2020). Riccardi, A. (2018) ‘The right to know: the role of transparency, access to information and freedom of expression in overcoming disasters’, in Zorzi Giustiniani, F., Sommario, E., Casolari, F. and Bartolini, G. (eds.) Routledge handbook of human rights and disasters. Abingdon: Routledge. RWI (2020) Narrative report: consultation on a human rights-based approach to displacement in the context of disasters and climate change in Vanuatu. Lund: Raoul Wallenberg Institute. Available at: https://rwi.lu.se/download/narrative-report-vanuatu-consultation/ (Accessed: 11 May 2020). Saul, B. and Nasu, H. (eds.) (2011) Human rights in the Asia-Pacifc region: towards institution building. Abingdon: Routledge. Scott, M. (2019a) ‘Accountability for state failures to prevent sexual assault in evacuation centres and temporary shelters: a human rights-based approach’, in Kinnvall, C. and Rydstrom, H. (eds.) Climate hazards, disasters, and gender ramifcations. Abingdon: Routledge. ——— (2019b) Background brief: key international standards and guidelines relating to displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. Lund: Raoul Wallenberg Institute. Available at: https://rwi.lu.se/publications/background-brief-key-internat ional-standards-and-guidelines-relating-to-displacement-in-the-context-of-disasters-a nd-climate-change/ (Accessed: 11 May 2020). Sherwood, A., Bradley, M., Rossi, L., Gitau, R., and Mellicker, B. (2014) Supporting durable solutions to urban, post-disaster displacement: challenges and opportunities in Haiti. Washington DC: Brookings Institution. Available at: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-c ontent/uploads/2016/07/Supporting-Durable-Solutions-to-DisplacementHaiti-Ma rch-4-2014.pdf (Accessed: 20 July 2020). SPC (2016) Framework for resilient development in the Pacifc: an integrated approach to address climate change and disaster risk management 2017–2030. Available at: https://ww w.preventionweb.net/english/professional/policies/v.php?id=50272 (Accessed: 20 July 2020).

52

Matthew Scott

Sphere (2018) The Sphere handbook. Available at: https://spherestandards.org/handboo k-2018/ (Accessed: 11 May 2020). Umar, A.R.M. and Scott, M. (2020) Indonesia: national law and policy report on displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. Lund: Raoul Wallenberg Institute. Available at: https://rwi.lu.se/disaster-displacement/ (Accessed: 11 May 2020). UN CCPR (1996) General comment no. 25: participation in public affairs and the right to vote. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.7. UN CEDAW (2018) General recommendation no. 37 on gender-related dimensions of disaster risk reduction in the context of climate change. CEDAW/C/GC/37. UN CESCR (1990) General comment no. 3: the nature of states parties’ obligations. E/1991/23. ——— (1991) General comment no. 4: the right to adequate housing. E/1992/23. ——— (1999) General comment no. 12: the right to adequate food. E/C.12/1999/5. UN Economic and Social Council (1992) Analytical report of the Secretary-General on internally displaced persons. E/CN.4/1992/23. UN Habitat (2015) Vanuatu: after devastation, UN experts call to protect human rights of all in disaster response. Available at https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/Dis playNews.aspx?NewsID=15739&LangID=E (Accessed: 27 April 2020). ——— (2016a) World cities report 2016: urbanization and development: emerging futures. Available at: https://unhabitat.org/sites/default/fles/download-manager-fles/WCR-2 016-WEB.pdf (Accessed: 13 May 2020). ——— (2016b) Slum almanac 2015–2016: tracking improvement in the lives of slum dwellers. Available at: https://unhabitat.org/sites/default/fles/download-manager-fles/Slum% 20Almanac%202015-2016_PSUP.pdf (Accessed: 13 May 2020). UN OHCHR (2013) Free, prior and informed consent of indigenous peoples. Available at: https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/ipeoples/freepriorandinformedconsent.pdf (Accessed: 12 May 2020). UNDRR (2019a) Words into action guidelines: disaster displacement: how to reduce risk, address impacts and strengthen resilience. Available at: https://www.undrr.org/publicat ion/words-action-guidelines-disaster-displacement-how-reduce-risk-address-impact s-and (Accessed: 11 May 2020). ——— (2019b) Co-chairs’ summary: global platform on disaster risk reduction 2019. Available at: https://www.preventionweb.net/fles/58809_chairsummary.pdf (Accessed: 12 May 2020). UNHCR, Brookings, Georgetown University (2015) Guidance on protecting people from disasters and environmental change through planned relocation. Available at: https://ww w.unhcr.org/protection/environment/562f798d9/planned-relocation-guidance-oc tober-2015.html (Accessed: 11 May2020). Valencia-Ospina, E. (2013) Sixth report on the protection of persons in the event of disasters, by Mr. Eduardo Valencia-Ospina, Special Rapporteur. A/CN.4/662. Van Geelen T., Wewerinke-Singh, M. Chikwanha, F. and Scott, M. (2020) Vanuatu: national law and policy report on displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. Lund: Raoul Wallenberg Institute. Available at: https://rwi.lu.se/disaster-displacement/ (Accessed: 11 May 2020). Wisner, B., Blaikie, P., Cannon, T. and Davis, I. (2004) At risk: natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters (second edition). London: Routledge. Yonetani, M. (2018) Mapping the baseline: to what extent are displacement and other forms of human mobility integrated in national and regional disaster risk reduction strategies? Platform on Disaster Displacement. Available at: https://www.preventionweb.net/publications/ view/65230 (Accessed: 11 May 2020).

Law and policy addressing displacement

53

International legal and policy documents 1948 1966 1966 1979 1989 1992 1998

2006 2015a 2015b 2016

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (adopted 10 December 1948) UNGA Res217 A(III) International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 3 January 1976) 993 UNTS 3 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (adopted 7 March 1966, entered into force 4 January 1969) Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (adopted 18 December 1979, entered into force 3 September 1981) 1249 UNTS 13 Convention on the Rights of the Child (adopted 20 November 1989, entered into force 2 September 1990) 1577 UNTS 3 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (adopted 9 May 1992, entered into force 21 March 1994) 1771 UNTS 107 Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. Addendum to Report of the Representative of the Secretary-General, Mr. Francis M. Deng, submitted pursuant to Commission resolution 1997/39. UN Commission on Human Rights. (E/CN.4/1998/53/ Add.2) Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (adopted 13 December 2006, entered into force 3 May 2008) 2515 UNTS 3 UN General Assembly. Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015 (A/RES/70/1) UN General Assembly. Resolution 69/283, Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, (A/CONF.224/CRP.1) International Law Commission Draft articles on the protection of persons in situations of disasters. Report of the International Law Commission, Sixty-eighth Session. A/71/10.

National legal and policy documents Bangladesh 2015 Cambodia 2014–2018 2014–2023 Indonesia 2018

National Strategy for the Management of Disaster- and ClimateInduced Internal Displacement Cambodia The National Action Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction Cambodia Climate Change Strategic Plan

2016

Indonesia 2018 Head of National Disaster Management Agency Regulation No. 03/2018 on the Handling of Internally Displaced Persons during Emergency Response Law No 8 of 2016 on Persons with Disabilities

Nepal 2016–2020 2007

Nepal 2016–2020 Post Disaster Recovery Framework. Nepal Policy on Internal Displacement in place since 2007

54

Matthew Scott

Philippines 2018 2016 2011 2011–2028 2010 2009–2019

National Disaster Response Plans Children’s Emergency Relief and Protection Act National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Framework (NDRRMF) National Climate Change Action Plan Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act Strategic National Action Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction

Solomon Islands 2018 2012–2017 2008

National Disaster Management Plan National Climate Change Policy National Adaptation Programmes of Action

Vanuatu 2018 2016–2017

National Policy on Climate Change and Disaster-Induced Displacement National Cyclone Support Plan

Prevention of and preparedness for displacement

3

Thailand Flooding disaster, people’s displacement, and state response: A case study of Hat Yai municipality Carl Middleton and Orapan Pratomlek

Introduction Hat Yai City in Songkhla Province is Thailand’s fourth-largest city and the trade and tourism centre of the South. Over the past several decades, the city’s population has rapidly expanded as has its role in Southern Thailand’s economy. One signifcant challenge faced by the city is fooding, with major foods most recently in 1988, 2000, and 2010, and some low-lying areas facing annual fooding. These foods have caused the loss of life, signifcant economic damage, and disruption to people’s lives, including displacement. The Thai government’s response has evolved over time, as has its capacity to respond. At frst, the focus was upon physical infrastructure, including dredging existing canals and the construction of new canals, especially the ‘Khlong Ror 1’ canal after the 2000 food, which is designed to redirect food water around the city. However, the 2010 food overwhelmed the canal’s capacity, and 80 per cent of the city was submerged, causing economic damage of more than USD 320 million (WWF 2015). The 2010 food led to the realisation amongst state agencies and civil society organisations (CSOs) that it was not possible to guarantee a ‘food-proof’ city with physical infrastructure alone (ADB 2015). This led to a project by the Asian Cities Climate Change Resilience Network (ACCCRN) to develop ‘soft infrastructure’ including an improved food warning mechanism, and the strengthening of collaboration between local government, community, CSOs, academics, and businesses to prepare communities to live with severe foods over the several days that they typically occur (Le Meur et al. 2013). The project complemented ongoing disaster management programmes of key state agencies, including the Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation (DDPM) and the Hat Yai City Municipal Government that have responsibilities under Thailand’s 2007 Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Act. Internationally, there is a growing recognition of the relationship between human rights, disasters, and internal displacement, including in the context of climate change (IASC 2011; Scott 2019). A range of rights are at risk including, inter alia, the right to life, security, food, health, shelter, education, housing, property, and livelihoods, as well as a range of civil and political rights (IASC 2011).

58

Carl Middleton and Orapan Pratomlek

A human rights-based approach views states as bearing the primary responsibility for protecting persons from harm associated with disaster-related displacement. It also foregrounds how some groups may be particularly vulnerable, including along (intersectional) lines of gender, ethnicity, age, health, and disability. The violation of human rights at times of disaster is not typically intentional, but rather the result of inadequate or inappropriate policies, resources, and on-theground practices (Lewis and Maguire 2016). Yet, this implies that human rights could be better protected if states were to invest more and better prepare disaster management strategies. In Thailand, there have been considerable analyses of the lessons learned from major food disasters including upon internally displaced people (IDPs) and international migrants, especially the 2004 tsunami and the 2011 ‘great food’ in the Chaophraya basin (e.g., Rigg et al. 2008; Thabchumpon and Arunotai 2018). However, these analyses have addressed a human rightsbased approach only to a limited extent. The purpose of this chapter is to analyse the impacts of fooding and displacement in Hat Yai City through a human rights lens. Based on interviews with state and non-state experts, and community leaders and members, we examine how displacement caused by fooding has changed over time as physical and soft infrastructure approaches have been established. Overall, we argue that an effective mechanism for preventing and preparing for displacement has been largely created for the majority of residents of Hat Yai City, including for the ten communities that were most food-prone in the past and are also amongst the less wealthy of the city’s residents. We highlight, however, that there are still several very poor informal communities who regularly experience fooding and displacement with limited state support, and whose human rights, therefore, remain at risk. We also fag the importance of ensuring the sustainability of the soft infrastructure. Finally, we also draw attention to the forced displacement related impacts of physical infrastructure, and the issue of food risk redistribution whereby the protection of Hat Yai City may create heightened food and livelihood risks in other areas. The chapter is structured as follows. In the next section, we introduce our research method. We then briefy outline Thailand’s recent experience of severe fooding and its legal framework. After that, we describe how fooding occurs in Hat Yai City and discuss the evolution of physical and soft infrastructure responses. In the latter part of the chapter, we look at the specifc issue of displacement and evaluate through a human rights lens, whether an effective mechanism for preventing and preparing for disaster displacement has been created.

Research method This research is based on a literature review and interviews with government offcers, representatives of civil society and international organisations, academics, and community leaders and members. The literature review assessed academic literature, legal and policy documents, and grey literature from credible sources in both English and Thai languages. Literature was identifed from online databases and sources, as well as materials collected during feldwork.

Thailand 59 We conducted two feld visits: 23–27 May 2018 and 3–7 October 2018. During the frst visit, we interviewed state and non-state actors to scope key issues regarding fooding and displacement. We also visited three communities alongside the U Tapao River in Hat Yai municipality that have been historically vulnerable to fooding. In Chan Viroj and Chanpratheeb communities, we conducted interviews with designated community leaders (one male and one female), and two to three random interviews with community members, ensuring that there was gender balance amongst the interviewees. We also visited one informal settlement within Chan Viroj, alongside a railway track, where we interviewed two informal community leaders (one male and one female) together, and separately three other households. During our second feld visit, we focused on the design, construction, and function of the Khlong Ror 1 canal. We travelled the 21 km length of the canal with a representative of the Royal Irrigation Department (RID), who explained about its design and operation, and also independently when we spoke with 22 randomly selected community members living alongside it in seven locations. We also revisited interviewees from the frst feld visit for additional discussion, conducted fve new interviews, and visited one more community on the U Tapao River in Hat Yai municipality, Wat Hat Yai Nai. Finally, we observed a meeting of the Hat Yai Flood Mitigation and Prevention committee, where government agencies, CSOs, and others shared updates and coordinated. Interviews were conducted either in English or Thai with translation. All interviews were transcribed and analysed according to our research questions. All interviewees are kept anonymous. Interviews with government agencies, civil society, international organisations, and academics focused on their role and experience regarding fooding and displacement, and their evaluation of the physical and soft infrastructure strategy in Hat Yai City. Interviews with food-prone communities in Hat Yai municipality addressed their experience of fooding, including community preparedness, advance warning systems, and the impact of foods and recovery on displacement and human rights. In all interviews, we paid attention to potentially marginalised groups.’ For communities along the Khlong Ror 1 canal, we asked regarding: the positive and negative impacts of the canal, including how some groups might be marginalised; access to information and participation in its original construction and subsequent expansion; and on the loss of land and assets, and displacement. We triangulated this data vis-à-vis interviews with the RID, academics, and CSOs. In summary, in addition to the interviews with community representatives, interviews were conducted with the following: Government agencies • • • • •

Disaster Prevention and Responsibility Department, and Department of Public Works, Hat Yai City municipality Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation (Provincial offce) Songkhla Provincial Health Offce Water Resource Regional Offce 8 Royal Irrigation Department (Offce 11 and Offce 16)

60

Carl Middleton and Orapan Pratomlek

Academics • •

Southern Natural Disaster Research Center, Prince of Songkhla University Retired academic with expertise in engineering

CSOs • •

Asian Cities Climate Change Resilience Network (ACCCRN) Songkhla Community Foundation

International organisations •

Red Cross Committee (Songkhla City)

For communities along the Khlong Ror 1 canal, we asked regarding: the positive and negative impacts of the canal, including how some groups might be marginalised; access to information and participation in its original construction and subsequent expansion; and on the loss of land and assets, and displacement. We triangulated this data vis-à-vis interviews with the RID, academics, and CSOs.

Recent major food disasters in Thailand In the last 15 years, Thailand has experienced numerous major food disasters, and two in particular have been researched extensively. The frst was the 2004 Boxing Day Indian Ocean Tsunami, which hit the Southwest coast of Thailand, resulting in approximately 5,400 confrmed deaths and 3,100 people reported missing. The tsunami, which struck without warning, created mass displacement in its immediate aftermath and entailed a signifcant period of recovery and reconstruction, alongside a fundamental rethinking of Thailand’s preparedness for such events (Rigg et al. 2008). The second was the major food in the Chaophraya basin in 2011, which affected 13.6 million people and offcially resulted in 815 deaths; 76 provinces were declared food disaster zones, and over 20,000 km2 of farmland was damaged (RTG 2012). This food drew attention to the inequalities produced, including protecting the centre of Bangkok at the expense of surrounding provinces (Marks 2015). At its peak, 165,000 IDPs were located in 2,600 shelters (World Bank 2012). Studies have emphasised the role domestic mobility played in both reducing and increasing vulnerability (Sophonpanich 2012; Gänsbauer et al. 2017; Thabchumphon and Arunotai 2018). Under some circumstances, vulnerability was reduced where migrants could return to rural homes that were better prepared for fooding; in other circumstances, forced displacement, especially without preparation, led to greater vulnerability. Studies also have drawn attention to the particular vulnerabilities faced by international migrants in Thailand, especially undocumented international migrants, some of whom, for example, were reluctant to seek support from the Thai Government for fear of arrest and deportation (Phongsathorn 2012; Beesey et al. 2016; Bravi et al. 2017).

Thailand 61 Recognising Thailand’s high vulnerability to fooding disaster, there have been many projects on community preparedness and resilience over the past several decades (Perwaiz et al. 2015). There have been some visible changes, such as investments in early warning systems and escape routes in coastal regions vulnerable to tsunami. There is also greater recognition of root causes that exacerbate food risk, such as weak urban planning, and institutional shortcomings, including fragmentation of government agencies, and ineffective public communication. Contrasting the performance of the Thai Government between the 2004 Tsunami and 2011 Flood, Kamolvej (2014) concludes that disaster management has improved, but still had notable shortcomings, including the signifcant role that politics and politicians played, the need for better databases to inform decision-making, and the need for better local response plans and standard operating procedures that can more effectively decentralise decision-making (c.f. Marks and Lebel 2016).

Legal framework on disaster management in Thailand Human rights at risk during a disaster are largely detailed in the main international treaties, to which Thailand has acceded: International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR); International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR); Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC); Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW); Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD); and Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). Observations by the respective treaty monitoring bodies periodically identify areas that Thailand is recommended to strengthen, although reference is generally not made specifcally to displacement related to disasters. Several committees have commented on how statelessness amongst indigenous populations and ethnic minorities has restricted access to basic services like primary education and increases vulnerability to traffcking (UN CEDAW 2017; UN CCPR 2017). Regarding gender, several committees acknowledged Thailand’s adoption of the 2015 Gender Equality Act, but noted that the legislation permitted discrimination against women on religious grounds and in the interests of national security, and also noted the persistence of stereotyped gender roles in Thailand which limit women’s participation in public life and political decision-making, as well as the prevalence of sexual and domestic violence against women and girls (see UN CEDAW 2017; UN CCPR 2017; UN CESCR 2015). The CEDAW Committee, however, has noted the Thai government’s joint development of ‘gender-integrated guidelines on disaster management’ with stakeholders like CSOs (UN CEDAW 2015). The CRPD Committee in its Concluding Observations in 2016 (para 23) expressed concern over the absence of specifc Sendai Framework-oriented plans on prevention, protection, and assistance for persons with disabilities in situations of risk or in humanitarian emergencies (UN CRPD 2016). The principal law in Thailand is the 2007 Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Act, B.E. 2550, which mandates the Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation (DDPM) created in October 2002 within the Ministry of Interior. Its

62

Carl Middleton and Orapan Pratomlek

powers include the following: formulating the National Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Plan for approval by the Cabinet; organising and conducting research on ‘procedures and measures to prevent and mitigate all impacts of disasters effectively’; operating, cooperating, supporting, and assisting ‘other government services, local administrations and other relevant private sectors on disaster prevention and mitigation,’ which includes providing aid to ‘disaster effected [sic] people’; guiding, providing consultancy, and training ‘other government services, local administrations and other private sectors on disaster prevention and mitigation’; and following-up, assessing, and evaluating ‘all activities related to disaster prevention and mitigation at all levels.’ As stated in the Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Act, the Prime Minister is the Chairman of the National Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Committee, and for which DDPM is the secretariat. Membership on the committee refects the ministries with a role in responding to disaster, including Defence; Social Development and Human Security; Agriculture and Cooperatives; Transportation; Natural Resources and Environment; Information and Communication Technology; Public Health; the Bureau of the Budget; the National Security Council; and Representatives of the Royal Thai Police Force and military. According to the Act, any disaster is managed at the lowest feasible administrative level. Thus, there is established: a Tambon (sub-district) Administration Organization (TAO) Command Centre, headed by the TAO chief; a Municipality Command Centre, headed by the Mayor; an Amphoe (District) Command Centre, headed by the District chief; and a Changwat (Provincial) Command Centre, headed by the Provincial Governor. Provisions relating to displacement are found from sections 27–29 of the Act. Section 27 states that in the event of a disaster, the Director or Designated Offcers shall have the authority to: ‘(1) Build some temporary shelters for living or getting frst aid, and properties care taking to effected people [sic] … (4) Provide security measures to prevent plunderers or thief to through the area [sic] (5) Support effected people [sic] to move their moveable properties and belongings from disaster impact area to secured neighbouring areas as requested.’ Section 28 empowers the Commander in Chief, Deputy Commander in Chief, Central Director, Director, District Director, and Local Director to order the evacuation of people affected or likely to be affected by disasters, or who ‘will be obstacles to disaster prevention and mitigation.’ Although the Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Act states that the population must be evacuated where they are or may be affected by disasters, it does not mention displacement or specifcally discuss the human rights challenges that arise when such evacuations do occur (c.f. Burson et al. 2018). Furthermore, the Act does not address gender-sensitive approaches to displacement issues, including resettlement and durable solutions. In accordance with the resolution made at the 2005 Beijing Action for Disaster Reduction in Asia Conference, the Thai government formulated the Strategic National Action Plan (SNAP) on Disaster Risk Reduction 2010–2019 for implementing the Hyogo Framework for Action. Details of the plan are

Thailand 63 beyond the scope of this chapter, but broadly, it is a plan that is intended to guide all relevant government agencies towards mainstreaming disaster risk reduction, namely, prevention, mitigation, preparedness, emergency response, and postdisaster management. Periodic review of the implementation of the SNAP is the responsibility of the DDPM. Thailand’s most recent 2015 National Disaster Risk Management Plan is stated as being in line with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, amongst other recent international standards and commitments. The plan’s four focus areas include improving and promoting disaster risk reduction by ‘boosting the effciency of disaster prevention, preparedness, and reducing disaster impacts through creating safe communities and promoting community and local involvement in improving disaster management practices in order to build resilience, foster adaptation to the effects of disaster events towards sustainable development,’ and ‘developing disaster recovery system that ably handles the demand for recovery assistance or disaster victims in a timely and impartial manner and the needs for rapid rehabilitation and reconstruction of disaster devastated areas’ (p. 16). Corresponding plans are then prepared at the provincial level that are consistent with the national plan, together with municipal-level plans. Such plans have been prepared both for Songkhla Province and Hat Yai City. The plan also details assigned responsibilities to relevant ministries with a role in disaster management. The plan’s strategies for disaster risk reduction include evacuation preparation and temporary shelter management. Disaster Management Centres at each government level must develop ‘comprehensive evacuation plan, emergency plan to relocate government services or to set forth evacuation measures [sic]’ (p. 65). In line with section 28 of the Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Act, where it appears that a disaster is likely to infict harm on people living in vulnerable areas, those with the authority to order evacuations must do so. The evacuations must be carried out in ‘a systematic and organized manner’ (p. 84). The plan also states that ‘precautionary evacuation must be carried out in not less than 12 hours before the actual occurrence of the incidents’ (p. 84). The policy states various factors comprising the evacuation process including that evacuees should be prioritised on the basis of need, where the groups with frst priority because of their vulnerability include ‘persons with disabilities, patients with special healthcare needs, the elderly, children and women,’ and families consisting of parents and children are to be evacuated together (p. 85–86).

Flooding in Hat Yai City Hat Yai City, located in the U Tapao River basin, has experienced major foods approximately every ten years, with the most recent being in 2010. According to the municipal government, the 2010 food covered 20 km2 of the city with water depths of up to 5.5 m in certain places. In contrast, in 2000, 18 km2 was fooded with water depths of up to 4 m. The offcial estimate of economic damage from the 1988, 2000, and 2010 foods was THB 4 billion, THB 14 billion, and THB

64

Carl Middleton and Orapan Pratomlek

10.5 billion, respectively (RID n.d.). According to the Hat Yai City municipality, fatalities occurred in both the 2000 and 2010 foods. Hat Yai City’s location within a low-lying bowl-like depression mid-way within the U Tapao River watershed leaves it exposed to fooding, with rainwater fowing into the city from sub-catchments to the South, East, and West (ADB 2015). There are presently two small dams close to the city for food protection, and a large dam in Sadao District in the upper basin designed principally for water storage and to a degree, for food control. Severe food risk is greatest with large amounts of rainfall in Sadao District. Localised fooding may also occur in the city due to inundation from heavy rainfall. Flooding typically occurs between October and December. These foods originate from the winter Northeast monsoon that brings heavy rain to the Eastern seaboard of Southern Thailand, especially around October and November. Aside from these major disasters, fooding also more commonly occurred within ten communities located along the U Tapao River, with a population of approximately 7,000 people. Less severe, more localised fooding also occurs but lasts for only two to three days at a time. Flood risk in Hat Yai City has been exacerbated by rapid urban growth and weak city planning that has blocked natural foodways and canals and built up previously open areas, while the absence of a food warning system severely limited the capacity of city residents to prepare. The extension of road infrastructure within the wider watershed, as well as other land use and forest cover changes into rubber plantations, have both accelerated run-offs into the city, and impeded natural drainage (Le Meur et al. 2013). Challenges relating to administrative coordination between the fve Districts within the U Tapao basin weakens food management and planning across the basin (Interviews 11 and 12, civil society, 24 May 2018; interview 7, government, 4 October 2018; c.f. Marks and Lebel 2016; also ADB 2015). In 2018, Thailand passed a new Water Resources Act that mandates the Offce of National Water Resources (ONWR) to coordinate between over 20 government line agencies involved in water management, including fooding. At the time of writing, the ONWR was in the process of drafting new regulations to implement the Act. As the city’s importance as an economic centre has grown, so too has the perception that severe fooding must be addressed given the rising associated economic costs. In the following sections, we discuss the physical and soft infrastructure responses and how they have evolved since the 1988 food. We then analyse the displacement implications of each.

Physical infrastructure approach The physical infrastructure approach to food management is intended to prevent fooding in the city through the diversion and management of water – and thus provide an effective mechanism for preventing displacement. The severe fooding of November 1988 resulted in the dredging of four existing water channels by the RID, including the U Tapao River that passes through the city. However, this

Thailand 65 was not suffcient to prevent the next severe food in November 2000. Following this food, the RID constructed seven more canals between 2001 and 2007. A key new canal was the Khlong Ror 1 designed to redirect food water around Hat Yai City and deliver it to the Songkhla Lake 21 kilometres north of the city and thus complement the capacity of the U Tapao River. The municipal government also built embankments within the city to protect it. There has also been investment in pumping stations to move water more quickly through the city. The expectation of the Hat Yai Municipal government was that the new infrastructure investment would be enough to address fooding. However, in late October 2010, the city’s most severe food to date struck with only fve to six hours warning, contributing to the severe damage and loss of life (Interview 9, academic, 23 May 2018).1 At this time, despite the earlier foods, a food warning system was not in place. According to ADB (2015), there were 50 fatalities during this food.2 The fooding evoked strong complaints from the city’s residents towards the government, especially from city-centre businesses who said they had received warning about the severity of the food too late to prepare. This led to a revised soft infrastructure approach towards managing fooding discussed below. After the 2010 food, the RID initiated a project to increase the capacity of the Khlong Ror 1 canal, such that, on paper, it would be able to manage the most extreme food experienced to date (RID n.d.).3 Despite not preventing the 2010 major food, the construction of the Khlong Ror 1 canal did reduce the prevalence of more regular fooding for communities near the city’s rivers, in particular along the U Tapao River. Interviews in the communities alongside the U Tapao River confrmed that relative to the past, communities fooded signifcantly less since the construction of the Khlong Ror 1 canal. While it was widely held amongst many interviewees that the expanded Khlong Ror 1 canal would protect Hat Yai city, some interviewees also expressed concerns that the canal did not guarantee that more extreme foods would not occur in the future if it was overwhelmed. Little public documentation exists regarding the construction of the Khlong Ror 1 canal, including on the amount of agricultural and homestead compulsory land acquisition during its original construction as well as its expansion (see below). Despite the size of the project, an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was not prepared; in interviews, the RID stated that the current law does not require such a document, while a local academic contested this interpretation (Interview 5, government, 3 October 2018; Interview 10, academic, 4 October 2018). One consequence is that information disclosure and assessment of environmental and social impacts, including gendered impacts, have not been rigorously debated through public participation processes. On the one hand, many interviewees within Hat Yai City stated that there was broad support for the canal. On the other hand, some interviewees fagged that the protection of the city appears to be resulting in food risk redistribution to other areas outside of the city, and that the water from Khlong Ror 1 canal may also result in ecological changes within Songkla Lake itself, with implications for fshery-based livelihoods. Both of these issues require further research.

66

Carl Middleton and Orapan Pratomlek

Soft infrastructure approach After the 2010 food, a growing recognition that it appeared infeasible to entirely ‘food-proof’ Hat Yai City led the government, civil society, business, and community leaders to consider how soft infrastructure could complement investments in physical infrastructure. At this time, a new initiative emerged through the ‘Asian Cities Climate Change Resilience Network’ (ACCRN) project (Le Meur et al. 2013 and WWF 2015). The ACCCRN initiative was funded by the Rockefeller Foundation from 2011–2016.4 Under ACCCRN, a Flood Working Group composed of representatives from government agencies, local communities, local business, and civil society worked together on various activities. According to a municipal government offcial interviewed, the partnership was established early to ensure project ownership by all residents of the city, not just the municipality (Interview 1, government, 24 May 2018). Overall, ACCCRN had fve strategies: work with ten communities located along the U Tapao River who were most at risk of fooding; establish a Climate Change Resilience Learning Centre; improve food modelling and warning systems; support town planning; and support public policy development. The project established the website ‘www.hatyaicityclimate.org’ to share the project’s work and communicate with the wider public. Some elements of the project important to addressing displacement due to major fooding are discussed below. Flood warning system Under the ACCCRN project, a new system for monitoring Hat Yai City’s food risk was created. Regarding improving predictive modelling of food risk, support was provided to establish the Southern Natural Disaster Research Center (SNDRC) at the Prince of Songkhla University. Researchers generate analysis that informs the Flood Warning Committee chaired by the Provincial Governor.5 This committee issues offcial public warnings on food hazard status, according to the following categories: ‘green’ = no risk; ‘yellow’ = alert; and ‘red’ = evacuate.6 An emphasis has been on people trusting the system, which is why only the Provincial Governor can announce a change in food hazard status. The need for access to reliable, understandable, and trusted information was also an emergent lesson from the 2011 Thailand food, during which social media played a crucial role in circulating information, but also became a source of information overload and misinformation (Shelter Project 2012). Once updated, the food hazard status is communicated in various ways. For example, it is posted to www.hatyaicityclimate.org and an associated smartphone app, displayed via colour-coded fags in public places, disseminated by community volunteers (see below), and the Provincial Governor may organise a press conference for local radio and TV. All community leaders whom we spoke with had this app installed on their phone and fully understood how to use it.

Thailand 67 A signifcant innovation of ACCCRN and the SNDRC was to create www. hatyaicityclimate.org that broadcasts real-time CCTV footage of river water levels at the three monitoring stations used for the modelling. The water level is colour coded to correspond with the risk of fooding in Hat Yai City (green/yellow/ red). Community leaders nowadays share comments and updates on water levels via Line groups. One interviewee noted: ‘Before the river monitoring stations were just sources of data. But they can be used for predicting and warning downstream [via community networks]’ (Interview 3, government offcial, 25 May 2018). When the model was frst created in 2012, it was fully accurate in predicting how upstream water levels could create food risk for Hat Yai City. However, with less water storage areas and new urban developments, it now requires further investments to be updated to be as accurate as before (Interview 1, municipal government, 24 May 2018). Community action plan In the ten communities located along the U Tapao River in Hat Yai City that are most at risk of fooding, the municipal government and civil society engaged community members to conduct food risk mapping exercises, prepare food response plans, and undertake various exercises and trainings.7 A community action plan was produced and distributed widely in each community. The aims are to prevent loss of human life and property, facilitate rapid rescue and recovery, and clarify the responsibilities of various government agencies. Each action plan details the topography of the community relative to the U Tapao River and identifes areas likely to food; maps single-storey houses and houses where children, the elderly, the sick, and disabled live; identifes the locations of temporary evacuation shelters; explains the plan for preparedness, warning systems, food response, and recovery; provides emergency contact details; and details compensation to be paid according to the law for those who are affected. A range of trainings were regularly provided on food preparedness and response in each community, both by the ACCCRN project and also through other funding from DDPM and the Hat Yai City municipality. Community health volunteers and volunteer ‘warning’ and ‘mentor’ houses Accompanying the community action plan, community volunteers take on various roles to prepare for and during food disasters, including community health volunteers, warning house volunteers, and volunteer mentor houses. Community health volunteers are trained by the Ministry of Health and play a key role in facilitating the process of evacuation. Their role is to know about vulnerable people within the community, and help them to evacuate, if necessary, or provide support in place. If somebody requires urgent assistance, the volunteer is trained to contact the relevant government offce (Interview 4, government, 26 May 2018).

68

Carl Middleton and Orapan Pratomlek

The role of warning house volunteers is to disseminate in person food status announcements. Each volunteer has a set of streets that they are responsible for, and they receive annual trainings. These houses are registered with the municipal government and are issued with walkie talkies so that they can receive information and share it with the community. Finally, volunteer ‘mentor’ houses are two-storey houses located within each road that serve to store supplies and to host families during fooding.8 The house is registered with the municipal government, which provides supplies to these houses, including water, batteries, and dried noodles that can be distributed at times of fooding, as well as frst aid supplies, life jackets, and walkie talkies. This mechanism helps to prepare for and thereby minimise the adverse impacts of displacement by providing basic support during fooding within the community itself.9 Evacuation shelters The Hat Yai municipality sets up evacuation shelters within each community, which are typically multi-storied schools but could also be sports complexes, hospitals, or temples on higher ground. Those who mostly use these evacuation shelters are the sick, elderly, those with young children, or those who otherwise might be vulnerable. It is the role of the community health volunteers to work with the local authorities to help identify and evacuate people to shelters. As noted above, the 2007 Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Act, B.E. 2550 and the 2015 National Disaster Risk Management Plan stipulate how evacuation shelters should be operated.

Disaster and displacement In this section, we analyse three contexts of displacement: within food vulnerable communities within which the ACCCRN project supported community preparedness; within an informal community that is regularly fooded and that receives limited state support; and along the Khlong Ror 1 canal. As Scott (2019, p. 2) observes: Leaving home, even for a short period of time, can expose individuals to a range of risks they may otherwise have avoided. Risks are physical (such as heightened exposure to gender-based violence, reduced access to food, clean water, shelter, essential services), psychological (mental strain of being away from home, consequences of economic pressures, living in crowded temporary accommodation), economic (impacts of not being able to engage in livelihood activities tied to one’s residence, being far from markets) and so forth. This is not to say that displacement should always be avoided; sometimes it may be necessary to protect human rights (IASC 2011), and it may also be an act of

Thailand 69 agency on the part of the individual displaced (Elmhirst et al. 2018). Therefore, it is important to examine the specifc context of displacement and the processes by which it occurs. Within food vulnerable communities Multiple expert interviewees stated that across the city, during major fooding, most people are not displaced (e.g., Interviews 1 and 9, municipal government and academic, 23 and 24 May 2018). It was commented that people are generally reluctant to move during fooding, as they are worried about the security of their belongings (an experience also identifed in the Philippines and Cambodia case studies in this volume – see Chapters 4 and 6). As outlined above, the ACCCRN project, alongside other government-led initiatives, has emphasised preparedness, including preparing community action plans, identifying health volunteers and ‘mentor’ and ‘warning’ houses, distributing emergency bags, preparing evacuation shelters, and providing trainings so that community members know what to do if a food occurs. During our research, we visited two of the ten communities alongside the U Tapao River that are most at risk of fooding, and that were the target communities of the ACCCRN project. According to interviews with the community leaders, those who are most vulnerable to displacement due to fooding are (1) those whose house only has one story; (2) the sick and elderly; and (3) those with young children. The communities learn about the risk of fooding via physical warning fags nearby, via the radio, and by sharing messages through phones. The local authorities may also visit the area to announce the warning. According to one community leader interviewed: When there is a yellow fag, people start to pack their things and move them into higher areas of the house, on the second foor. When there is a red fag, you must move or you will be stuck in the community. However, some people decide not to move because they worry about their property. (Interview 14, community leader, 23 May 2018) In general, if a family has relatives living in areas that are not fooded, they will stay with them. For those who do not have relatives with dry houses, they will either move to a volunteer mentor house or the government-managed evacuation shelter. The locations of both the evacuation shelter and the mentor houses are detailed in a community action plan. In terms of preparing vulnerable households that might be displaced, the local authorities coordinate with the mentor houses to identify families who will need to move. According to the local policy, the Hat Yai municipality should come to the community to help move vulnerable people to the evacuation shelters (Interview 14, community leader, 23 May 2018). The measures of preparedness outlined above and documented in the community action plan assist identifying vulnerable people to be moved.10

70

Carl Middleton and Orapan Pratomlek

However, during the 2000 food, one community was caught totally unprepared as the food water arrived at night. They grabbed what personal possessions that they could and put them onto the roof. Because the water came so fast, people even had to climb trees. Some houses were destroyed due to their weak foundations. While the fooding caused great damage, our interviewee commented that: everybody knows each other here and try to help each other. They take responsibility to share. They can cook and share together. (Interview 15, community leader, 25 May 2018) During these severe food events, it took one week for the water to retreat, and the government could not access the area to provide support. In this community, after the 2000 food, the government established around eight volunteer houses (similar to the ACCCRN ‘mentor houses’) to distribute emergency relief bags and life vests during fooding emergencies. These mentor houses were utilised in 2010 so that most people did not move from the community. During 1988, 2000, and 2010, both communities visited were severely fooded, and they have also experienced more regular foods between these severe events. At the time of carrying out the research in May 2018, the most recent food had been in 2016. Leaders interviewed in both communities stated that compared with the past, the communities are less vulnerable now to fooding and displacement. They attributed this to several factors, including improvements in the quality of housing from one-storey to two-storey houses, and from wooden to concrete construction; the construction of canals, in particular, the Khlong Ror 1 canal; and, in the case of one community, the formalisation of the community including issuing land titles that then extended government services to the area. With the construction of the Khlong Ror 1 canal expansion, we heard mixed assessments from interviewees as to whether community members remain as committed to food preparedness as immediately after the 2010 food. With the lengthening period of time since the last major food, and the time and effort necessary to maintain a relatively high level of preparedness, for some community members spoken with other day-to-day concerns, for example, the local economy, have become more of a priority. In terms of recovery from fooding in a community, the frst agency is the Health Offce, which coordinates community cleaning and checks infrastructure such as roads and houses. The Health Offce also monitors for epidemics and food-related illnesses (e.g., diarrhoea, leptospirosis, malaria, and dengue) (Interview 4, government line agency, 26 May 2018). Meanwhile, staff from the Hat Yai municipality visit the community to support clean up and assess any damage to houses that might be subject to compensation. While up to THB 5,000 can be provided, several interviewees mentioned that the compensation amount does not refect the reality of the impact to peoples’ livelihoods due to fooding (Interview 1, municipal government, 24 May 2018). Le Meur et al. (2013) found that, in recovering from the 2010 food, those who did not have access to formal

Thailand 71 credit were more likely to have to borrow from loan sharks with high interest rates, which could create a downward spiral of debt. While it is important to note that the preparedness systems in place under the ACCCRN project are not yet tested under a severe food condition, in combination with the physical infrastructure, they appear to provide an effective mechanism for preventing and preparing for displacement. The approach seeks to minimise displacement but also provide support when displacement is necessary, to vulnerable groups. Through a human rights lens, preparedness plans appear to protect many substantive rights (protection of life, security, physical integrity, family unity, food, health, and shelter), while also encouraging broadbased participation in preparing the community action plan. Particular attention has been paid to potentially vulnerable groups, with systems in place to prioritise their evacuation if necessary. Within informal settlements While the ten communities along the U Tapao River now appear largely protected from fooding, and measures are in place to address the risk of displacement, an informal settlement along the railway track on land owned by the State Railway of Thailand continues to experience regular fooding and displacement. The community is located on low-lying land, and there is no drainage system. As the land belongs to the railway, they are not permitted to raise the land; they can only raise their houses, which are built on stilts. The community itself is very poor. Livelihood activities, for example, include scavenging and recycling from the Hat Yai City waste dump. There are approximately 19 houses in the community. All of the community members are registered as poor households, and many are living with illnesses. One interviewee said that people do not choose to live there, but they have no other options (Interview 17, community member, 27 May 2018). Flooding occurs around two or three times per year, and water can remain for days, weeks, or months. Flooding occurs either by inundation from heavy rain, or, under more severe conditions from water overfowing from the U Tapao River. While the community can check the warning fag status nearby for severe fooding, according to interviewees, they do not receive warnings from the government directly and there is no community warning system within the community itself. Each time that fooding occurs, a pump is required to extract the water as there is no drainage infrastructure. The pump is borrowed from the municipal government, which also provides fuel (but is arranged on the initiative of the community members themselves). When a severe food strikes, then the community are displaced up to the railway track, which has occurred most recently in 2010, 2011, and 2014. They move without support from the state and build their own shelters alongside the tracks. This is dangerous, as trains typically continue to run on the tracks. They said that, during times of severe fooding, they had to buy their own canned fsh and instant noodles.

72

Carl Middleton and Orapan Pratomlek

Overall, this community received limited support from the government, or from the nearest community food committee. According to one interviewee from the informal community: ‘we only see politicians during the election time’ (Interview 17, community member, 27 May 2018). However, there is also limited solidarity within the community. One of the nearby food committee members had visited the community several times to try to help solve the food problem. For example, he tried to negotiate to widen the road to improve access during food periods. He also suggested that they could build a drain but was met with limited interest from the community. In contrast to the formal communities discussed above, in this informal community, it is clear that many human rights related to food, shelter, healthcare, and livelihood protection are presently not substantially protected by the state. Much relates to how the community members are economically, socially, and politically marginalised and indicates that comprehensive and long-term state support is urgently required. Along the Khlong Ror 1 canal While the Khlong Ror 1 canal is an important element of Hat Yai City’s food management strategy, and if successful, avoids the need for food-related displacement entirely, various dimensions of displacement are associated with the project, namely, compulsory land acquisition and the redistribution of food risk to other areas outside Hat Yai City. As noted above, little information is available in the public domain on these topics and an EIA report was not prepared, while there also appears to have been limited research by academia and civil society on this topic. In this section, we tentatively outline these topics and suggest that further research is required. There have been no tracer studies by the RID regarding those who have moved in this context. Several interviewees from both civil society and government acknowledged that, at the time of the project’s construction, there had been a number of individual complaints about land compensation,11 but it had not transformed into a broader community movement. To limit further compulsory land acquisition, along most of the route the second phase of construction (initiated after the 2010 food) has redesigned the canal’s profle to deepen it and adjust the shape from a ‘V’ to a ‘U.’ However, some land has been acquired including in Hat Yai City from the local authorities and the State Railway of Thailand, and also from some homesteads near to Songkhla Lake where the RID stated that they sought to minimise resettlement through expanding the canal on one side only (Interview 5, 3 October 2018).12 According to project documentation viewed at the RID offce, the total land acquisition was 107 rai (0.17 million square metres), but it was not possible to determine the total number of people directly affected. Government interviewees suggested the numbers were low. We interviewed one family who were to be resettled to a place near Songkhla Lake who had negotiated the price of compensation upwards by 50 per cent. In our discussions, it was diffcult to determine

Thailand 73 their opinion on being resettled or the extent to which they had been consulted. They mentioned that two other houses were also affected and had moved into the village nearby. Worldwide, state land acquisition and forced resettlement are well recognised as placing human rights at risk, ranging from substantive rights such as the right to property and livelihood to procedural rights such as public participation, access to information, and access to justice (Satiroglu and Choi 2015). Developmentrelated displacement is also recognised as a form of internal displacement under the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (UN Commission on Human Rights 1998). The scope of our research could not evaluate whether these rights had ultimately been protected by the state or not, but we highlight the importance of integrating a human rights perspective into such processes. A second potential issue on displacement relates to the redistribution of food risk due to the canal’s construction and operation. Several government interviewees acknowledged that the canal could potentially change and likely increase fooding in downstream agricultural areas. They noted, however, that compensation would be provided by the government according to the law, and that those in rural areas are experienced in living with foods. An interviewee from civil society noted that while it is true that rural communities have experience living with foods, some have wondered why they should do so to protect the city (Interview 23, 6 October 2018). Meanwhile, improved access to land via the canal’s access road has increased house construction in its vicinity both nearby to Hat Yai City, and to a lesser extent along the route to Songkhla Lake. According to an interviewee from the Hat Yai City municipality, the downstream area has been zoned as a foodplain that is intended to limit construction in the area and make clear the risks of fooding to those planning to settle within it (Interview 7, 4 October 2018). The increased settlement in the downstream areas, as well as the heightened risk of fooding, both suggest that new forms of food-linked displacement might be created and requires further study.

Conclusion Overall, it appears that an effective mechanism for preventing and preparing for displacement due to fooding has been created for the residents of Hat Yai City, especially for the ten communities who were most food-prone in the past. This has been attained through a combination of physical and soft infrastructure and underscores that displacement due to fooding disaster can be mitigated, prepared for, and better managed. Regarding displacement under the Hat Yai model, there are two approaches. First, recognising that many families prefer not to be displaced, there is an emphasis on preparedness and providing support within the communities. Second, acknowledging that some groups will inevitably be displaced, there are support structures in place, namely, volunteer ‘mentor’ houses, government shelters, and preparedness plans. Recognising that the systems now established have not yet been tested under real food conditions, if a future severe

74

Carl Middleton and Orapan Pratomlek

food were to occur, a systematic post-food evaluation of the effectiveness of the state support and the community action plans would be extremely valuable. The absence of severe fooding since 2010 cannot yet be attributed to the expansion of the Khlong Ror 1, which at the time of research was still under construction. Yet, physical infrastructure, including watercourse dredging, canal construction, and the construction of embankments to better manage food water within the city have contributed towards a reduced food risk for the city. The soft infrastructure strategy catalysed by the ACCCRN project has played a crucial complementary role. It promoted a collaborative relationship between various government line agencies, the Hat Yai City municipality, civil society groups, community leaders, and the wider community. While it has not been tested during an actual major food, communities appear well prepared with advanced planning, clearly defned roles of community members, and regular trainings. Community members have access to information on food risk via the www.hatyaicityclimate.org website and related websites and apps. However, the most intensive effort to create this soft infrastructure was undertaken in the years immediately following the food. Nowadays, the perceived risk of fooding is reduced amongst communities as well as policy makers, such that food preparedness has slightly reduced in priority (Interview 9, academic, 23 May 2018). Meanwhile, planning documents require updating as communities have changed over time, for example, due to migration. While this case study demonstrates the positive efforts of the government and non-state partners to improve community resilience and address food-induced displacement through physical and soft infrastructure means, there are still issues remaining unresolved. These include: how the protection of Hat Yai City comes at the expense of prolonged or exacerbated fooding in other areas nearby to the city (i.e., risk redistribution) and that there remain particularly marginalised communities who are regularly at risk of fooding – including facing displacement – with little state support or prospect for durable solutions. Overall, the ‘Hat Yai model’ as a preventative measure should be widely promoted in Thailand and beyond as a means to promote state and non-state cooperation, enhance community empowerment and awareness, and reduce community vulnerability to food disaster. On specifc policy suggestions, frst, food preparedness should be integrated into broader community development initiatives. While the physical infrastructure, in particular Khlong Ror 1, is believed to have signifcantly reduced the risk of major fooding for Hat Yai City, there remains the possibility that major fooding could occur, and therefore, ongoing support for soft infrastructure should be maintained. As the perception of food risk declines amongst many community members, food preparedness programmes could be integrated into broader community programmes that are synergistic such as health projects and supporting local economies, as well as city planning in general. This would help ensure the community action plans on foods remain up to date. Specifc support should also be provided to the remaining communities on the state railway land to address food risk and regular displacement that occurs.

Thailand 75 Second, fragmentation between government line agencies in terms of coordinating across disaster-related programmes and budgets needs to be considered. Thailand’s 2007 Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Act, B.E. 2550 principally guides the Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation and delegates responsibility for managing disaster to the lowest feasible administrative level. Yet, there remains signifcant fragmentation between government line agencies in terms of coordinating across disaster-related programmes and budgets. Synergising the operational guidelines and budgeting protocols between the Hat Yai municipality, the DDPM, and the Department of Health amongst others could increase programme operational and cost-effectiveness. Moreover, overcoming administrative fragmentation should also be extended to basin-scale planning for addressing food disaster risk. Third, a monitoring study should be conducted to ensure that the functioning of Khlong Ror 1 does not redistribute food risk to become other harms, in particular, changing water availability in upstream areas, unnecessarily exacerbating fooding in downstream areas, and affecting the fsheries in Songkhla Lake. Such a study would also validate the complementarity of physical infrastructure and soft infrastructure approaches in Thailand.

Notes 1 The capacity of canals at this time could accommodate 1,075 cubic metres per second (m3/s), while the food was 1,623 m3/s (RID, n.d.). 2 According to Interview 13 (international organisation, 25 May 2018), there were four fatalities. 3 The canal’s capacity will increase from 465 m3/s to 1,200 m3/s; The capacity of the U Tapao River is 465 m3/s. 4 When the project ended, a former President of the Chamber of Commerce led a transition to establish the Southern Cities Climate Change Resilience Network (SCCCRN) that at the time of writing was fundraising. 5 Membership of the committee includes representatives from: The Prince of Songkhla University; Hat Yai Municipal Government; the RID; the Royal Meteorological Department; and the DDPM. 6 A red fag usually signals that a food is expected in 9–12 hours. 7 From various interviewees, there were suggestions that the depth of participation varied between communities depending on whether the lead was a CSO or municipal government staff. 8 Amongst our interviewees, explanation of the origin of the ‘mentor house’ system differed. Some said that it was initiated after the 2000 food, others said after the 2010 food. 9 Several community members interviewed randomly were unaware of the mentor house arrangements (e.g., Interview 16, community member, 27 June 2018). This is not to say that all would not beneft from these arrangements, but it does indicate that not all members of the community are equally engaged. 10 While the community action plans were accurate and comprehensive at the time that they were prepared, the documents have not been updated since 2012, despite changes within the community due to migration etc. (Interview 11, civil society, 6 October 2018).

76

Carl Middleton and Orapan Pratomlek

11 According to the RID, during phase 1, farmers with no land title were still entitled to receive compensation, but only around 70–80% of the land value (Interview 5, Government, 3 October 2018). 12 Avoiding resettling communities from the Koh Nam Loh area.

References ADB (2015) GrEEEn city action plan for Songkhla and Hat Yai municipalities (IndonesiaMalaysia-Thailand Growth Triangle). Manila: Asian Development Bank (ADB). Available at: https://www.adb.org/sites/default/fles/related/41572/imt-gt-green-cit y-action-plan-songkhla-hat-yai-municipalities-march-2015.pdf (Accessed: 5 May 2020). Beesey, A., Limsakul, S. and McDougall, E. (2016) Hazard exposure and vulnerability of migrants in Thailand: a desk study for the capacity-building programme ‘reducing the vulnerability of migrants in emergencies. Bangkok: International Organization for Migration. Available at: https://publications.iom.int/books/hazard-exposure-andvulnerability-migrants-thailand (Accessed: 5 May 2020). Bravi, A.S., Trupp, K.A., Sakulsri, T., Tadee, R., Apipornchaisakul, K. and Punpuing S. (2017) Migration and natural disasters: The impact on migrants of the 2011 foods in Thailand. Migrants in Countries in Crisis. Vienna: International Centre for Migration Policy Development. Available at: https://micicinitiative.iom.int/resources-and-publ ications/thailand-case-study-migration-and-natural-disasters-impact-migrants-2011 (Accessed: 5 May 2020). Burson, B., Kälin, W., McAdam, J., and Weerasinghe, S. (2018) ‘The duty to move people out of harm’s way in the context of climate change and disasters’, Refugee Survey Quarterly, 37, pp. 379–407. Elmhirst, R., Middleton, C. and Resurreccion, B. (2018) ‘Migration and foods in southeast Asia: a mobile political ecology of vulnerability, capability, resilience and social justice’, in Middleton, C., Elmhirst, R. and Chantanavich, S. (eds.) Living with foods in a mobile southeast Asia: a political ecology of vulnerability, migration and environmental change. Abingdon: Earthscan, 1–21. Gänsbauer, A., Bilegsaikhan, S., Trupp, A. and Sakdapolrak, P. (2017) Migrants at risk: responses of rural-urban migrants to the foods of 2011 in Thailand. TransRe Working Paper No. 6. Bonn: Department of Geography, University of Bonn. Available at: http://repository.usp.ac.fj/10531/ (Accessed: 5 May 2020). IASC (2011) Inter-Agency Standing Committee operational guidelines on the protection of persons in situations of natural disasters. The Brookings – Bern Project on Internal Displacement. Available at: https://www.brookings.edu/multi-chapter-report/iasc-ope rational-guidelines-on-the-protection-of-persons-in-situations-of-natural-disasters/ (Accessed: 5 May 2020). Kamolvej, T. (2014) ‘Has Thailand disaster management, from tsunami to food, been better?’, Journal of Governance of Mahasarakam University, 4(2), pp. 103–119. Le Meur, A., Friend, R., and Thinphanga, P. (2013) Floods, vulnerability and urban resilience: Lessons in Hat Yai, Thailand. (Briefng paper). Bangkok: ISET-International. Available at: https://www.i-s-e-t.org/resource-foods-vulnerability (Accessed: 5 May 2020). Lewis, B. and Maguire, R. (2016) ‘A human rights-based approach to disaster displacement in the Asia-Pacifc’, Asian Journal of International Law, 6, pp. 326–352. Marks, D. (2015) ‘The urban political ecology of the 2011 foods in Bangkok: the creation of uneven vulnerabilities’, Pacifc Affairs, 88(3), pp. 623–651.

Thailand 77 Marks, D. and Lebel, L. (2016) ‘Disaster governance and the scalar politics of incomplete decentralization: fragmented and contested responses to the 2011 foods in Central Thailand’, Habitat International, 52, pp. 57–66. Perwaiz, A., Sinsupan, T. and Murphy, K. (2015) Empowering communities and strengthening resilience: Thailand partnerships for disaster resilience. Bangkok: Asian Disaster Preparedness Center. Available at: https://www.adpc.net/igo/category/ID927/doc/2015-cGw3AM -ADPC-ADPC_Empowering_communities_Thailand.pdf (Accessed: 5 May 2020). Phongsathorn, P. (2012) ‘Environment and migration: The 2011 foods in Thailand’, in Gemenne, F., Brücker, P. and Ionesco, D. (eds.) The state of environmental migration 2011. Paris: Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations (IDDRI) and International Organization for Migration (IOM), pp. 13–24. Available at: https://publications.iom.int/system/fles/pdf/state_environmental_migration_2011. pdf (Accessed: 5 May 2020). RID (n.d.). Hatyai food mitigation project under the Royal Initiative of His Majesty the King. Hatyai District, Songkhla Province. Project video, Royal Irrigation Department (RID). RTG (2012) Report on the situation of foods, storms and mudslides, Issue 129, January 17, 2012. Bangkok: Center for Supporting Flood Management and Operations Windstorm and Mudslides, The Offce of the Prime Minister, Royal Thai Government (in Thai). Rigg, J., Grundy-Warr, C., Law, L. and Tan-Mullins, M. (2008) ‘Grounding a natural disaster: Thailand and the 2004 tsunami’, Asia Pacifc Viewpoint, 49(2), pp. 137–154. Satiroglu, I. and Choi, N. (2015) Development-induced displacement and resettlement: New perspectives on persisting problems. Abingdon: Routledge. Scott, M. (2019) Background brief: key international standards and guidelines relating to displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. Raoul Wallenberg Institute of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law. Available at https://rwi.lu.se/disasterdisplacement/ (Accessed: 5 May 2020). Shelter Project (2012) Thailand −2011 – Bangkok foods. Available at: http://shelterprojec ts.org/shelterprojects2011-2012.html (Accessed: 5 May 2020). Sophonpanich, W.S. (2012) ‘Flooding in Thailand: fee, fght or foat.’ Forced Migration Review, 41, pp. 16–17. Thabchumphon, N. and Arunotai, N. (2018) ‘Living with and against foods in Bangkok and Thailand's central plain’, in Middleton, C., Elmhirst, R. and Chantanavich, S. (eds.) Living with foods in a mobile southeast Asia: a political ecology of vulnerability, migration and environmental change. Abingdon: Earthscan, pp. 89–104. UN CCPR (2017) Concluding observations on the second periodic report of Thailand. CCPR/C/ THA/CO/2. UN CESCR (2015) Concluding observations on the combined initial and second periodic reports of Thailand. E/C.12/THA/CO/1-2. UN CEDAW (2015) Consideration of reports submitted by States parties under article 18 of the convention, sixth and seventh periodic reports of States parties due in 2010: Thailand. CEDAW/C/THA/6-7. ——— (2017) Concluding observations on the combined sixth and seventh periodic reports of Thailand. CEDAW/C/THA/6-7. UN CRPD (2016) Concluding observations on the initial report of Thailand. CRPD/C/THA/CO/1. World Bank (2012) Thai Flood 2011: rapid assessment for resilient recovery and reconstruction planning. Bangkok: World Bank. Available at: http://documents.worldbank.org/cura ted/en/677841468335414861/Overview (Accessed: 5 May 2020). WWF (2015) Hat Yai resilience. Available at: https://wwf.panda.org/wwf_news/?256130/H at-Yai-resilience (Accessed: 5 May 2020).

78

Carl Middleton and Orapan Pratomlek

International legal and policy documents 1966 1966 1966 1979 1989 1998

1998

2006 2015

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 23 March 1976) 999 UNTS 171 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 3 January 1976) 993 UNTS 3 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (adopted 7 March 1966, entered into force 4 January 1969) Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (adopted 18 December 1979, entered into force 3 September 1981) 1249 UNTS 13 Convention on the Rights of the Child (adopted 20 November 1989, entered into force 2 September 1990) 1577 UNTS 3 Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. Addendum to Report of the Representative of the Secretary-General, Mr. Francis M. Deng, submitted pursuant to Commission resolution 1997/39. UN Commission on Human Rights. (E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2) UN Commission on Human Rights. 1998. Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. Addendum to Report of the Representative of the SecretaryGeneral, Mr. Francis M. Deng, submitted pursuant to Commission resolution 1997/39 (E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2) Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (adopted 13 December 2006, entered into force 3 May 2008) 2515 UNTS 3 UN General Assembly. Resolution 69/283, Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, (A/CONF.224/CRP.1)

National legal and policy documents 2007 2009 20102015 2015 2018

Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Act, B.E. 2550 [Unoffcial translation from www.ThaiLaws.com], Royal Thai Government (RTG). Strategic National Action Plan (SNAP) on Disaster Risk Reduction 20102019 [Offcial English translation], Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation, Strategic National Action Plan (SNAP) on Disaster Risk Reduction 2010-2019 Gender Equality Act (B.E. 2558) [Unoffcial translation from http://law.msociety.go.th], Royal Thai Government (RTG) National Disaster Risk Management Plan (B.E. 2558) [Offcial English translation], Royal Thai Government (RTG) Water Resources Act (B.E. 2561) [In Thai from [https://library2.parliament. go.th]]https://library2.parliament.go.th], Royal Thai Government (RTG).

4

The Philippines Beyond resilience: Protecting the rights of internally displaced persons in Dulag, Leyte, in the wake of Super Typhoon Haiyan Ryan Jeremiah D. Quan

Introduction Displacement in the context of disasters and climate change, no matter the duration, affects human rights. As such, disaster-prone countries like the Philippines must take measures to protect the rights of affected populations. Every year, an average of 20 typhoons visit the Philippines. Located in the Pacifc ‘Ring of Fire,’ the country also regularly experiences earthquakes and volcanic eruptions (Asian Disaster Reduction Center 2018). Consequently, people living in the Philippines are exposed to different forms and varying degrees of severity of disasters. Such exposure, particularly when combined with vulnerable social conditions and lack of robust early warning systems, preparations, and emergency action, helps to explain the recurrent high number of people displaced each year (IDMC 2020). Although certain areas may be more susceptible to the impacts of a particular kind of hazard, poverty complicates the impacts of disasters, with poorer households suffering more (Bankoff 2015). Likewise, women and other potentially vulnerable groups, who are already in situations that could be considered socially and economically disadvantaged before a disaster, become subject to greater risks in times of disasters (ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights 2018, p. 1). This constant exposure results in the ‘normalization of threat’ (Bankoff 2015, p. 163) embedded in the everyday lives of people living in the Philippines. As a consequence, Filipinos have developed a certain level of resilience to cope with disaster situations. However, this should not be an excuse for the State not to adequately address the needs and protect the rights of people exposed to disaster risk. While the current Philippine legal framework mentions ‘displacement,’ it bears stressing that there is no specifc law which directly guarantees the rights and securities due to internally displaced persons (IDPs), including those displaced in times of disaster. As a result, the prevention of displacement, as well as protection during displacement in the context of disasters, is dependent on laws and guidelines that do not fully address the needs and rights of IDPs. In addition, there is no single legal document wherein the principles of international human rights law relating to IDPs are incorporated. The Philippines National Law and Policy Report on Displacement in the Context of Disasters and Climate

80

Ryan Jeremiah D. Quan

Change (Quan and Scott 2020) that was produced as part of this research initiative addresses the legal framework in depth. In November 2013, the Philippines was hit by one of the strongest typhoons ever recorded in Philippine and world history – Super Typhoon Haiyan, locally known as Yolanda. The Category 5 typhoon made a total of six landfalls on 8 November 2013, affecting 3,424,593 families in 44 provinces (NDRRMC 2014). In addition to casualties, injuries, missing individuals, and damage to property, Haiyan likewise caused displacement. In fact, the Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre reported that Haiyan caused the largest single displacement recorded in the Philippines, with over four million people leaving their homes (IDMC 2018). Although thousands remained in temporary bunkhouses for a protracted period, the main response of those displaced by Haiyan was simply returning to their homes, regardless of whether they had been destroyed (Sherwood et al. 2015). An estimated 286,433 people were staying in 993 evacuation centres fve days after Haiyan’s landfall (Sherwood et al. 2015). Although important human rights considerations also arise in relation to the question of durable solutions, this chapter focuses on the immediate period leading up to, during, and shortly after the typhoon. It focuses on the municipality of Dulag in the province of Leyte. The province was one of the hardest-hit areas, with 13-foot high storm surges recorded (National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council 2013). The study aims to describe and understand the experiences of individuals and local authorities before, during, and after Haiyan, and to assess if the existing laws, policies, guidelines, and mechanisms were suffcient to effectively address the needs and concerns of the members of communities affected by the typhoon. After providing an overview of the municipality of Dulag and the research methods, the study proceeds to discuss the domestic legal framework related to disaster displacement. Key pieces of legislation, such as the 2010 Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act and the 2009 Climate Change Act are introduced. Likewise discussed are laws that seek to protect marginalised groups like women and children. The experience of the municipality when Haiyan struck is then looked at – from the preparations to the evacuation and protection measures during displacement to the lessons gained that would hopefully enable them to better address evacuation and displacement issues, and ultimately, to adequately prepare for disasters. Adopting a human rights-based approach, these experiences and practices are examined using relevant international human rights instruments, norms, and standards, as well as existing domestic laws and policies. The study concludes that there are gaps in the implementation of international human rights norms and standards and domestic laws and policies relating to disaster displacement and identifes possible reasons for these gaps. Towards the end, the study offers recommendations in the areas of law and policy reform; measures to address limitations on resources, facilities, and services; and possible responses to evacuation and housing issues.

The Philippines 81

The study site and research methods The study site is the municipality of Dulag, a coastal town located at the Eastern side of the Leyte Island, fronting the Gulf of Leyte. With a land area of around 11,007 ha and a relatively fat topography, Dulag is home to an estimated 51,591 people as of 2017. Dulag has 45 barangays (the smallest administrative unit within the municipality), nine of which are categorised as coastal. Most of the people displaced by Haiyan, approximately 1,371 persons according to the Municipal Disaster Risk Reduction Management Offcer, lived in the coastal areas of Dulag. The author and his research assistant personally facilitated and documented focus group discussions (FGDs) in order to gain insights into the experience of displacement in the context of Typhoon Haiyan. Two FGDs were conducted with the residents and the barangay offcials of Barangay Buntay, one of the coastal communities in Dulag. The participants of the frst FGD were the following: the barangay chair, barangay secretary, and four barangay councillors (kagawads). The group was composed of three men and four women. The participants in this group were chosen because they were directly involved in the different stages of disaster management in Barangay Buntay. The participants of the second FGD were members of the same coastal community composed of fve men and two women. All the participants of the FGDs were adults, residents of Dulag at the time Haiyan hit in 2013, and were able to understand questions and articulate their experiences in the Filipino language. All participants in the FGDs were identifed with the assistance of the Municipal Disaster Risk and Reduction Management (MDRRM) Offce of Dulag. Key informant interviews were also conducted with persons who took part in disaster response, and those who hold specifc positions in the municipality of Dulag relevant to disaster response. The interviewees were: (a) the former Mayor of Dulag who was serving at the time Haiyan hit in 2013; (b) the incumbent Mayor of Dulag; (c) Executive Assistant of the Mayor; (d) current MDRRM Offcer; (e) former MDRRM Coordinator; (f) Assistant Municipal Social Welfare and Development (MSWD) Offcer; and (g) one of the heads of the Haiyan emergency response efforts of Dulag. The University Research Ethics Committee of the Ateneo de Manila University approved the research ethics clearance application for this project.

The domestic legal framework The 1987 Philippine Constitution lays down the country’s commitment to human rights. The Declaration of Principles and State Policies provides that ‘[t]he State values the dignity of every human person and guarantees full respect for human rights’ (art. II, s. 11). The Philippines also recognises ‘the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature’ (art. II, s. 16), which has been declared a self-executing right that does not need any further legislation for it to be demandable and enforceable (Oposa v. Factoran 1993). Following these constitutional precepts, all laws must

82

Ryan Jeremiah D. Quan

be consistent with human rights norms and standards, including those related to climate change and disasters. To effectively address the disasters that occur in the country, the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act (R.A. 10121) became law on 27 May 2010. The law was already in force at the time of Typhoon Haiyan. The law covers all aspects of DRRM, i.e., good governance, risk assessment and early warning, knowledge building and awareness-raising, reducing underlying risk factors, and preparedness for an effective response and early recovery. The law also formed the National Disaster Risk Reduction Management Council (NDRRMC). The law adopts a policy that ‘ensures that disaster risk reduction and climate change measures are gender-responsive, sensitive to indigenous knowledge systems, and respectful of human rights’ (s. 2(j)) and calls attention to persons in situations of potential vulnerability and marginalisation in the areas of capacity building (s. 2(n)), data and information gathering on impacts of disasters (s. 3(p)), and involvement in the development of disaster risk reduction and management policies and programmes at the local level (s. 12(d)). The law gives special focus to internally displaced mothers and mandates local DRRM offces to provide them with an area in the evacuation sites where they can ‘[breastfeed], feed and care for their babies and give support to each other (s. 12(c)(15).’ There are several issuances complementing this law that either adopt an approach that recognises human rights or addresses displacement. The 2011 National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Framework (NDRRMF), also adopted before Typhoon Haiyan, highlights adherence to international norms, principles, and standards, specifcally taking note of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR), the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. The framework puts forth a paradigm shift in approaching disaster management. Following a developmental approach, disasters are seen ‘as a development concern and may arise as a result of unsustainable development practices.’ Disaster management, while still led by the government, now adopts an ‘all-society approach’ that promotes community participation, inclusiveness, transparency, and gender equity. The paradigm shift is noteworthy as it not only addresses hazards but also emphasises the differential impacts of disasters on population groups living in different situations. While the framework seemingly adopts a human rights-based approach to disaster management, it does not, however, squarely address displacement occasioned by disasters. The National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan 2011–2028 (NDRRMP) operationalises the NDRRMF to achieve the country’s DRRM vision – ‘safer, adaptive and disaster resilient Filipino communities towards sustainable development.’ The plan covers disaster prevention and mitigation, disaster preparedness, disaster response, and disaster rehabilitation and recovery. It commits ‘to contributing to gender-responsive and rights-based sustainable development.’ The plan addresses internal displacement caused by human-induced disasters and

The Philippines 83 ‘seeks to mainstream DRRM into the peace process.’ It is worth noting that an earlier document, the Strategic National Action Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction 2009–2019 (SNAP), acknowledges that natural hazards are part of the Philippine environment, but still limits its consideration of displacement to human-induced situations. Similar to the NDRRMP, the SNAP also aims to mainstream DRRM into the peace process, acknowledging that it is an important issue for IDPs. The Climate Change Act of 2009 states that disaster risk reduction must be integrated into climate change programmes and initiatives. It bears stressing that the law does not mention the impacts of climate change on human rights and displacement. However, the National Framework Strategy on Climate Change 2010–2022 identifes increasing rural to urban migration as a factor that contributes to climate change vulnerability. The issue of population displacement caused by climate change-related events, such as sea-level rise, and increasingly frequent disasters resulting from extreme weather events is addressed by the National Climate Change Action Plan 2011–2028 (NCCAP). It is considered as a human security concern, which is identifed as a priority area in the country’s climate change adaptation and mitigation agenda. The NCCAP identifes gender mainstreaming as a cross-cutting action and is highlighted in research and development, including the ‘conduct of gendered vulnerability and adaptation assessments,’ planning and policy making, knowledge and capacity development, and enhancing women’s participation in climate change adaptation. Some notable activities in the plan that caters to what the plan calls ‘climate refugees’ include resettlement plans, a fnancing plan, and gender-responsive sustainable livelihood and social protection programmes for poor families. The Philippines does not yet have a law that protects IDPs. The closest the Philippine Congress got to enacting an IDP law was in 2013, when it submitted for the President’s signature the proposed Rights of Internally Displaced Persons Act of 2013. Unfortunately, the proposed measure was vetoed by former President Aquino, claiming that it had constitutional infrmities (Rappler 2013). There are, however, laws that address the needs of specifc sectors displaced during times of disasters and calamities. The 2009 Magna Carta of Women provides that ‘[w]omen have the right to protection and security in times of disasters, calamities, and other crisis situations … in all phases of relief, recovery, rehabilitation, and construction (§ 10).’ The State has the duty to provide assistance, address women’s particular needs, and protect women from sexual exploitation and gender-based violence. The 1974 Child and Youth Welfare Code mandates special assistance for children in case of public calamity; the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) must ‘take immediate custody of dependent children and give temporary shelter to orphaned and displaced children,’ in case of separation from parents or guardians (art. 140). Finally, the 2016 Children’s Emergency Relief and Protection Act (CERPA) reiterates the role of the DSWD to provide shelter for unaccompanied minors during disaster and other emergency situations where their survival and normal development are threatened or endangered (§ 4 (b)). The law goes on further to state that the transitional shelters shall provide

84

Ryan Jeremiah D. Quan

for mother and child-friendly spaces, gender-specifc emergency latrines, bathing cubicles, and handwashing facilities specifcally designed for children (§ 4 (b)). The CERPA also requires that the following be ensured: immediate delivery of basic services and necessities (§ 4 (c)); stronger measures for children in areas where a state of calamity is declared, including protection from exploitation and abuse (§ 4 (d)); health, medical, and nutrition services (§ 4 (e)); and a plan for the immediate resumption of educational services (§ 4 (f)). In summary, the Philippines has a legal framework which addresses disaster risk management, despite not having a law which specifcally addresses IDPs. The existing legal framework, from the Constitution to domestic laws and issuances, reiterates the respect and protection of human rights in all levels of their implementation. It emphasises a gender-responsive and developmental approach, particularly in addressing the situation of marginalised groups, such as women and children, in times of disaster. While there is a domestic legal framework in place, its implementation is another matter.

Dulag, Leyte, and Typhoon Haiyan When Haiyan hit in 2013, there were an estimated 14 full-time municipal health workers in Dulag composed of a municipal health offcer, a dentist, nurses, seven midwives, and a medical technician. There were also three social workers. There was still no MDRRM Offce at that time; the MSWD Offcer served as the de facto MDRRM Offcer. During the interview with the local government offcials at the time of Haiyan, there was no indication that they were guided by the international human rights standards on disaster preparedness and response. What was evident was they were working on the basis of what they had commonly practised and implemented in times of disasters, particularly during tropical storms and typhoons. Considering that their actions were not expressly guided by any international human rights standards, the local duty bearers were focused solely on the survival of the local residents before, during, and after Haiyan. The data also show that the local offcials of Dulag were more or less left to decide on their own without any support from the national government, especially after Haiyan hit Dulag. All of these will be further discussed in the following sections. Early warning Since the residents of Dulag are used to tropical storms and typhoons, few anticipated the intensity and the impact of Haiyan. Thus, the local government unit (LGU) and the residents prepared for Haiyan like it was like any other typhoon. Following the procedure that they were accustomed to, the LGU, headed by its former mayor, led the preparations of Dulag for Haiyan. Days before the typhoon made landfall, coordination meetings with barangay offcials were conducted by the LGU, where each barangay was directed to make the necessary preparations for their respective areas. A week before Haiyan hit Dulag, the MSWD Offce

The Philippines 85 prepared relief goods, such as rice, canned goods, and noodles, and prepositioned the same for distribution. Notably, hygiene kits were not prepared since the focus then was to ensure that people would have something to eat after the typhoon. The MSWD Offce designated the evacuation centres where the residents of each barangay were supposed to go. It had been the practice in Dulag to identify the evacuation centres where the members of each barangay were to go before a typhoon. School buildings were always utilised as evacuation sites during disasters. If schools were not suffcient, other venues such as churches, barangay halls, and covered courts are likewise used. With 45 barangays to consider, the LGU clustered the barangays in such a way that for every 7 to 11 barangays, at least one midwife or health personnel was assigned to attend to health concerns. The LGU relied heavily on barangay offcials to communicate matters such as disaster preparedness to its constituents. With respect to Barangay Buntay, the barangay offcials personally warned the residents regarding Haiyan by going house-to-house. The residents already knew their assigned evacuation centre: a school fve kilometres away from Buntay. A day before Haiyan hit Dulag, about 90 per cent of the residents of the barangay had already evacuated. A few insisted on staying in their homes because they did not want to lose any of their possessions or to be in a position of not knowing what would happen to their houses. According to the residents, they received news about Haiyan through television and radio broadcasts, even before the LGU made any announcement. In the news, people were warned about a possible ‘storm surge.’ However, no one understood what a storm surge actually was, including the barangay offcials who were relaying the information regarding the typhoon. According to them, if the terms ‘tidal wave’ and ‘tsunami’ had been used, they would have understood it better and taken the warnings more seriously. They did not perceive the information and warnings given by the barangay offcials and the LGU as life threatening. Evacuation: Hard infrastructure In one of the evacuation centres, while Haiyan was battering Dulag, the residents were initially staying on the second foor when the roof few away due to strong winds. They were then forced to transfer to the lower level. One of the participants shared: For us, we were staying at Gabaldon Elementary School. We were already there by 3 am. We were staying at the second foor when the roof of the building was destroyed. We were forced to go to the lower foor of the building. However, food waters began to rise and we needed to go to the higher foor but the building no longer had any roof. But we just stayed on the second foor of the school. This particular evacuation centre was destroyed by Haiyan and is currently no longer used as such.

86

Ryan Jeremiah D. Quan

Destroyed houses and infrastructures were a common sight that day. One of the residents left her home in one of the coastal areas to seek shelter in a twostorey building near the centre of the town with her bedridden mother. However, the roof of this building was blown off, leaving people, including the bedridden mother, exposed to the elements. When the frst wave of winds stopped, the construction workers from the construction site across the building where they were staying rescued them. They were able to take shelter in another building. In a super typhoon like Haiyan, early evacuation, in itself, would not guarantee protection. Measures to retroft or otherwise improve the resilience of buildings used as evacuation centres warrant close attention by national and local authorities. Another resident who was staying in a coastal area described that the second wave of winds was stronger than the frst and carried with it waves of seawater. According to him, the waters did not move towards the direction of the shore but towards the direction of Tacloban, hitting the towns of Tolosa, Tanauan, and Palo. His family kept moving around the different areas in the house because the roof was blown off by the winds. While their house was no longer safe, he and his family could no longer move to another house or area because the roads were flled with fallen trees. His family waited for food that day because they had nothing to eat (Focus Group Discussion no. 2, Barangay Buntay, 18 July 2018). Evacuation: Soft infrastructure One of the strengths of Dulag in times of disaster is its practice of pre-assigning the barangays to their respective evacuation centres. As such, people knew where to go before, during, and after the disaster strikes. This practice was confrmed during the interviews and FGDs. The spaces and services given to those who stayed in the evacuation centres did not make particular provision for persons in situations of potential vulnerability. No special consideration was given to women or children. There were no specifc spaces assigned for breastfeeding women, children, and persons with disabilities, even if these are required by national laws, such as the Philippine DRRM Act and the CERPA. It is notable that, while the offcials of the LGU had an idea regarding providing safe spaces for women, children, and persons with disabilities in evacuation centres, the lack of suffcient space and funds proved to be challenging. There were no cases of sexual or gender-based violence reported in Dulag during that time. Local government offcials supervised the evacuation centres and assigned the families to their respective classrooms. There were around ten families in a classroom in the evacuation centres. In addition to lack of space, another diffculty was the fact that these government offcials themselves were victims of the typhoon. Thus, even those who supervised the centres had the added responsibility of attending to their own families staying in the same centres. With respect to the distribution of relief goods, there was a system that was followed where lists provided by the LGU were used to determine the recipients. However, there were instances when there were disruptions in the distribution of

The Philippines 87 goods because the lists were incomplete or some residents wanted to receive more than what they were entitled to. The other concerns in the evacuation centres were the outbreak of diseases, water sanitation, and common diseases. After Haiyan, there was an outbreak of chikungunya and mosquito-borne diseases. Special attention was given to pregnant women, and some actually gave birth in the evacuation centres. For the Rural Health Unit (RHU) of Dulag, the main challenge was the lack of human resources. RHU staff were overwhelmed with the number of injured persons, and their operations were limited due to lack of electricity. Because of the lack of RHU staff, in some cases, people who needed medical services were only attended to after two days. While others immediately returned to their homes, some people stayed at the evacuation centres for almost two weeks. Another concern was that the general services employees, such as the members of the RHU, multi-tasked instead of focusing on their assigned tasks or areas of specialisation. After some of the schools used as evacuation centres collapsed due to the strength of Haiyan, temporary shelters like tents were built. Some made use of the remnants of their houses and likewise built tents beside their houses. There were people who stayed in their homes after they fxed the roof. Regardless of whether their houses were partially or totally destroyed, as long as the roof was fxed, they chose to return and stay in their homes. According to Dulag’s MDRRM Offcer, it is easy to say that there are international and national standards that should be complied with in disaster response. However, according to her, implementing such standards in a third-class municipality1 like Dulag is very diffcult. The municipality did not even have enough facilities to accommodate all its residents during Haiyan. Since there were immediate needs that had to be addressed, such as food, the LGU focused on those. Being a third-class municipality means that Dulag has an income of PHP 35 million or more but less than PHP 45 million a year (Philippine Information, n.d.). However, it must be noted that General Comment No. 3 of the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights clearly provides that lack of resources may only justify the failure of the State to protect if it has ‘demonstrate[ed] that every effort has been made to use all resources that are at its disposition in an effort to satisfy, as [a] matter of priority, those minimum obligations’ (UN CESCR 1990). In the case of Dulag, it must take appropriate steps to begin addressing this concern. A good frst step may be to analyse its budget and spending to determine if more resources should be allocated to DRRM. Post-disaster Most of the NGOs in Dulag were focused on the protection of the rights of children. They provided counselling and play therapy. Others conducted group counselling for mothers, especially those who were then breastfeeding. The barangay offcials were tasked with gathering data regarding the number of households and people affected by the typhoon. They did this by doing houseto-house visitation. The data gathered were submitted to the Municipal Offce.

88

Ryan Jeremiah D. Quan

The barangay offcials were also the ones who waited to receive the relief goods for their constituents at the assigned drop off points. According to LGU offcials and residents of Buntay, there was not much involvement of the national government during the relief operations and rehabilitation in Dulag after Haiyan. In fact, NGOs responded frst before the national government. Further, the NGOs were more visible. During the FGD, the residents of Buntay mentioned that they were informed that victims of disasters who partially or totally lost their homes, as certifed by their respective barangay offcials, are entitled to Emergency Shelter Assistance (ESA) equivalent to PHP 10,000 (partial loss) and PHP 30,000 (total loss). ESA is a relief given during the response phase after a disaster (DSWD 2014). However, in the case of the province of Leyte, ESA was only released by the DSWD more than a year after Haiyan. Moreover, if victims had already fxed or rebuilt their houses before ESA was released, they were disqualifed from receiving the same. This scenario risks breaching the right to adequate housing guaranteed by the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). The Pinheiro Principles (UN Commission on Human Rights 2005, p. 7) elaborate on this right and provide that ‘States should adopt positive measures aimed at alleviating the situation of refugees and displaced persons living in inadequate housing.’ By not releasing the ESA on time and by not releasing it at all to those who would earlier have been entitled to it, the government may not have fully complied with its State obligations under the ICESCR. Also, the NDRRMC required offcial reports from the LGU a month after Haiyan, which Dulag offcials submitted in March 2014 to the Provincial Government of Leyte. The reports needed the certifcation of the Provincial Governor for Dulag to be included in the restoration and rehabilitation plan of the national government. Unfortunately, the reports submitted by Dulag were misplaced, which resulted in the municipality being excluded from the initial restoration and rehabilitation plan of the national government. Post-Haiyan preparedness The experience during Haiyan brought about many changes, not only with respect to the mechanisms of the LGU but also with respect to the mindset and practice of the people. The residents of Dulag now take the initiative to go to evacuation centres at least two days before an impending typhoon. People now seriously take into consideration the precautionary measures, announcements, and directives of the local government authorities. People no longer wait for offcial announcements of the LGU for forced evacuation. In the case of the residents of Buntay, they have been assigned a new evacuation centre fve kilometres away, located in Barangay Del Pilar following their experience during Haiyan. A local ordinance, referred to as the Dulag Forced Evacuation Ordinance 2014, is in place in Dulag. Although Burson et al. (2018) raise an important question about the extent to which forced evacuations can ever be in accordance with international human rights law, this type of ordinance is permitted

The Philippines 89 under Principle 6 of the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (Kälin 2008, p. 34). Under the ordinance, it is incumbent upon the Municipal Disaster Risk Reduction Management Council (MDRRMC) to assess and recommend whether a pre-emptive or forced evacuation of residents is necessary (Dulag Forced Evacuation Ordinance 2014). Based on the recommendation, the Mayor will declare the implementation of the evacuation that includes the following: • • •

•

The designated area where vehicles provided by the Municipal Government are waiting to transport local residents to the identifed evacuation centres. Evacuation centres or such places where the evacuated residents will be temporarily taken. The necessity of the evacuated local residents to stay in the previously mentioned evacuation centres until there will be another issuance declaring that the imminent danger within the affected area is no longer existent, if this is still possible. Measures ensuring the safety of local residents in the evacuation areas.

The ordinance also states that after the declaration of forced evacuation but before its implementation, the local government unit shall inform the residents in their local dialect about the need to evacuate. In case of refusal of the residents to comply with the directive to evacuate, the government personnel may exert the appropriate physical force to ensure the residents’ safety, implementing the same without any form of discrimination and with due consideration to vulnerable groups such as women, children, elderly, and persons with disability (Dulag Forced Evacuation Ordinance 2014). Notably, the ordinance does not specify how the residents will be assigned to their respective evacuation centres. While it mentions that the manner of evacuation will consider the members of the vulnerable groups such as women, children, elderly, and persons with disability, it does not specify if these groups will be given a special space to accommodate their respective needs. It also does not state whether they will be given priority during evacuation. On the other hand, it seems that the local government unit, particularly the MDRRMC, decides on matters regarding evacuation based on its assessment of the attending circumstances. The LGU also uses the proportionate or appropriate force necessary in implementing evacuation. Forced evacuation does not necessarily mean using force on people so that they would comply with the directive to evacuate, but it means that the LGU requires the residents to leave their homes and evacuate. In addition to the said ordinance, the MDRRM Offce implements a contingency plan in times of disasters. First, the offce follows a protocol for information dissemination during heavy rains, even if there is no declared typhoon signal. This is especially for the beneft of those who are living near or along rivers and the mountainside. Second, if the rain lasts for at least three days, forced evacuation is implemented so that in case of landslides, there will be no casualties or injuries. Since the LGU commonly experiences typhoons and landslides, it is not unusual for it to implement forced evacuation. In the case of forced evacuation,

90

Ryan Jeremiah D. Quan

not only the LGU offcials or personnel responsible for disaster response are involved. The LGU employs the services of both the national police and the military since they are generally perceived by people as having greater authority compared with other government employees or workers. Third, early warning systems (public announcement system) are now in place in about 30 out of the 45 barangays. Those for the remaining barangays are already in the process of procurement, and the LGU is preparing a hazard-specifc contingency plan as required by the NDRRMC at the time of this study. Dulag also started the ‘Adopt a Family Program,’ where owners of bigger and sturdier houses or those with available warehouses can choose to adopt families during disasters. This programme aims to address the lack of space in evacuation centres, and the lack of resources to build additional evacuation centres. Currently, this programme is being implemented in 34 barangays in Dulag. The 11 barangays that have been classifed as coastal barangays are not covered by this programme. A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is executed between the owner of the house/warehouse, the barangay offcial where the owner resides, and the municipal government. The MOU serves as a safeguard for the residents. The local government unit does not force any house owner to take part in the programme. Considering that the relationship is contractual, there is a need for consent on the part of the house owners. By entering into the MOU, the house owners become legally obligated to give shelter to certain residents in times of disaster. Since the MOU is a tripartite document wherein the barangay offcials and the municipal government are parties, there is transparency with its provisions because it is a public document. As it is a public document, the residents are aware of its provisions and the benefciaries of the MOU. Under the MOU, the houses and warehouses under the programme will be considered as evacuation centres, making them eligible to receive relief goods. Each MOU specifes the benefciaries in times of disaster. Thus, both the barangay offcials and the municipal government are aware before a disaster strikes of the recipients of the relief goods per house. The MDRRM Offce has already utilised this programme in the two previous typhoons that hit Dulag (i.e., Basyang and Urduja) in 2018. This initiative is a proactive approach to addressing the need for evacuation centres when resources are insuffcient to build new ones. The transparency of the arrangements is worth noticing. However, as noted in other contributions to this volume, private evacuation can also carry the risk of sexual and gender-based violence, and further research on how such arrangements across Asia and the Pacifc address this issue is indicated. The LGU also implemented a method of transporting residents to their assigned evacuation centres. This is in accordance with Ordinance No. 2014-VI. The MDRRMC decides the manner of transporting the residents as well as their assignment of evacuation centres. In terms of relief distribution, it is now more organised since the LGU tries as much as possible to prevent any duplication in claiming or receiving relief goods. In terms of budget policies, the current MDRRM Offcer observed that some guidelines being implemented by the national government in terms of disaster

The Philippines 91 response are more theoretical than practical. In particular, the Commission on Audit (COA) implements guidelines on what can be procured by the MDRRM Offce, without taking into consideration the actual needs of the municipality. As a result, the MDRRM Offce is questioned for procuring items that the municipality actually needs. For example, the rescue equipment procured by the MDRRM Offce for disaster response volunteers was later disallowed by the COA. Another challenge is that there is no standard for approving or disapproving procurements of the MDRRM Offce. It seems that the auditor assigned by the COA to the municipality has wide discretion on this matter. The current MDRRM Offcer suggested that frst, the national government should consult people in the grassroots before they implement policies or guidelines. This will result in policies or guidelines that refect the experiences of programme implementers. Second, she suggested that national government agencies, like the COA, should undergo orientation on DRRM so that they understand the needs in the grassroots. Clearly, the local context must inform national policies.

Conclusion and ways forward The experience of evacuation in the municipality of Dulag during Typhoon Haiyan highlights a number of gaps in the implementation of international human rights standards and the national law and policy framework relation to displacement in the context of disasters. It demonstrates the limitations faced by local government units in implementing international and national laws, guidelines, and policies relating to disaster preparedness and response, but also the creativity of fnding solutions despite such limitations. It also presents how local government units are compelled to work independently when there is no strong and effective coordination from the national government. A human rights-based approach to disaster risk reduction and management must be mainstreamed in order to protect human rights in times of disaster and to enhance accountability and transparency in the entire disaster response process. It should also highlight citizen participation and empowerment in all phases of disaster preparedness and response. Based on the data gathered during the FGDs and the interviews, there seems to be a gap on two levels of participation: the participation of the local government units with respect to the shaping of national policies that affect disaster risk reduction and management, and the participation of residents in contextualising the national into local policies that directly affect them. To address gender concerns in relation to disasters, as emphasised by the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights, ‘[l]inking gender and human rights approach in natural disaster context simply means not forgetting women, whether it is about addressing their specifc needs or ensuring their participation in all phases of disaster management’ (ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights, 2018, p.4). Notably, while Ordinance No. 2014VI mentions using the appropriate physical force in case of the refusal of residents to leave their homes despite the implementation of forced evacuation,

92

Ryan Jeremiah D. Quan

particularly mentioning that special attention should be given to vulnerable groups (i.e., women, children, persons with disabilities, and elderly people), it does not spell out how these vulnerable groups shall be assigned their evacuation centres and if they will be given spaces that would cater to their specifc needs. It seems that there should be a policy that expressly addresses their concerns and their needs. While it is good that the ordinance contains matters relating to evacuation in times of disaster, it must comply with international standards both in content and in the manner of implementation. Furthermore, education is still key in addressing gender issues in disaster contexts. Deeply rooted patriarchal beliefs and gender roles that limit women from meaningfully participating in DRRM must be addressed. Beyond giving women a voice in fnding solutions for disaster situations they are involved in, this also presents an opportunity to harness the knowledge and experiences of women that are valuable in law and policy development. A comprehensive law protecting the rights of IDPs must be enacted following standards set by the core international human rights instruments and the UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. By having such a law, the obligations of State actors, particularly those at the local level, become clearer. Currently, the protection of IDPs seems to be merely incidental based on a smorgasbord of other related laws and policies. A national legal and policy framework should systematically address displacement in all contexts, including situations caused by disasters and climate change-related events. Such law on internal displacement must provide for specifc duties and guidelines to effectively address the needs and vulnerabilities of IDPs. There are proposed bills in the 17th Congress that seek to address the rights of IDPs.2 These versions attempt to address the objections that the previous administration had on the 2013 version of the bill. In this regard, stakeholders should continue to raise awareness regarding the need to have a domestic law that specifcally addresses the needs of IDPs as well as to lobby for the bill to be passed into law. While there are laws that protect vulnerable individuals, particularly children, from disaster-induced displacement, there is still a need to highlight disaster displacement in DRRM and not just focus on human-induced displacement. There is a need to fll the gap between the policies adopted by the national government and what is actually happening in the feld in times of disaster. The laws and guidelines at the national level must be able to address the issues and needs that the LGUs face in the feld. Dulag’s experience in having certain items, which are deemed essential to disaster response, not being allowed to be purchased by the national government before the disaster shows this gap. The MDRRM Offce shared its concerns about complying with the guidelines of the national government regarding reporting and audit requirements. The current MDRRM Offcer explained that the different agencies at the national level require different reports with different formats, but the information is the same. This is taxing for the MDRRM Offcer who only has two staff members. The challenge for the MDRRM Offce is to comply with the national policies that govern its offce and, at the same time, maximise the limited sources it has

The Philippines 93 in dispensing its duties. Despite the challenges that the MDRRM Offce deals with due to a lack of resources, it continues to maximise the resources it has by being creative in fnding solutions to more effective disaster responses, such as its ‘Adopt a Family Program.’ This programme was borne out of the need to provide enough evacuation centres for affected residents, considering that the LGU still lacks the capacity to build the necessary facilities. Since schools are not equipped to serve as evacuation centres, this programme seems to be more suitable to provide the needs of displaced families. According to the current MDRRM Offcer, in case this programme gains traction as a temporary solution, schools can be freed up and be used for other purposes in times of disasters. It must be noted that the LGU must still ensure that the rights of the evacuees covered by this programme are protected. While the interviews conducted show that the duty bearers are inclined to follow the policies implemented by the national government, there was no explicit or implied suggestion that they do so in consideration of international human rights standards. Thus, it is important for local offcials to keep abreast of international standards and best practices that are useful in developing policies and implementing programmes relating to disaster displacement. Addressing resource limitations, facilities, and services While Dulag offcials recognise the existence and applicability of international human rights standards that must be integrated into their disaster response, the resource limitation of a third-class municipality hinders them from adopting the same. Under the 2010 Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act (R.A. 10121), no less than 5 per cent of an LGU’s budget should be set aside as a Local Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Fund. Thus, the budget allotted for disaster risk reduction and management is wholly dependent on the revenue of the local government unit. In this regard, the income classifcation of a local government unit matters. Disaggregated data is essential in customising the relief goods according to the needs of the members as well as determining the number of people actually displaced by the typhoon. While the LGU had lists of families to be provided with relief in the different evacuation centres, these were not maximised. This data presents an opportunity for the LGU to take into account the specifc needs of vulnerable groups. Responding to evacuation and housing issues With respect to evacuation centres, there is a need to invest in infrastructure. Dulag’s experience during Haiyan showed not only the lack of proper evacuation areas, but it also highlighted the fact that most, if not all, facilities used as evacuation sites cannot withstand severe weather events. Also, there is still a need to create safe spaces for women, elderly, children, persons with disabilities, and those who are sick. Health and hygiene facilities in evacuation centres should

94

Ryan Jeremiah D. Quan

also be improved. This is a big challenge considering that the evacuation centres do not have suffcient space for all the residents of Dulag. The national government must put in place a mechanism to enable LGUs to comply with these standards in disaster preparation, response, and rehabilitation, specifcally the provision of safe spaces for vulnerable groups and hygiene kits. The CERPA requires that school buildings may only be used for a limited period. However, the lack of a dedicated facility for evacuation purposes precludes them from complying with the law. This again highlights the need to consider local particularities in the formulation of national laws and policies. This affrms the observation of Bankoff (2015, p. 88) that Central to the success of all relief and rehabilitation measures is the establishment of evacuation centres for both temporary and longer term shelter and through which basic food-stuff and primary healthcare can be provided. Most evacuation centres are not purpose-built structures but are schoolhouses, unoccupied public buildings, barracks or, where no suitable accommodation exists, simply tent cities. The evacuation centres used in Dulag, which were mostly school buildings, proved inappropriate for such a purpose. Providing evacuation centres that are appropriate for the needs of residents affords evacuees a place to stay where their dignity is respected and their rights are protected. Although the ‘Adopt a Family’ Programme represents an innovative response to the lack of space in government-run evacuation centres, there remains a need to improve and develop municipal evacuation centres. When displacement is as foreseeable as it is across the Philippines, ensuring that everyone has access to safe shelter is a core human rights obligation that states must take steps, to the maximum of available resources, to provide. The municipal ordinance authorising forced evacuation in certain circumstances is understandable and, in principle, permissible under international human rights law, as refected in Principle 6 of the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. What is important to monitor is the manner in which this power is exercised, given the risk that what one individual deems necessary may, in fact, be arbitrary, and thus amount to a violation of the right not to be arbitrarily displaced. The issue regarding the Emergency Shelter Assistance also warrants closer consideration, if not in relation to Haiyan, which took place in 2013, then in relation to foreseeable future displacement events. As the name suggests, the assistance that is to be provided applies to the emergency phase. Having to wait more than one year for such assistance stands in the way of durable solutions to displacement. This is even more the case for people who were entitled to receive the assistance, but who were deprived of receiving it merely because they took the initiative to rebuild their homes before the government released the ESA.

The Philippines 95 Philippines: Moving forward on human rights, displacement, and protection during disasters Many more issues relating to disaster displacement have to be addressed in the Philippines. Further study may be conducted covering areas where there were surges of population movement due to Haiyan. Such study may explore the experience of these receiving communities. An in-depth study on the crucial role NGOs played in disaster response and rehabilitation after Haiyan would also provide important insight. One angle to be considered is the interaction and dynamics between the government and these NGOs, and how such affected effective response and rehabilitation. It must be noted that some of the developments in DRRM, including those that address displacement, were informed by the experiences during Haiyan. It may be worth examining if these changes in laws, policies, and guidelines are sustainable and whether these may be applied in other disaster situations in other areas. Resilience is an admirable trait of the Filipino people. However, this should not be used as a convenient excuse for inadequacies in addressing the needs and rights of displaced populations due to disasters. Following the human rights-based approach, the State is the primary duty-bearer that has obligations under international human rights law to respect, protect, and fulfl human rights. It is the ultimate disservice to the people to just rely on their resilience to cope with disaster situations. The government should have long-term plans and mechanisms in place not only to ensure that the rights of the IDPs are protected but also to empower them to return to their normal way of life. After all, protecting the rights of IDPs goes back to the respect for the fundamental and non-derogable right to life of the people to live a quality and dignifed life.

Notes 1 See Philippine Statistics Authority, 2018 Philippine Standard Geographic Code for Municipality of Dulag, available at: https://psa.gov.ph/classifcation/psgc/?q=psgc/bar angays/083718000 (last accessed on 1 April 2019). 2 See An Act Protecting the Rights of Internally Displaced Persons and Penalizing Acts of Arbitrary Internal Displacement, S.B. No. 1142, 17th Cong., 1st Reg. Sess. (2016), available at: https://www.senate.gov.ph/lisdata/2481821369!.pdf (last accessed 19 November 2018). See also An Act Protecting the Rights of Internally Displaced Persons and Appropriating Funds Therefor and for Other Purposes, S.B. No. 1513, 17th Cong., 2nd Reg. Sess. (2017), available at: https://www.senate.gov.ph/lisdata/2 632122638!.pdf (last accessed 19 November 2018).

References ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (2018) Women in natural disasters: indicative fndings in unraveling gender in institutional responses. Available at: https://aichr.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Adopted_AICHR_Thematic_Study_W omen_in_Natural_Disasters_26012018.pdf (Accessed: 12 January 2020).

96

Ryan Jeremiah D. Quan

Asian Disaster Reduction Center (2018) Information on disaster reduction of member countries – Philippines. Available at: http://www.adrc.asia/nationinformation.php?Na tionCode=608 (Accessed: 12 January 2020). Bankoff, G. (2015) Cultures of disaster: society and natural hazard in the Philippines. Abingdon: Routledge. Burson, B., Kälin, W., McAdam, J. and Weerasinghe, S. (2018) ‘The duty to move people out of harm’s way in the context of climate change and disasters’, Refugee Survey Quarterly, 37(4), pp. 379–407. Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre (2018) Philippines: country information. Available at: http://www.internal-displacement.org/countries/philippines (Accessed: 12 January 2020). ———(2020) Global internal displacement database. Available at: https://www.internal -displacement.org/database. (Accessed: 9 April 2020). Kälin, W. (2008) Guiding principles on internal displacement: Annotations. Washington, DC: American Society of International Law. NDRRMC (2013) Memorandum for the SND and chairperson. Available at: https://reliefw eb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/fles/resources/NDRRMC%20Update%20Sitrep%20No.%2 044%20Effects%20of%20Typhoon%20YOLANDA%20%28HAIYAN%29.pdf (Accessed: 12 January 2020). ——— (2014) Situation report No. 104: effects of Typhoon ‘Yolanda’ (HAIYAN). Available at: https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/fles/resources/Update%20Sitrep%20No.% 20104%20Effects%20of%20TY%20YOLANDA.pdf (Accessed: 27 May 2020). Philippine Information (n.d.) Philippine city and municipality classes. Available at: https ://www.in-philippines.com/philippine-city-and-municipality-classes/ (Accessed: 12 January 2020). Philippine Statistics Authority (2018) 2018 Philippine standard geographic code for municipality of Dulag. Available at: https://psa.gov.ph/classifcation/psgc/?q=psgc/bar angays/083718000 (Accessed: 12 January 2020). Philippine Supreme Court (1993) Oposa v. Factoran, G.R. No. 101083. Quan, R. and Scott, M. (2020) Philippines national law and policy report on displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. Lund: Raoul Wallenberg Institute of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law. Available at: https://rwi.lu.se/disaster-displacement/ (Accessed: 27 May 2020). Rappler (2013) ‘Aquino vetoes bill on internally displaced persons’, Rappler.com, 29 May. Available at: https://www.rappler.com/nation/30200-aquino-vetoes-internally-dis placed-persons-bill (Accessed: 12 January 2020). Sherwood, A., Bradley, M., Rossi, L., Guiam, R., and Mellicker, B. (2015) Resolving post-disaster displacement: insights from the Philippines after Typhoon Haiyan (Yolanda). Available at: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Resolving-Po stDisaster-DisplacementInsights-from-the-Philippines-after-Typhoon-Haiyan-June-2 015.pdf (Accessed: 27 May 2020). Thomas, A.R. (2015) Resettlement in the wake of Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines: a strategy to mitigate risk or a risky strategy? Available at: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/ uploads/2016/06/Brookings-Planned-Relocations-Case-StudyAlice-Thomas-Philippin es-case-study-June-2015.pdf (Accessed: 12 January 2020). UN CESCR (1990) General comment no. 3: the nature of state parties’ obligations. E/1991/23. UN Commission on Human Rights (2005) Final report of the Special Rapporteur Paulo Sérgio Pinheiro on housing and property restitution in the context of the return of refugees and internally displaced persons. E/CN.4/Sub.2/2005/17.

The Philippines 97

International legal and policy documents 1948 1979 1989 1998

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (adopted 10 December 1948) UNGA Res217 A(III) Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (adopted 18 December 1979, entered into force 3 September 1981) 1249 UNTS 13 Convention on the Rights of the Child (adopted 20 November 1989, entered into force 2 September 1990) 1577 UNTS 3 UN Commission on Human Rights. 1998. Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. Addendum to Report of the Representative of the SecretaryGeneral, Mr. Francis M. Deng, submitted pursuant to Commission resolution 1997/39 (E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2), 11 February 1998

National legal and policy documents 1974 1987 2009 2009

2009 2010

2010 2011 2011 2011 2014

2014

The Child and Youth Welfare Code, Presidential Decree No. 603 (1974). The Philippine Constitution An Act Providing for the Magna Carta of Women, Republic Act No. 9710 An Act Mainstreaming Climate Change into Government Policy Formulations, Establishing the Framework Strategy and Program on Climate, Creating for this Purpose the Climate Change Commission, and for Other Purposes, Republic Act No. 9729 (2009) (the Climate Change Act). Strengthening Disaster Risk Reduction in the Philippines: Strategic National Action Plan 2009-2019. Available at http://www.adrc.asia/countryreport/ PHL/2009/PHL_attachment.pdf (Accessed: 14 November 2018). An Act Strengthening the Philippine Disaster Risk Reduction and Management System, Providing for the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Framework and Institutionalizing the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan, Appropriating Funds Therefor and for Other Purposes, Republic Act No. 10121. National Framework Strategy on Climate Change 2010–2022. Available at http://www.neda.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/nfscc_sgd.pdf (Accessed: 14 November 2018). National Climate Change Action Plan 2011-2028. Available at http://ext wprlegs1.fao.org/docs/pdf/phi152934.pdf (Accessed: 14 November 2018). National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Framework. Available at http://www.ndrrmc.gov.ph/attachments/article/1675/NDRRMC_Framewor k.pdf (Accessed: 12 January 2020). National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Plan (NDRRMP) 2011–2028. Available at http://www.ndrrmc.gov.ph/attachments/article/41/ NDRRM_Plan_2011-2028.pdf (Accessed: 12 January 2020). Department of Social Welfare and Development. Guidelines for the Implementation of the Emergency Shelter Assistance (ESA) Project for Families with Partially and Totally Damaged Houses Due to Typhoon ‘Yolanda,’ Memorandum Circular No. 24, series of 2014. Available at https://www.dswd.gov.ph/issuances/MCs/MC_2014-024.pdf (Accessed: 23 January 2020). An Ordinance Implementing Forced Evacuation as a Resort When a Disaster or Emergency Has Been Declared in the Municipality of Dulag, Leyte and of Loss of Lives Becomes Imminent, Providing Penalties Therefor and for Other Purposes, Ordinance No. 2014-VI (2014).

98 2016

2016

2017

Ryan Jeremiah D. Quan An Act Mandating the Provision of Emergency Relief and Protection for Children Before, During, and After Disasters and Other Emergency Situations, Republic Act No. 10821(2016) (Children’s Emergency Relief and Protection Act). Proposed bill: An Act Protecting the Rights of Internally Displaced Persons and Penalizing Acts of Arbitrary Internal Displacement, S.B. No. 1142, 17th Cong., 1st Reg. Sess. (2016). Available at https://www.senate.gov.ph/ lisdata/2481821369!.pdf (Accessed: 19 November 2018). Proposed bill: An Act Protecting the Rights of Internally Displaced Persons and Appropriating Funds Therefor and for Other Purposes, S.B. No. 1513, 17th Cong., 2nd Reg. Sess. (2017). Available at https://www.senate.gov.ph/ lisdata/2632122638!.pdf (Accessed: 19 November 2018).

Protection during evacuation and throughout displacement

5

Vanuatu Protecting the rights of vulnerable groups during evacuation: A case study of Cyclone Pam and Mataso Island in Vanuatu Tess Van Geelen and Margaretha Wewerinke-Singh1

Introduction In March 2015, category 5 Tropical Cyclone Pam slammed into Vanuatu, a small island nation in the South-Western Pacifc Ocean with a population of about 272,000 people (Vanuatu National Statistics Offce 2017). The damage and subsequent economic loss totalled around USD 450 million, or roughly 64 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) (Vanuatu Meteorology and Geo-Hazards Department 2017). The Government of Vanuatu reported that 65,000 people had been displaced by the disaster (roughly one-quarter of the population), and an estimated 17,000 buildings were damaged or destroyed (Esler 2015). This chapter presents the fndings of our case study on the impact of Cyclone Pam on the Mataso Island community, from a human rights perspective. Roughly three-quarters of Vanuatu’s population live in rural villages spread across 82 islands (SPREP 2017; Vanuatu National Statistics Offce 2017); 65 per cent of the population does not have access to improved sanitation, and 15 per cent lack access to safe drinking water (Vanuatu National Statistics Offce 2017). Vanuatu is categorised by the United Nations (UN) as a Least Developed Country, in large part due to its status as one of the most geo-physically vulnerable countries in the world (Garschagen et al. 2015; UNDESA 2010). From 2011 to 2015, the World Risk Index ranked it as the world’s most vulnerable nation to disasters (Garschagen et al. 2015). Vanuatu is located in both the ‘Pacifc Rim of Fire’ and the South Pacifc tropical cyclone basin. The islands experience moderate earthquakes almost every other day, regular eruptions from more than a dozen active volcanoes, and a high frequency of cyclones, tsunamis, storm surges, drought, landslides, and fooding of coasts and rivers (Vanuatu Meteorology and Geo-Hazards Department 2017; PCRAFI 2017). Low levels of income and institutional capacity compound this extreme geophysical vulnerability (GFDRR 2009; GFDRR 2017; UN DESA 2010). Existing environmental issues in the country both exacerbate and are exacerbated by disasters and climate change (UN DESA 2010). Like other Pacifc Island nations, Vanuatu is on the front line of climate change. The country has already seen an increase in the frequency and intensity

102

Van Geelen and Wewerinke-Singh

of extreme weather events due to climate change (GFDRR 2017; UN DESA 2010; NPCCDID 2018). Climate modelling for Vanuatu has predicted increased average temperatures and an increase in the frequency of extreme temperatures; both increased precipitation and a higher number of dry days; sea level rise; and coastal erosion (Vanuatu Meteorology and Geo-Hazards Department 2017; GFDRR 2017; UN DESA 2010). The Pacifc Catastrophe Risk Assessment and Financing Initiative has predicted that, in the long term, Vanuatu can expect to incur average annual losses of around USD 48 million due to cyclones and earthquakes (PCRAFI 2017). Ecosystem health, governance, and livelihoods in Vanuatu are under stress due to the effects of global warming, and these adverse consequences interact in negative feedback loops that increase the risk of both disasters and displacement. Our case study illustrates how vulnerability can both exacerbate and be exacerbated by disasters, which, in turn, can increase the risk of displacement, undermine autonomy, and entrench poverty (IPCC 2007; IPCC 2014; UN OHCHR 2018).2 A number of existing human rights challenges also present special risks to vulnerable populations during disasters, particularly in relation to the protection of women, children, LGBTI+ persons, persons with disabilities, and the elderly. Women are marginalised in a variety of ways, including a lack of political representation,3 high prevalence of gender-based violence,4 and cultural barriers to participation in decision-making (Vanuatu Women’s Centre 2011; Bowman et al. 2009; US State Department 2015). While the government of Vanuatu is not expected to meet protection standards during disasters that are not ordinarily met in everyday life due to developmental constraints, there is still a duty to take steps to ensure that evacuation and recovery activities and processes do not create new human rights risks or exacerbate existing vulnerabilities and inequalities (Kälin 2012). This chapter begins with a brief overview of the methodology and rationale for the case study before providing some background on the relevant legal, policy, and governance framework in Vanuatu. The next section consists of background to the case study, detailing the disaster itself and the response efforts. Then, our analysis of the data focuses on human rights issues relating to the initial decision to order the evacuation from Mataso Island and the related challenges around the protection of human rights during evacuation and throughout displacement. The fnal section briefy concludes the chapter, with some recommendations for future research.

Method The focus of the study is Mataso Island and the small community living there when Tropical Cyclone Pam struck in 2015. The location of the study in Vanuatu presents two particularly valuable research opportunities. First, evidence regarding the link between climate change and the intensifcation and increased frequency of cyclones in the Pacifc has

Vanuatu

103

accumulated in recent years (Stott 2016). It will, therefore, be increasingly important to develop our understanding of this type of disaster and the associated human rights challenges, as Pacifc nations draft new laws and policies to deal with the adverse consequences of climate change. Second, Vanuatu’s relatively innovative policy approach to climate change and displacement enabled us to examine two overarching questions: how to design policies that adequately protect human rights during disaster-induced displacement, and how to ensure that those policies are effectively implemented in practice. The research addresses this question retrospectively, focusing on key elements of the legal and policy framework that emerged in response to Cyclone Pam, and considering how effectively they address the challenges presented by Cyclone Pam. Our analysis draws on a range of primary sources including domestic laws and policies; semi-structured (storytelling) interviews with community representatives, government offcials, and humanitarian workers; and reports by nongovernmental organisations (NGOs), government agencies, and international organisations.5 We interviewed 18 members of the Mataso Island community currently residing on Mataso, and one former Mataso Islander who now lives in Port Vila. Due to resource constraints, we were only able to visit the island on one occasion. Interview participants consisted of any person who was available and willing to participate on that occasion. We regret that persons with disabilities and other potentially vulnerable persons were not interviewed because interviewers were not able to reach them under the circumstances.6 In the community interviews, participants were comprised of four women (including one elder), ten men (including three elders), two girls, and three boys. Ten staff members were interviewed from a variety of humanitarian organisations and civil society, including local and international NGOs and UN agencies. We also interviewed two offcers from the National Disaster Management Offce (NDMO) (one current and one former). Unfortunately, we were not able to speak with more government representatives, as most government staff involved with disaster management had been dispatched to Ambae Island for extended periods during our feld research to manage the evacuations and resettlement that followed several volcanic eruptions in 2017–2018.

The legal, policy, and governance framework in Vanuatu Human rights Vanuatu’s Constitution guarantees a range of civil and political human rights, including the right to life and the right to freedom of movement, although these are non-justiciable. Vanuatu has ratifed the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) including the Optional Protocol, the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). While it has not ratifed the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR),

104

Van Geelen and Wewerinke-Singh

several of these key rights are also found in the CRC and CRPD, and many of the norms contained in the ICESCR and other treaties are binding on Vanuatu as customary international law (Triggs 2011).7 The government has generally cooperated with international human rights groups operating in the country, including by allowing them to investigate alleged human rights violations (US State Department 2016). The President appoints an Ombudsman every fve years, who is responsible for investigating human rights complaints. However, the Ombudsman’s Offce does not have prosecutorial powers, and its reports are not admissible as evidence in court. Vanuatu does not have a national human rights commission. Chiefs and traditional governance structures The traditional chiefy governance structure operates in parallel to the national Government of Vanuatu. The chiefs exercise customary authority within local communities, and the Malvatumauri (the National Council of Chiefs) has a constitutionally mandated advisory role at local, provincial, and national levels on matters of customary law, tradition, and culture (Constitution of Vanuatu 1980). In many remote communities, the local chiefs (often closely supported by local churches) carry out the majority of typical governance or policing activities, while the national government is rarely present in practice. This can involve Island Courts headed by the local chief (Constitution of Vanuatu 1980). However, the relationship between the chiefs and the national government is variable and often ad hoc. The chiefy system itself ‘varies according to time and place and is highly fuid’ (Green 2015. See also Cox et al. 2007). Chiefy governance remains an important part of Ni-Vanuatu culture that continues to enjoy widespread support. It also presents considerable advantages in terms of decentralised governance in a geographically fragmented nation. At the same time, the socially conservative tendencies of traditional institutions have prompted concerns about the protection of women in particular (Cox et al. 2007). Chiefs are predominantly men, and the institution perpetuates maledominated decision-making in the communities. Chief-led confict resolution, including cases of gender-based violence and abuse, typically prioritises family cohesion rather than the rights and interests of victims (Huffer and Molisa 1999; UN DACT 2015). The predominance of chiefy governance in island communities like Mataso, therefore, presents special challenges regarding the protection of women and other potentially vulnerable groups in the context of disasters, particularly in relation to decision-making and planning. Climate change, disaster, and displacement policy The government has adopted a detailed and expansive suite of laws and policies dedicated to managing disasters, climate change, and displacement. The legal and policy framework is examined in detail in Van Geelen et al. (2020). Policies that cover preparedness, risk reduction, and response management are implemented

Vanuatu

105

by the NDMO, which is also responsible for coordinating with provincial and local disaster committees (Interview 19, government offcer, 25 July 2018). The NDMO falls within the Ministry of Climate Change and Adaptation, refecting the strong connection between climate change and disasters in the Pacifc (Vanuatu Meteorology and Geo-Hazards Department 2017; GFDRR 2017). In the wake of Cyclone Pam, the government introduced several new policies, including the Cyclone Support Plan 2016–2017, which deals with cyclone prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery, and the 2017 Community Preparedness Package, which aims to improve coordination between national government operations and international support. The Climate Change and Disaster Risk Reduction Policy (2016–2030) draws on the 2015 Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNGA 2015) and promotes both human rights protection and cross-cutting risk analysis, including gender and social vulnerability. Internal displacement is noted as a priority area in relation to capacity building, disaster preparedness, and recovery, and the policy includes specifc guidance on evacuation centres and long-term resettlement. The government also worked with international and local actors to review the 20-year-old national disaster legislation, incorporating lessons learned from the experience of Cyclone Pam (IFRC 2016). The new Disaster Risk Management Act was passed by Parliament in the last sitting of 2019. The NDMO has already begun working with other sectors of government to mainstream the new disaster risk management policies at all levels of government and across all sectors (Interview 19, government offcer, 25 July 2018). The NDMO is also developing Operational Guidelines for Mass Evacuations with the support of the International Organization for Migration (IOM) and the United Nations Offce for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UN OCHA).8 The NDMO worked with IOM and others to develop the 2016 National Evacuation Centre Guidelines, which was identifed as a priority in the wake of Cyclone Pam (Pacifc Community 2015). The guidelines draw on the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and the Strategy for Climate and Disaster Resilient Development in the Pacifc (Pacifc Community. 2014). The guidelines set out criteria for evacuation facilities, covering both geographical and structural features, in addition to safety and security issues. They refect a number of standards found in international guidelines, including: • • •

Easy and dignifed access to facilities for persons with disabilities and the elderly Privacy for women and girls, including exclusive and well-lit access to bathroom facilities Basic safety features, including smoke detectors, adequate lighting, and ventilation

The National Evacuation Centre Guidelines include an objective to ‘support and maintain human dignity and respect the privacy of affected people, including being responsive to gender, culture, religion and accessibility considerations’

106

Van Geelen and Wewerinke-Singh

(p. 5). However, they do not include any guidance relating to evacuation procedures, such as early warning and consent, participation in decision-making, or monitoring and complaints handling as recommended in the MEND Guide and the IASC Operational Guidelines (2011). In October 2018, the government adopted the new National Policy on Climate Change and Disaster-Induced Displacement (NPCCDID), which clarifes and signifcantly expands the rights and protections guaranteed to persons displaced by disasters in Vanuatu. The new policy aims to ‘ensure displacement and human mobility considerations are mainstreamed into Vanuatu’s planning at national, provincial and local levels, building on existing national policy initiatives’ (p. 7–8). Developed in light of the lessons learned from Cyclone Pam and with assistance from IOM, the policy is one of the world’s most progressive on climate-driven displacement (Napwatt 2017). IOM’s then Chief of Mission, Dr Lesikimakuata Korovavala, noted that ‘Vanuatu is among the frst countries in the world to prepare such a policy and is venturing into new territory with this initiative’ (Napwatt 2017). The policy adopts the term ‘disaster’ rather than ‘natural disaster’ to acknowledge that risk is infuenced by both geophysical hazards as well as social, economic, and political vulnerability, and specifcally includes nonnatural triggers of displacement, such as evictions and infrastructure projects. The policy expressly follows the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (Guiding Principles) (UN Commission on Human Rights 1998), which is the cornerstone document underpinning a human rights-based approach to internal displacement. The policy also addresses gender responsiveness, community participation, and climate change adaptation as cross-cutting issues. However, signifcant concerns remain regarding the capacity of the Vanuatu government to implement these new policies, which are explored in the case study below.

Case study of March 2015 Tropical Cyclone Pam, Mataso Island Cyclone Pam was the largest cyclone ever recorded in the South Pacifc, until Cyclone Winston, which hit Fiji the following year (Joint Typhoon Warning Center 2015). The small island of Mataso in Shefa Province – home to roughly 130 people at the time – was amongst those most severely affected. All buildings, livestock, and most food sources on the island were destroyed. One man and one woman on Mataso reportedly died from injuries while waiting for medical assistance in the days that followed. A third victim, an elderly woman, also passed away shortly after arriving in Port Vila, although the cause of her death remains unclear (Cullwick 2016). While the community members waited for assistance, they had no adequate shelter and little food or water, as every home and garden had been destroyed, every animal was killed, and most water sources were polluted with salt water and debris (Interviews, community members, 7 May 2018). During this time, the damage caused by the cyclone in combination with a general lack of resources and the delay in assistance undermined the enjoyment of a range of human rights, including the rights to life, health, housing, food, water, sanitation, and education.

Vanuatu

107

The evacuation Assistance from government, NGOs, and humanitarian organisations reached Mataso Island six days after the cyclone hit, although one family member from the nearby capital, Port Vila, was able to visit in the days immediately following with his own fshing boat (Interview 8, community member, 7 May 2018). On the day after the cyclone, he evacuated eight people who had been injured by debris and took them to Port Vila for medical attention (Interview 8, community member, 7 May 2018). In other parts of the country, some islands did not receive any outside assistance until two weeks after the cyclone (Cavanagh 2015). When government assistance reached Mataso nearly one week after the cyclone, 63 people – almost half of the population – were evacuated to Port Vila. Port Vila is located on Efate Island, approximately 40 kilometres South of Mataso, requiring a journey of two to three hours by motorboat. At the request of NDMO staff, a government-owned patrol boat from the Solomon Islands carried the evacuees to Port Vila, under an agreement on mutual assistance in the event of disasters (Interviews 3, 8, 10, and 14, community members, 7 May 2018; Interview 19, government offcer, 25 July 2018). One woman was too badly injured to travel by boat and was evacuated by helicopter around the same time or shortly after those who were evacuated by boat (Interview 16, community member, 7 May 2018). It seems to have been agreed between the NDMO and community representatives that all ft and able men would remain on Mataso to begin rebuilding homes and replanting gardens, while most of the women and children, and all of the injured, elderly, and persons with disabilities were evacuated to Port Vila (Interviews 3, 4, 6, 13, and 14, community members, 7 May 2018). The majority of people evacuated from Mataso were hosted by their extended family living in Port Vila, rather than in the central evacuation centres, in what the NDMO called ‘host evacuation’ (Interview 19, government offcer, 25 July 2018). Since at least the 1980s, small numbers of Mataso Islanders have been gradually moving to Port Vila and have established a neighbourhood within the city called Ohlen Mataso. Most evacuees from Mataso spent two to three months in Port Vila under this arrangement. In interviews, many of the Mataso evacuees reported feeling concerned and uncomfortable about the burden their presence posed on their relatives, many of whom were themselves affected by the cyclone and subsequent fooding around Port Vila (Interviews 9, 14, and 15, community members, 7 May 2018). The Mataso Islanders we spoke with disagree with the government offcials regarding the quantity of basic provisions that were provided during the evacuation in Port Vila. While NDMO offcials claimed to have provided enough basic foodstuffs to survive on for the duration of the evacuation (Interview 19, government offcer, 25 July 2018), most evacuees said they only received a few days’ worth of biscuits and water from the government, and that the rest of the time they survived on gifts from friends and family in Port Vila, or from humanitarian organisations (Interviews 1, 2, 6, and 10, community members, 7 May 2018).9

108

Van Geelen and Wewerinke-Singh

All parties agree, however, that little to no support was provided for long-term recovery, whether in monetary or material form. As one Mataso woman put it, ‘we come in empty to Vila and go back empty to Mataso’ (Interview 2, community member, 7 May 2018). Based on our interviews, it seems that the majority of assistance to the Mataso community came from a local Member of Parliament who was from Mataso himself, rather than the NDMO or other government agencies (Interviews 8 and 14, community members, 7 May 2018). The return During the months after Cyclone Pam, while the evacuees from Mataso Island were still in Port Vila, the NDMO sent a team to conduct safety assessments and assist the islanders who remained with the reconstruction (Interview 19, government offcer, 25 July 2018). After about two months, when this team determined that it was safe for the evacuated community members to return, the NDMO provided a boat and some basic provisions to go with them. IOM also assisted in the return. An IOM staff member accompanied the returning party and stayed on to support the reconstruction for two to three weeks (Coats 2015). At that time, the majority of evacuees returned to Mataso Island. Since then, however, some Mataso Islanders have returned once more to Port Vila. Durable solutions: Mataso three years on When we visited Mataso Island in 2018 to conduct interviews with those who had returned home after the evacuation in 2015, clear signs of the disaster remained. Many people were still living in tents provided by the Red Cross and the United Nations Development Programme following the cyclone, although these tents had only been intended for temporary emergency shelter. Like most of the population in Vanuatu, Mataso Islanders typically have no savings or disposable income. Many are not formally employed and do not receive any form of monetary income, living exclusively off their gardens and the reef. Although the community received some limited material support in the months immediately following the disaster (almost entirely food), they received no fnancial support for longer-term recovery and rebuilding, either from the government or humanitarian donors (Interviews 1, 2, 6, and 10, community members, 7 May 2018). With virtually all of the island’s vegetation uprooted during the storm, the Mataso community has not been able to acquire enough natural building materials to rebuild homes, although a handful of tents have been fortifed with sheets of corrugated iron, apparently donated by students from New Zealand.

Analysis of the role played by law and policy The sections above highlighted the government’s proactive approach to disaster planning, climate change adaptation, and human rights protection. Most of these key policies came into effect as a response to Cyclone Pam. As a developing

Vanuatu

109

nation with limited resources, however, serious challenges persist in the implementation of relevant policies, undermining the protection of rights in practice. This part focuses on the decision to evacuate people from Mataso Island and relates to issues concerning the protection of human rights during evacuation and throughout displacement. For reasons of space, detailed discussion on durable solutions is outside the scope of this chapter. Protection from displacement: Communication, free and informed consent, and participation in decision-making in the evacuation from Mataso The principles of consent and participation, which in turn require effective communication, are key procedural rights in the context of disaster management. This section concerns the evacuation from Mataso after the cyclone, while the following section considers protection issues that arose during displacement. The Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement state that individuals must provide ‘free and informed consent’ to be evacuated (Principle 7.3(c)). This provision applies ‘in situations other than during the emergency stages of armed conficts and disasters’ (Principle 7.3). This is complemented by the MEND Guide (CCCM Cluster 2014, p. 30–31), which requires that any forced evacuation must be ‘absolutely necessary under the circumstances to respond to a serious and imminent threat to life, physical integrity or health.’ In the case of Mataso, the evacuation took place roughly one week after the cyclone had passed. As such, it was arguably no longer a situation of ‘emergency.’ There was no longer any imminent threat to life, and the standard of free and informed consent would have been important to consider.10 Both the Guiding Principles and the MEND Guide highlight the duty of authorities to ensure that alternative options to evacuation are considered. Forced evacuation must only be undertaken if those alternatives cannot protect the physical integrity and lives of those affected, and evacuees must still be consulted as much as possible (Principles 6.2(d), 7; CCCM Cluster 2014, p. 31). In consultations regarding evacuation, authorities must also ‘endeavour to involve those affected, particularly women’ (Principle 7.3(d)). In interviews, Mataso Islanders generally reported receiving no or inadequate information about the disaster, including cyclone warnings, evacuation orders, or other disaster relief activities (Interviews 15 and 17, community members, 7 May 2018). Others noted the poor communications infrastructure in Mataso and other islands (Interviews 15 and 17, community members, 7 May 2018; Interview 22, local NGO offcer, 6 August 2018; Interview 23, UN offcer, 8 August 2018). Mobile service is unreliable, and few people (particularly outside the capital) have access to alternative means of communication, such as radios or newspapers. While the NDMO had tracked the cyclone for a week before it made landfall and issued regular warnings through radio and local media, some Mataso community members heard little or nothing of the cyclone until the day it hit and then only

110

Van Geelen and Wewerinke-Singh

through neighbours or family members living in Port Vila (Interviews 15 and 17, community members, 7 May 2018). After the cyclone hit, the evacuation appears to have been carried out without seeking free and informed consent from women, the elderly, and persons with disabilities. In our interviews, we heard from the government and male community members that ‘all the men agreed’ to evacuate all women, children, and elderly persons, while the men stayed behind to begin the clean-up (Interviews 3, 4, and 6, community members, 7 May 2018; Interview 19, government offcer, 24 July 2018). However, Mataso women that we interviewed did not feel that the rest of the community had agreed to this (Interviews 15 and 17, community members, 7 May 2018).11 One evacuated woman reported having ‘no choice’ and said that she was threatened with arrest if she did not agree to evacuate (Interview 15, community member, 7 May 2018). Members of civil society also noted a general government failure to consult women or vulnerable groups about evacuation procedures (Interview 27, international NGO offcer, 21 August 2018). The relocation to Port Vila was stressful, expensive, and dangerous (especially for the elderly and persons with disabilities who were transported without any special equipment). Some community members no doubt needed to be evacuated for medical attention, as there were no medical facilities on Mataso. However, others suggested in interviews that it may have been preferable to remain on Mataso and receive food and material support in situ in order to begin the work of rebuilding and replanting gardens without delay (Interview 15, community member, 7 May 2018). Emergency shelter closer to the community could have enabled evacuees to return regularly and at minimal expense to their homes each day to begin rebuilding, while still accessing the emergency shelter to sleep, bathe, and prepare meals (Interview 22, local NGO offcer, 6 August 2018; Interview 23, UN offcer, 8 August 2018). When the evacuees from Mataso did return months later, they found their gardens overgrown with weeds, and most of the food plants perished. The experience of Mataso in this respect appears to be consistent with that in other islands. In the months after the cyclone, the United Nations Disaster Assessment and Coordination Team (UNDAC) conducted surveys in a number of communities throughout Vanuatu. It reported that ‘[c]ommunication with affected communities is a signifcant gap in the humanitarian response to date … preventing communities from making informed decisions related to selfrecovery’ (UN DACT 2015, p. 45). In denying vulnerable groups the opportunity to participate in evacuation decision-making, authorities failed to provide the special protection and assistance owed to vulnerable groups in displacement (Principle 4.2). Authorities also may have failed to prevent arbitrary displacement, in failing to consider all feasible alternatives to evacuation, such as in situ assistance (Principles 6 and 7). In the Mataso case study, we found no evidence that such alternatives were considered. Vanuatu’s NPCCDID, introduced after Cyclone Pam, does not provide any specifc guidance relating to evacuation operations. ‘Voluntary and informed choice’ is noted in relation to long term resettlement activities, but not in

Vanuatu

111

relation to evacuation procedures (p. 26). The policy does refer to ‘Operational Guidelines for Mass Evacuations,’ which were under development at the time of writing, as noted above. The implementation of these guidelines is a key strategic objective of the NPCCDID. Going forward, this should be a priority for the NDMO, which must ensure that the new guidelines incorporate rights-based standards regarding evacuations as set out in the MEND Guide and the Guiding Principles. It will also be necessary to improve the coverage and use of the highfrequency radio network and SMS warning systems, as well as improving telecommunications infrastructure generally, in order to reach all communities with early warning and disaster relief information (Pacifc Community 2015). Protection during evacuation and throughout displacement During the disaster response, human rights were undermined by a lack of funding, resources, and institutional capacity within the government (Interview 19, government offcer, 25 July 2018; Interview 20, international NGO staff 20 July 2018). This section focuses on a major issue that featured prominently both in post-disaster assessments and our interviews, and which remains a signifcant gap in the management of disaster displacement in Vanuatu today: the establishment and operation of evacuation centres. This issue undermined rights refected in the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement including rights to dignity and security during displacement (Principles 8, 9); special protection and assistance for vulnerable groups (Principle 4.2); non-discrimination in the provision of food, water, sanitation, medical attention, and shelter (Principle 4.2); and education (Principle 23; UN CRC 2001). When the Mataso evacuees arrived in Port Vila, the NDMO had not yet set up evacuation centres, due in part to a shortage of appropriate and undamaged buildings. Some community members were eventually placed in schools and churches, but no management or services were allocated to these centres for several days, in most cases (Interview 19, government offcer, 25 July 2018). Few of the buildings were equipped with disabled access or facilities or with private areas for women and girls (Interviews 2 and 10, community members, 7 May 2018). Because schools were used as evacuation centres, no children in the area attended school in the months following the cyclone (Interviews 2, 8, 14, 15, and 17, community members, 7 May 2018; Interview 28, government offcer, 21 August 2018). The lack of adequate facilities and monitoring at the centres increased the risk of gender-based violence and sexual assault (UN DACT 2015). This was exacerbated by overcrowding and the inability of women and children to access private spaces, especially for bathing (Pacifc Community 2015). Evacuees described the centres as ‘too crowded,’ ‘bad,’ and ‘not suitable’ (Interviews 2 and 4, community members, 7 May 2018). One member of civil society described the centres as ‘not safe and private,’ and noted that even if their homes are unsafe, people always prefer to go home if they can rather than stay in the centres. They added that only the most vulnerable community members, such as people with disabilities

112

Van Geelen and Wewerinke-Singh

and the elderly, tended to remain in the centres because they had no choice (Interview 26, international NGO staff 20 August 2018). Participants were also concerned about overcrowding in locations where evacuees were hosted by families in Port Vila, and the increased risk of gender-based violence (Interview 25, UN offcer, 10 August 2018). These concerns were echoed by UNDAC, who noted that evacuation settings often exacerbate risks, including a ‘projected increase in family violence,’ given that perpetrators are often close family members or neighbours, and given the often-overcrowded nature of facilities, the general lack of privacy, and diffculty in monitoring (2015). In interviews, NDMO offcers considered that the placement of evacuees with family members was an effective solution to limited resources, particularly given that evacuation centres had not yet been set up when the Mataso Islanders were evacuated (Interview 19, government offcer, 25 July 2018). With some 65,000 people across the country displaced by the cyclone, the NDMO was spread so thin that they considered ‘host evacuation’ to be the ‘cheapest and fastest solution’ for the Mataso evacuees, freeing the government to focus on setting up evacuation centres for other communities and distributing supplies (Interview 19, government offcer, 25 July 2018). However, given the serious concerns associated with this practice, the NDMO must consider in the future whether it is possible to properly comply with protection standards in this setting, and if so, what additional assistance may be needed to ensure full compliance. Experience from Thailand (Chapter 3) and the Philippines (Chapter 4), which have developed formalised systems for community-based evacuation, may provide some relevant insight in this regard. As the worst disaster in living memory, it was also the frst disaster in which the NDMO was required to establish evacuation centres (Pacifc Community 2015). NDMO offcials reported that with no experience or dedicated Camp Coordination and Camp Management (CCCM) capacity (still the case as of writing), it was extremely diffcult to ‘make sure that people were taken care of’ (Interview 19, government offcer, 25 July 2018). The Pacifc Community recommended the development of a national CCCM framework to address this gap and urged that this should be a priority reform given the heightened risk to vulnerable groups during disasters. Participants also identifed capacity building in this area as a priority going forward (Interview 19, government offcer, 25 July 2018; Interview 30, UN offcer, 24 August 2018; Interview 23, UN offcer, 8 August 2018; Interview 26, international NGO offcer, 20 August 2018). The new National Evacuation Centre Guidelines are relatively comprehensive, providing criteria and standards for the identifcation of appropriate facilities, provision of food and water, spacing of bedding, and supply of equipment and support staff for people with disabilities, which would signifcantly enhance the protection of rights during displacement if properly implemented. Unfortunately, these guidelines do not appear to have been implemented, and the complementary guidelines regarding centre management are still under development (RWI 2020). These key policies must be completed and implemented as a priority in order to comply with the Vanuatu government’s obligations to prevent

Vanuatu

113

gender-based violence (and protect rights generally) in both national evacuation centres and informal community-based shelter (Scott 2019). The policies must refect international standards such as the IASC Guidelines for Integrating Gender-Based Violence Initiatives in Humanitarian Action (2015), which set out steps to reduce gender-based violence during disaster displacement. Ultimately, however, our interviews revealed serious concerns that these new policies will do little to protect human rights in practice unless the NDMO is empowered with the funding and training necessary to implement them in the feld. (Interview 19, government offcer, 25 July 2018; Interview 20, international NGO offcer, 20 July 2018; Interview 22, local NGO offcer, 6 August 2018; Interview 23, UN offcer, 8 August 2018). Many key protection issues that arose after Cyclone Pam have re-emerged in the context of evacuations from the recent volcanic eruptions during 2017–2018 in Ambae in the North of Vanuatu, indicating that further action focused on funding and capacity strengthening is required if the ambitions refected in policy are to be realised in practice (Interview 30, UN agency, 24 August 2018; RWI 2020). The NDMO readily acknowledged these issues, citing a lack of funding and training across different government sectors (Interview 19, government offcer, 25 July 2018). This is compounded by Vanuatu’s extreme vulnerability to natural hazards: while NDMO staff are responsible for wearing the ‘two hats’ of long-term planning and preparation, as well as emergency response, serious resource constraints mean that staff are constantly preoccupied responding to current disasters and rarely have time to work on planning (Interview 19, government offcer, 25 July 2018).12 Conclusion and ways forward On paper, the policy and legal framework in Vanuatu relating to disaster displacement demonstrates a progressive commitment to rights protection by the government, and positive awareness of protection issues. However, gaps in resourcing and implementation resulted in a broad array of human rights concerns during Cyclone Pam, including the exacerbation of high pre-existing risk amongst vulnerable populations. The key issues that emerged from our study include a lack of communication and consent to evacuate with respect to women and vulnerable groups, inadequate protection of vulnerable groups during evacuation and displacement, and an ongoing issue of inadequate policy implementation by key institutions due to a lack of funding. The gulf between the legal and policy framework and outcomes on the ground suggests that that the most serious threats facing internally displaced persons in Vanuatu come more from a serious lack of resources rather than a lack of political will. The fndings of the case study highlight the importance of investing resources in the ongoing capacity strengthening of actors involved in protecting people during evacuation and throughout displacement, including the state but also a wide range of other groups involved in disaster management in this highly decentralised nation. How to effectively strengthen the capacity of chiefs, religious

114

Van Geelen and Wewerinke-Singh

institutions, and civil society actors, as well as actors working within the NDMO and other state agencies in a highly decentralised and pluralistic country like Vanuatu presents one immediate opportunity for further research. In Vanuatu, as in many other developing nations, urbanisation and the growth of informal settlements have increased vulnerability to both sudden-onset and slow-onset disasters, with important implications for future risk of displacement (see NPCCDID 2018). Further, as the likelihood of cyclones and other climate change-related hazards continues to increase in the future, the insight provided by this case study into the relationship between climate change, disasters, vulnerability, and displacement will become increasingly valuable, not only in Vanuatu and the Pacifc but globally as other nations struggle with similar challenges. The longer-term relationship of sustainable development, climate change, and displacement risk also warrants further investigation. There are various steps that could be taken in the short and medium term to reduce vulnerability to disaster displacement. Consent and consultation during disasters could be improved by ensuring that these principles are properly incorporated in relevant policies and that relevant staff have appropriate training and awareness to implement this in the feld. Participation could be improved through quotas to ensure the representation of women and vulnerable groups in relevant positions at all levels of government, as well as increasing funding and training for relevant institutions (Pacifc Community 2015). Additionally, consultations on sensitive issues should be designed to ensure that members of vulnerable groups can speak freely and that all issues are raised and addressed (Pacifc Community 2015; Sphere Handbook 2018). More generally, improving human rights protection in relation to disaster displacement requires the development and implementation of key protection policies by the Vanuatu government. This, in turn, requires increased fnancial and technical support from foreign donors and humanitarian agencies. International actors should review their support policies and work more closely with both national governments and the civil sector to ensure assistance is delivered in a way that fosters local capacity, sustainable development, and the realisation of human rights.

Notes 1 This chapter builds on the analysis presented in Wewerinke-Singh and Van Geelen (2019) in which the authors analysed the Mataso Island case study in the context of international climate change law and international human rights law. The authors are indebted to members of the Mataso community, the Vanuatu government, and humanitarian workers who kindly agreed to share their experiences and perspectives. We are also grateful to Tommie Lui, Howard Lapo, and Leerick Riimana for outstanding research assistance, and to Richard Shing and his team at the Vanuatu Kaljoral Senta for their support throughout the project. 2 For more detail on the longer-term interactions between climate change, disasters, and mobility in the Mataso case study, see Wewerinke-Singh and Van Geelen (2019). 3 At the time of writing, there was no female representative in the country’s 52-member parliament, and only fve women in total had been elected to the national parliament since

Vanuatu

4

5 6 7 8

9 10 11 12

115

independence in 1980. A study by Morgan (2013) found that just 3 per cent of senior or executive government positions are held by women. See also: Pacifc Women in Politics (2018); Vanuatu’s National Gender Equality Policy 2015–2019; and World Bank (2013). An estimated 60 per cent of women in Vanuatu have experienced physical and/or sexual violence, including 21 per cent who suffered permanent injuries and 68 per cent who were subject to psychological violence by intimate partners: Vanuatu Women’s Centre (2011); US State Department (2015). Ethics approval was obtained from the Faculty of Arts, Law and Education Research Committee, University of the South Pacifc. It is our understanding that members of these groups have largely left Mataso. Vanuatu is also signatory to a number of international and regional agreements on gender equality, such as the Beijing Platform (1995). For a complete list, see Vanuatu’s National Gender Equality Policy 2015–2019 (2019). The new guidelines will be based on IOM’s Comprehensive Guide for Planning Mass Evacuations in Natural Disasters (MEND Guide). See Government of Vanuatu, Ministry of Climate Change and Adaptation (2016) Mass Evacuation in Natural Disaster [MEND] Mission in Vanuatu. At the time of writing, these guidelines were still under development. The Pacifc Community Report (2015, p. 20) also noted that some of the centres ‘initially received no supplies because they were not registered or recorded.’ By implication, an evacuation that took place prior to the cyclone making landfall may have attracted a different standard. Unfortunately, we were not able to interview as many women as men, so this fnding is not conclusive. However, all participants who stated the evacuation was consented to were men and all informants who disagreed were women. Vanuatu experiences an earthquake of at least magnitude 4.0 every three days, on average (US Geological Survey 2019), and the recent evacuations from Ambae, for example, come following three major volcanic eruptions which have preoccupied the NDMO since 2017.

References Bowman, C., Cultural, J., Ellis, A. and Manuel, C. (2009) Women in Vanuatu: analyzing challenges to economic participation. Washington, DC: World Bank. Cavanagh, V. (2015) ‘Cyclone Pam: UN agency reports all 22 Vanuatu islands reached with relief supplies’, United Nations News, 27 March. Available at: https://news.un.org/ en/story/2015/03/494562-cyclone-pam-un-agency-reports-all-22-vanuatu-islands-rea ched-relief-supplies (Accessed: 15 August 2018). CCCM Cluster (2014) Comprehensive guide for planning mass evacuations in natural disasters (MEND guide). Available at http://www.globalcccmcluster.org/tools-and-guidance/ publications/mend-guide (Accessed: 1 June 2019). Coats, K. (2015) Vanuatu: no ordinary homecoming – the Mataso community reunited. International Organization for Migration, 27 May. Available at: http://weblog.iom.in t/vanuatu-no-ordinary-homecoming-%E2%80%93-mataso-community-reunited (Accessed: 15 August 2018). Cox, M., Alatoa, H., Kenni, L., Naupa, A., Rawlings, G., Soni, N., Vatu, C. (2007) The unfnished state: drivers of change in Vanuatu. AusAID. Available at: https://oxfamblogs. org/fp2p/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Unfnished-State-Vanuatu-DOC-Final-Repor t-April-07.pdf (Accessed: 1 June 2019). Cullwick, J. (2016) ‘Mataso receives boat from government’, Vanuatu Daily Post, 29 December. Available at: http://dailypost.vu/news/mataso-receives-boat-from-gove

116

Van Geelen and Wewerinke-Singh

rnment/article_5462c97d-4521–5187–83fe-c70b83fcf32e.html (Accessed: 15 August 2018). Esler, S. (2015) Vanuatu post-disaster needs assessment: tropical cyclone Pam. Government of Vanuatu. Available at: http://dfat.gov.au/about-us/publications/Pages/vanuatu-postdisaster-needs-assessment-tropical-cyclone-pam-march-2015.aspx (Accessed: 1 June 2019). Garschagen, M., Hagenlocher, M., Kloos, J., Pardoe, J., Lanzendörfer, M., Mucke, P., Radtke, K., Rhyner, J., Walter, B., Welle, T., Birkmann, J. (2015) World risk report 2015. United Nations University Institute for Environment and Human Security and Bündnis Entwicklung Hilft. Available at: https://collections.unu.edu/eserv/UNU:3303/ WRR_2015_engl_online.pdf (Accessed: 1 June 2019). GFDRR (2009) Reducing the risk of disasters and climate variability in the Pacifc islands: Republic of Vanuatu country assessment. GFDRR, World Bank and SOPAC. Available at: https://www.sprep.org/att/irc/ecopies/countries/vanuatu/113.pdf (Accessed: 1 June 2019). ——— (2017) Vanuatu. Available at: https://www.gfdrr.org/vanuatu (Accessed: 1 June 2019). Government of Vanuatu, Ministry of Climate Change and Adaptation (2016) Mass evacuation in natural disaster [MEND] Mission in Vanuatu. Available at: https://ww w.humanitarianresponse.info/sites/www.humanitarianresponse.info/files/docum ents/files/mend_-_mass_evacuation_in_natural_disaster_mission_in_vanuatu.pdf (Accessed: 1 June 2019). Green, D. (2015) ‘Of MPs, chiefs and churches: Vanuatu’s parallel governance systems’, Oxf am: From Poverty to Power, 11 December. Available at: https://oxfamblogs.org/ fp2p/of-mps-chiefs-and-churches-vanuatus-parallel-governance-systems/ (Accessed: 15 August 2018). Huffer, E. and Molisa, G. (1999) ‘Governance in Vanuatu’, Pacifc Economic Bulletin, 14(1), p. 101. IASC (2011) Operational guidelines on the protection of persons in situations of natural disasters. Inter-Agency Standing Committee, Brookings-Bern Project in Internal Displacement. Available at: https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/IDPersons/OperationalGuide lines_IDP.pdf (Accessed: 3 June 2019). ——— (2015) Guidelines for integrating gender-based violence interventions in humanitarian action: reducing risk, promoting resilience and aiding recovery (2015). Available at: https:// gbvguidelines.org/en/ (Accessed: 1 June 2019). IFRC (2016) ‘How cyclone Pam led Vanuatu to rethink its disaster laws’, IFRC, 2 August. Available at: http://www.ifrc.org/en/what-we-do/disaster-law/news/asia-pacifc/how-c yclone-pam-led-vanuatu-to-rethink-its-disaster-laws-72402/ (Accessed: 15 August 2018). IPCC (2007) AR4 climate change 2007: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. IPCC, World Meteorological Organization, United Nations Environment Programme. Available at: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar4/wg2/ (Accessed: 1 June 2019). ——— (2014) AR5 synthesis report: climate change 2014. IPCC, World Meteorological Organization, United Nations Environment Programme. Available at: https://www. ipcc.ch/report/ar5/syr/ (Accessed: 1 June 2019). Joint Typhoon Warning Center (2015) Tropical Cyclone 17P (Pam) warning NR 015. Pearl Harbor, HI: United States Naval Meteorology and Oceanography Command. Kälin, W. (2012) ‘The human rights dimension of natural and human-made disasters’, German Yearbook of International Law, 55, pp. 119–147.

Vanuatu

117

Morgan, W. (2013) Governance, leadership and accountability in Vanuatu: a review of the literature. Port Vila, Vanuatu: Oxfam. Napwatt, F. (2017) ‘Vanuatu prepares its population displacement policy’, Vanuatu Daily Post, 1 July. Available at: http://dailypost.vu/news/vanuatu-prepares-its-population-dis placement-policy/article_df1f6d0d-4c50–5ff8–82ba-f3f92c776e17.html (Accessed: 15 August 2018). Pacifc Catastrophe Risk Assessment and Financing Initiative (2017) Country risk profle: Vanuatu. Available at: http://pcraf.spc.int/documents/136 (Accessed: 1 June 2019). Pacifc Community (2014) Strategy for climate and disaster resilient development in the Pacifc. Available at: https://www.preventionweb.net/english/policies/v.php?id=41659&rid=5. (Accessed: 22 July 2020). ——— (2015) Tropical Cyclone Pam: lessons learned workshop report. Available at: https ://www.spc.int/sites/default/files/wordpresscontent/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/T C-Pam-Lessons-Learned-Report.pdf (Accessed: 1 June 2019). Pacifc Women in Politics (2018) Country profles: Vanuatu. Suva, Fiji: United Nations Development Program. Available at: https://www.pacwip.org/country-profles/vanua tu/ (Accessed: 1 June 2019). RWI (2020) Narrative report: consultation on a human rights-based approach to displacement in the context of disasters and climate change in Vanuatu. Lund: Raoul Wallenberg Institute. Available at: https://rwi.lu.se/download/narrative-report-vanuatu-consultation/ (Accessed: 11 May 2020). Scott, M. (2019) ‘Accountability for state failures to prevent sexual assault in evacuation centres and temporary shelters’, in Kinnvall, C. and Rydstrom, H. (eds.) Climate hazards, disasters and gender ramifcations. Abingdon: Routledge. Sphere Project (2018) Sphere handbook: humanitarian charter and minimum standards in disaster response. Fourth edition. Rugby: Practical Action Publishing. Available at: www.spherestandards.org/handbook (Accessed: 19 May 2020). SPREP (2017) Vanuatu national environment policy and implementation plan 2016–2030. Apia, Samoa: Secretariat of the Pacifc Regional Environment Programme. Available at: https ://www.sprep.org/attachments/Publications/EMG/vanuatu-nepip.pdf (Accessed: 1 June 2019). Stott, P. (2016) ‘How climate change affects extreme weather events’, Science Magazine, 352, p. 1517. Triggs, G. (2011) International law: contemporary principles and practices. Second Edition. Chatswood: LexisNexis Butterworths. UN CRC (2001) General comment no. 1: Article 29(1): the aims of education. CRC/ GC/2001/1. UN DACT (2015) Second phase harmonized assessment report, Vanuatu: Tropical Cyclone Pam. United Nations Offce for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UNOCHA). Available at: https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/fles/resources/Se cond%20Phase%20Harmonized%20Assessment%20Report-2015-04-17_FINAL_ 1.pdf. (Accessed: 19 May 2020). UN DESA (2010) Vanuatu national assessment report: 5 year review of the Mauritius strategy for further implementation of the Barbados programme of action for sustainable development. Geneva: United Nations. Available at: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content /documents/1380Vanuatu-MSI-NAR2010.pdf (Accessed: 1 June 2019). UN OHCHR (2018) Addressing human rights protection gaps in the context of migration and displacement of persons across international borders resulting from the adverse effects of

118

Van Geelen and Wewerinke-Singh

climate change and supporting the adaptation and mitigation plans of developing countries to bridge the protection gaps. A/HRC/38/21. United Nations (1995) Beijing platform for action and the revised Pacifc platform for action on the advancement of women and gender equality. Fourth World Conference on Women. A/ CONF.177/20 and A/CONF.177/20/Add.1. United States Geological Survey (2019) Earthquake track. Available at: https://www.ear thquaketrack.com/p/vanuatu/recent?mag_flter=5. (Accessed: 1 June 2019). US State Department (2015) Vanuatu 2015 human rights report. Washington, DC: Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor. Available at: https://www.state.gov/doc uments/organization/253023.pdf. (Accessed: 20 August 2018). ——— (2016) Vanuatu 2016 human rights report. Washington, DC: Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor. Available at: https://www.state.gov/documents/organiza tion/265596.pdf. (Accessed: 20 August 2018). Van Geelen, T., Wewerinke-Singh, M., Chikwanha, F., and Scott, M. (2020) Vanuatu national displacement law and policy report: consultation draft. Lund: Raoul Wallenberg Institute. Available at: https://rwi.lu.se/disaster-displacement/. (Accessed: 20 July 2020). Vanuatu Meteorology and Geo-Hazards Department (2017) Increasing resilience to climate change and natural hazards: Environment and social management framework. World Bank Project Doc No. SFG2255 REV. Available at: http://documents.worldbank.org /curated/en/349571468132625631/pdf/SFG2255-REVISED-EA-P112611-Box40291 0B-PUBLIC-Disclosed-5-23-2017.pdf (Accessed: 1 June 2019). Vanuatu National Statistics Offce (2017) 2016 post-TC Pam mini-census report. Available at: https://vnso.gov.vu/index.php/component/advlisting/?view=download &fleId=4542 (Accessed: 1 June 2019). Vanuatu Women’s Centre (2011) Vanuatu national survey on women’s lives and family relationships. Available at: https://mjcs.gov.vu/images/research_database/Vanuatu_Na tional_Survey_on_Womens_Lives_and_Family_Relationships.pdf (Accessed: 19 May 2020). Wewerinke-Singh, M. and Van Geelen, T. (2019) ‘Protection of climate displaced persons under international law: a case study from Mataso Island, Vanuatu’, Melbourne Journal of International Law, 19(2), p. 666. World Bank (2013) Gender mapping report: actors and initiatives promoting gender equality in Vanuatu. Washington, DC: World Bank.

International legal and policy documents 1966 1966 1979 1989 1998

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 23 March 1976) 999 UNTS 171 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 3 January 1976) 993 UNTS 3 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (adopted 18 December 1979, entered into force 3 September 1981) 1249 UNTS 13 Convention on the Rights of the Child (adopted 20 November 1989, entered into force 2 September 1990) 1577 UNTS 3 Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. Addendum to Report of the Representative of the Secretary-General, Mr. Francis M. Deng, submitted pursuant to Commission resolution 1997/39. UN Commission on Human Rights. (E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2)

Vanuatu 1998 1999 2006 2015

119

Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in DecisionMaking and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (adopted 25 June 1998, entered into force 30 October 2001) 2161 UNTS 447 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (‘CEDAW Optional Protocol’) (adopted 6 October 1999, entered into force 22 December 2000) 2131 UNTS 83 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (adopted 13 December 2006, entered into force 3 May 2008) 2515 UNTS 3 UN General Assembly. Resolution 69/283, Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, (A/CONF.224/CRP.1)

National legal and policy documents 1980 2015 2016 2016

2018

2019

Constitution of the Republic of Vanuatu. Consolidated 2006). Available at: http://www.paclii.org/vu/legis/consol_act/cotrov406/ (Accessed: 1 June 2019). National Gender Equality Policy 2015-2019. Available at: https://dwa.gov .vu/images/policies/NationalGenderEqualityPolicyJuly2015.pdf (Accessed: 1 June 2019). Climate Change and Disaster Risk Reduction Policy (2016-2030). Available https://www.preventionweb.net/fles/46449_vanuatuccdrrpolicy2015.pdf (Accessed: 1 June 2019). National Guidelines for the Selection and Assessment of Evacuation Centres (‘National Evacuation Centre Guidelines’) Government of Vanuatu, Ministry of Climate Change Adaptation. Available at: https:// www.nab.vu/sites/default/fles/documents/Evacuation%20Centres%20Gui delines.pdf (Accessed: 1 June 2019). National Policy on Climate Change and Disaster-Induced Displacement (NPCCDID). Available at: https://www.iom.int/sites/default/fles/press _release/fle/iom-vanuatu-policy-climate-change-disaster-induced-displ acement-2018.pdf (Accessed: 1 June 2019). Disaster Risk Management Act 2019. Parliament of Vanuatu. Bill available at: https://parliament.gov.vu/images/Bills/2018/2nd_Ordinary_Ses sion/Bill_for_the_Disaster_Risk_Management_Act_No._of_2018.pdf. (Accessed: 15 June 2019).

Appendix 1: List of interviews Interview 1, community, 7 May 2018, male adult, father Interview 2, community, 7 May 2018, female adult, mother Interview 3, community, 7 May 2018, male adult, father Interview 4, community, 7 May 2018, male adult Interview 5, community, 7 May 2018, male youth Interview 6, community, 7 May 2018, male adult, father Interview 7, community, 7 May 2018, male adult, father Interview 8, community, 7 May 2018, male adult, elder Interview 9, community, 7 May 2018, male adult, father Interview 10, community, 7 May 2018, female adult, mother Interview 11, community, 7 May 2018, male youth

120

Van Geelen and Wewerinke-Singh

Interview 12, community, 7 May 2018, male youth Interview 13, community, 7 May 2018, male adult, elder Interview 14, community, 7 May 2018, male adult, elder Interview 15, community, 7 May 2018, female adult, mother Interview 16, community, 7 May 2018, female adult, elder Interview 17, community, 7 May 2018, female youth Interview 18, community, 7 May 2018, female youth Interview 19, government agency, 25 July 2018 Interview 20, international NGO, 20 July 2018 Interview 21, community, 7 May 2018, male adult Interview 22, local NGO, 6 August 2018 Interview 23, UN agency, 8 August 2018 Interview 24, foreign government embassy, 9 August 2018 Interview 25, UN agency, 10 August 2018 Interview 26, international NGO, 20 August 2018 Interview 27, international NGO, 21 August 2018 Interview 28, government agency (former)/UN agency (current), 21 August 2018 Interview 29, UN agency, 23 August 2018 Interview 30, UN agency, 24 August 2018

6

Cambodia Unpacking the nature of displacement due to fooding in Phreah Kunlong through a human rights-based approach Ratana Ly1

Introduction Cambodia, a hazard-prone country, faces frequent foods, droughts, storms, and lightning strikes, with fooding causing the highest number of deaths and largescale displacement (CFE-DM 2017). The Mekong River fows across the country, which is also home to Tonle Sap, the largest lake in Southeast Asia. Normal, seasonal fooding provides moisture, nutrients, and rich sediments to foodplain ecosystems thereby enriching farms and fsheries (Imhoff 2016). However, climate change may increase the ‘frequency, intensity and severity’ of extreme weather events (CFE-DM 2017, p. 18) such as changes in the monsoon rainfalls, impacting the ‘food-pulse powered ecosystems’ (UNDRR 2019, p. 6). Disaster risk can be understood as a result of natural hazards working through the social causes of vulnerabilities and physical exposure (Wisner et al. 2004). The social vulnerabilities of a community could come from the interaction of numerous factors including demography, ethnicities, class, gender, age, and the capability to respond to emergencies (Verchick 2012). A community’s physical location further contributes to its level of vulnerability to natural hazards (Verchick 2012). In addition to having limited resources to protect themselves or recover from the disaster, socially disadvantaged people are ‘more likely to be in harm’s way’ (Farber 2007, p. 302). Human vulnerability may even turn a ‘natural hazard…into a full-fedged disaster’ (Fisher 2010, p. 552). Clear laws and policies related to risk management play an important role in managing both the physical exposure to the disaster and the social vulnerability dimension, yet they are useful only when actually being implemented (Verchick 2012). These would include early warning systems and transparent and inclusive disaster management policies with clear allocations of roles and responsibilities (Guadagno 2016). Owing to this differential experience of and diverse responses to disaster, simplistic generalisations of a disaster situation are to be avoided. This chapter examines the specifc situation of food-induced displacement in one village, Phreah Kunlong, in the Kratie province of Cambodia. It is a poor and marginalised place, with extremely low land elevation when compared with other parts of Kratie. Most of the 176 families (Interview 1, village chief, 26 July 2019) not only have

122

Ratana Ly

no land elsewhere, but also have strong ties to their village (Interview 26, farmer, 26 June 2018). Flooding from the Preak Té (a tributary of the Mekong River) through the village is benefcial and is a common natural event, which brings in fsh and nutrients to farms (Interview 10, farmer, 12 June 2018). However, large or extreme fooding, which is very deep and prolonged, not only abruptly disrupts the usual income-generating activities, but also puts inhabitants in constant fear for their safety (Interview 9, farmer, 12 June 2018). In this kind of food situation, people experience differing degrees of compulsion to move from their homes to higher ground. The inhabitants of Phreah Kunlong and a few other villages would traditionally move to a shared 52-hectare hill, an evacuation zone or temporary shelter site (or ‘safety hill’ when translated literally from Khmer) or at least graze their cattle there during fooding. Increasingly, the inhabitants have strategically calculated the benefts and drawbacks of going to the safety hill and of remaining in their fooded houses, as well as of travelling back and forth between the safety hill and their homes (Interview 1, village chief, 28 June 2018). According to the 1998 Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (the Guiding Principles) (UN Commission on Human Rights 1998), internally displaced persons are ‘forced or obliged’ to abandon their habitual residence in response to disasters. The strategic mobility of Phreah Kunlong villagers raises the question of who is displaced and how to improve responses to food-induced displacement. This chapter argues that the term ‘displacement’ needs to be unpacked in order to improve our understanding of the phenomenon of food-induced displacement as experienced by this village and how a human rights-based approach can address this phenomenon. The following sections describe the methodology and approach of this study before discussing the socio-economic background of the inhabitants in Phreah Kunlong, and the disaster preparedness of this community. Thereafter, the chapter looks at types of movements of the inhabitants to the safety hill, as well as the benefts and the drawbacks of such movements. This then leads to the analysis of whether the movement between their houses in lower elevations and the safety hill is understood as ‘displacement’ before concluding that a broader human rights-based approach beyond the Guiding Principles offers a better response to this mobility situation.

Methodology and approach Thirty-four Phreah Kunlong inhabitants, fve non-governmental organisations (NGOs) which were working to alleviate poverty in Phreah Kunlong, and three governmental offcers took part in the interviews between June and August 2018. Most of the interviews were done in person at the village or at the workplace of the informants. A few interviews were conducted over the phone and through an online messenger, while the village chief of Phreah Kunlong provided additional information by phone in July 2019 and February 2020. The information from the interviews was deepened through participant observation in Phreah Kunlong in June 2018.

Cambodia 123 This chapter primarily adopts a human rights-based approach to the analysis of food-induced displacement. The recognition of the relationship between disaster-related displacement and human rights issues is growing (Naser 2010). A human rights-based approach is a useful tool for identifying the areas of priority and urgency so that disaster responses can be tailored to the needs of those who are affected. The framework also points out who the duty bearers are and how they ensure that the displacement is managed to promote human dignity, and whether relevant actors provide at least minimum standards for their services and assistance in a fair, non-discriminatory, and participatory manner (Ferris 2014). This approach is essential, as when problems affecting rights are not addressed, people tend to be displaced longer (Lewis and Maguire 2015). The approach adopted in this chapter is to ask whether the Guiding Principles provide an effective tool for addressing displacement in the context of disasters. This study has shown that it is insuffcient to ensure that the rights of all persons affected in the context of the same disaster, within the same locality, are respected, protected, and fulflled by relying solely on the Guiding Principles. A wider human rights-based approach, which is capable of taking into account the situation of people who are ‘trapped’ at home, and the dynamics of people’s mobility between their homes and the safety hill, is therefore called for. A human rights-based approach pursued within the context of sustainable development offers a better alternative in terms of protecting the enjoyment of economic and social rights of people and equipping them with the capabilities to respond to food and food-induced displacement.

Socio-economic background in relation to fooding A few people in Phreah Kunlong worked as police offcers, primary school teachers, doctors, and some villagers at times worked as motor-taxi drivers, garment workers, construction workers, carpenters, sellers, and fshers, to top up their income. Aside from that, the inhabitants were primarily subsistence farmers growing mainly rice, and some corn, cassava, and cashew trees. The villagers had relied on benefcial fooding, or often called ‘water-rising,’ from the Preak Té for their livelihoods for generations. During smaller-scale fooding, those that did not fll the lakes, they did not have suffcient water and nutrients for agriculture (Interview 36, farmer, 27 June 2018). The village instead benefted from medium-scale fooding, which lasted less than two weeks and provided enough water and nutrients for the soil. Extreme fooding occurred every once in a while, refecting natural variability (Interview 11, farmer, 12 June 2018). However, there were more frequent small fooding and extreme fooding events as a consequence of unplanned releases from a number of hydroelectric dams and climate change (Interview 8, disaster management committee offcer, 19 August 2018). On rare occasions, accidents happened due to a combination of extreme rainfall and poor maintenance and design, such as the collapse of the Saddle Dam D of a hydroelectric dam in Laos in late July 2018 (BBC 2018; Ellis-Petersen 2018). This caused a fash food, catching locals off guard, destroying unharvested corn,

124

Ratana Ly

and as in other extreme foods, affecting a majority of inhabitants in the village (Interview 4, NGO offcer, 24 July 2018). A one-meter food over the village’s dirt road could reach about two or more meters for many houses (Interview 9, farmer, 12 June 2018; Interview 6, NGO offcer, 11 August 2018), making it look like ‘seas,’ with occasional big waves (Interview 16, farmer, 13 June 2018). The commune had fewer trees, due to heavy logging, to attenuate the fow of foodwater and windstorms, which caused terror in the village (Interview 32, farmer, 26 June 2018). Three families fell under the so-called ‘poverty level 1’ (extremely poor) and ten families fell under ‘poverty level 2’ (moderately poor) in the 2017 assessment result (Interview 1, village chief, 28 June 2018) that was based on factors including home ownership, the construction material and size of the dwelling unit, income, and number of domestic livestock. Families assigned in this category were eligible to receive an ‘equality card’ to access various free services and assistance (Kaba et al. 2018), but by July 2019, the village chief issued temporary documents to these families to get access to free services while the cards were still being processed. Due to the irregular fooding, more families appeared to fall under ‘poverty level 1’ and ‘poverty level 2,’ although no new poverty level assessments had been conducted since 2017 (Interview 1, village chief, 26 July 2019). The government, NGOs, and other actors may also turn to the information on the poverty level to prioritise their resources when distributing humanitarian aid and other services (Kaba et al. 2018; Interview 28, farmer, 26 June 2018). While several inhabitants wanted to beneft from such classifcation (Interview 16, farmer, 13 June 2018), some perceived social stigma associated with such a label. An informant who was in debt did not want to be classifed as either ‘poverty level 1’ or ‘poverty level 2’ because as ‘they say: poor as the mouth says [meaning, if we told ourselves that we were poor, then we would later become that poor]’ and ‘I do not want that’ (Interview 22, housewife, 14 June 2018). The 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and other international human rights treaties that Cambodia has ratifed require that states take steps, to the maximum of available resources, to progressively realise rights to food, shelter, health, and other essential conditions for a dignifed life. The Sustainable Development Goals (UNGA 2015a), which Cambodia has endorsed, also promote advances in these areas, although these goals are not legally binding (RGC 2019). Social and economic improvements were slowly taking place in Phreah Kunlong, although not without much criticism from the inhabitants. The local authorities attested that the villagers’ economic status and quality of life had improved by pointing to different private and public services such as the availability of the dirt road through the village a couple of years ago, and the bigger, stronger, and higher stilt houses made from wood to resist fooding compared with ten years earlier when many houses were still made of palm leaves (Interview 1, village chief, 28 June 2018). Families have been able to purchase bottled water for drinking since 2017. Piped water reached 80 per cent of the village in early 2018. The village chief

Cambodia 125 asserted that access to clean water made people healthier and reduced their illnesses (Interview 1, village chief, 28 June 2018), but by June 2018, many households had not started to use the piped water yet in order to save costs (Interview 40, farmer, 27 June 2018). The water pipes, toilets, and the dirt road were then fooded and unusable during the extreme foods in 2018 and 2019 (Interview 1, village chief, 9 February 2020). The local government and the NGOs implemented various programs relating to promoting education, raising chickens for families with children, using sewing machines, and how to diversify crops and farming for the inhabitants to boost their skills, knowledge, and ability to engage in income-generating activities (Interview 18, farmer, 13 June 2018; Interview 36, farmer, 27 June 2018; Interview 7, NGO offcer, 14 August 2018). Only two informants in Phreah Kunlong had fnished high school, which indicated lower formal education levels amongst adults (Interview 42, teacher, 28 June 2018), although the commune chief2 insisted that there had been a boost in school enrolment amongst younger people, and incentives like providing bicycles to students living in faraway places (Interview 2, commune chief, 13 June 2018). Children, however, could not attend school during fooding (Interview 17, farmer, 13 June 2018). An NGO separately claimed that after Typhoon Ketsana hit in 2009, ‘[locals] fxed the road and we paid them for their work’ (Interview 6, NGO offcer, 11 August 2018). These cash-for-work schemes may somewhat help the village to recover from a disaster by paying them to do clearance work.

Community disaster preparedness Cambodia has endorsed the Sendai Framework on Disaster Risk Reduction (UNGA 2015b), which encourages states to adopt laws, policies, and programmes to build disaster resilience. In 2015, the country enacted the Law on Disaster Management, which addresses prevention and risk reduction, improved preparedness, emergency response, and recovery from disaster, as well as coordination and facilitation of international assistance during disasters. The Royal Decree on the Organization and Functioning of the National Committee for Disaster Management (2015) tasked the National Committee, which is mainly composed of government ministers, with leading, administering, and coordinating all activities related to disaster risk management. In other words, the National Committee is responsible for issuing policies, action plans, guidelines for implementation, promoting public awareness on prevention, mitigation, preparedness, emergency response, and recovery to ensure the safety and resilience of people. It is also to develop and strengthen disaster risk management at the community level, as well as to collaborate with civil society amongst other partners. The effectiveness of existing laws and policies can only be tested when the concerned actors have the knowledge, capacity, and resources to implement them on the ground. A senior offcer of the Provincial Committee for Disaster Management in Kratie asserted that his Committee knew about, promoted, and educated on the laws on disaster management to authorities ranging from

126

Ratana Ly

the provincial to the village levels (Interview 8, disaster management committee offcer, 19 August 2018). Yet, the local authorities in Phreah Kunlong, who actively assisted the inhabitants before, during, and after the foods, barely knew about the existence of laws and their roles and obligations as set by laws and policies governing disaster management (Interview 2, commune chief, 13 June 2018). That somewhat impacted their prompt responses as they often had to wait for orders from their superiors when taking actions within their capacity. An example is that the local authorities did not know that they were able to request for support to address the disaster from the Ministry of Environment (Interview 3, senior government offcer, 20 August 2018). The authorities and NGOs provided advice, knowledge, training, and help to the inhabitants, in accordance with their policies, mandates, and capacities, but the inhabitants considered existing support inadequate and at times irrelevant. The inhabitants themselves had valuable knowledge and experience associated with fooding and displacement. As Guadagno (2016) puts it, the knowledge of the disaster-affected community could guide what and how preparedness, response, and recovery support should work to help them. Although Cambodia is not yet a party to the 1998 Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-Making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters, participation and access to information are integral elements of a rights-based approach (Scott 2019). The Cambodian law governing disaster management also acknowledges the importance of the participation of inhabitants in managing disaster risks (see Bernard & Scott 2020). The NGOs and the local authorities argued that they consulted with the locals before implementing any projects in the community in order to meet the locals’ needs and to ensure cooperation (Interview 4, NGO offcer, 24 July 2018; Interview 1, village chief, 28 June 2018). The villagers wanted to be consulted (Interview 30, farmer, 26 June 2018), but some disagreed that the consultation took place (Interview 14, farmer, 13 June 2018) or thought that the consultation was ineffective (Interview 20, farmer, 14 June 2018). A local said ‘they asked us, but they did not do anything about it…the road [which was damaged after each food] is getting lower’ (Interview 12, farmer, 12 June 2018). The national government, local government, and the NGOs provided training on disaster preparedness and the related skills, and the village chief argued that this training boosted households’ ability to be resilient to foods (Interview 1, village chief, 28 June 2018). To some inhabitants, the information on forthcoming training arrived quite late for them to attend (Interview 19, farmer, 13 June 2018). Women were the main participants, revealing the common and embedded gender roles and perceptions in Cambodian society. An NGO observed that ‘usually the women [80% of the participants] attended’ because they said ‘the father is in the farms…when the women came, they could bring the young children with them’ (Interview 4, NGO offcer, 24 July 2018). An elderly male local agreed, ‘only older women go. [Men] already know what to do to prepare for the food’ (Interview 12, farmer, 12 June 2018). Although male locals tended to engage in income-generating activities and would be less available for training, their perception of masculinity and strength apparently acted as a hindrance for

Cambodia 127 them to attend this training. It is questionable whether and to what extent the male members of the families would be willing to follow the knowledge and skills gained by the female family members. Despite the training, the actual preparation was informed by issues of previous practices and available resources. From observations in Phreah Kunlong, many villagers had already started to prepare in June 2018 for the then forecasted foods in August, such as fxing boats, making fshing nets, and preserving food. A mother separately confessed, ‘if I have money, then I prepare, if I do not have money, I cannot prepare [the food for the coming food]’ (Interview 22, housewife, 14 June 2018). Most villagers in Phreah Kunlong would also depend on big plastic containers to foat and swim as only a few owned or could afford life vests (Interview 35, farmer, 27 June 2018). In some years, several households spent more than what they had saved prior to the fooding and entered into debt (Interview 38, fsher, 27 June 2018). Low-income households and minority populations are also more vulnerable and less prepared for disaster, and less likely to believe the disaster warning. They are also likely to be uninsured (Verchick 2012). Thus, in addition to training on disaster preparedness, an adequate early warning system is needed to warn residents of danger (Fisher 2010). Phreah Kunlong was home to nine elderly people over the age of 65 and fve people with disabilities. There were no members of minority ethnic groups living in the village (Interview 1, village chief, 9 February 2020). The village chief swiftly shared information received on rising Mekong water levels in Kratie through mobile phones and word of mouth. He asserted, ‘when the food is coming, [we] broadcast and tell people to go to the safety hill or construct shelter in the upper part of their house [so they can put their valuable property or sleep in that shelter if the food reaches the living area]’ (Interview 1, village chief, 28 June 2018). The inhabitants themselves were on high alert rather than simply waiting for the announcement to evacuate their cows to the safety hill. The villagers knew (Interview 13, farmer, 13 June 2018) and the village chief admitted, ‘even the village chief’s house is fooded…I cannot guarantee and tell people “do not worry, I will go to help you” when I, myself, am also worried and have to help myself’ (Interview 1, village chief, 28 June 2018). The government also had a mobile phone alert system, where locals could register in order to receive disaster warning messages, but only one inhabitant interviewed knew how to use that system (Interview 40, farmer, 27 June 2018). Many would rather turn to traditional broadcasts like radio for the information (Interview 27, farmer, 26 June 2018). During disasters, authorities must have the knowledge and skills on how to evacuate people (Guadagno 2016). The village, however, did not have its own usable evacuation boat or life vests (Interview 1, village chief, 28 June 2018). Although the commune had one big boat, it was also being used by other villages (Interview 41, farmer, 28 June 2018). But, in practice, besides moving their cattle, most inhabitants would choose to remain in their houses for as long as possible, despite warnings, and they, instead, wanted elevated roads to take refuge from rising foodwater and travel during emergencies (Interview 11, farmer,

128

Ratana Ly

12 June 2018). However, the local authorities and the NGOs had only a limited budget to fx the dirt road. Effective early warning systems and evacuation measures, alongside previous coping strategies and local knowledge, prepared inhabitants for foods and mitigated impacts on those who stayed behind and those who moved. Since the resources and support provided from the authorities and NGOs were limited, a household’s fnancial resource was vital in determining their ability to minimise the risks associated with foods (Interview 13, farmer, 13 June 2018).

Mobility dynamics Livelihoods, mobility, and displacement interacted in intricate ways in Phreah Kunlong. As shown below, decisions to move to the safety hill were not easy ones and fraught with many considerations. Daily movement to sustain livestock Livestock were central to the livelihoods of villagers living in Phreah Kunlong (Interview 23, carpenter, 14 June 2018). Most villagers pastured their cows at the safety hill during foods. One farmer said: ‘when the grass is fooded, then [we] would bring the cattle to the safety hill, and then [some] people will go [to take care of the cattle].’ In most cases, they went to the hill in the morning and returned home in the late afternoon (Interview 9, farmer, 12 June 2018). Sending cattle to the safety hill led to tensions with the 30 families of cassava growers, who were occupying much of the ‘public’ land at the safety hill, resulting in reluctance and frustration for many cattle farmers to graze cattle at the hill. Thus, the presence of police at the safety hill made people feel somewhat safer (Interview 18, farmer, 13 June 2018). Neither the village chief nor the commune chief had the capacity to address this issue of land occupation (Interview 1, village chief, 9 February 2020). Daily movement to protect original dwelling During foods, the inhabitants were struggling between taking care of their home property and protecting their cattle from thieves at the safety hill (Interview 9, farmer, 12 June 2018). Protecting homes and other assets during the course of displacement is an important concern for the displaced person (IASC 2011), as these assets could be the foundation for rebuilding their lives after a disaster. Both the community itself and local authorities have roles to play in these safeguards (Interview 9, farmer, 12 June 2018). Trauma as a driver of mobility Trauma from the experience of losing a family member to food in the past also drove whole families or some of their members to move to the safety hill

Cambodia 129 (Interview 34, farmer, 27 June 2018). This was the feeling shared by an elderly man moving to the safety hill, who said he was ‘worried about the house, wife, children and grandchildren remaining at home, when there is wind – because if something happens, I would only survive alone’ (Interview 12, farmer, 12 June 2018). Community pressure drives mobility and affects well-being The intention to move to the safety hill was sometimes driven by the actions of others. Despite this, some could not just move easily because they lack the wherewithal to move, for example, a boat, and they had to rely on their relatives and neighbours to take them to the safety hill (Interview 25, farmer, 26 June 2018). Instead, some of them became fatalistic as a mother of two young children said: Our house is not high-stilted. But even with a medium food, we would not go to the safety hill despite the waves and the wind. We are scared that the house would topple over but we try not to worry by thinking that nothing is going to happen. If other people can live, we also can live [during the food]. (Interview 22, housewife, 14 June 2018) Others also went to the safety hill out of boredom as the village was very quiet during the food (Interview 19, farmer, 13 June 2018). ‘At the safety hill [during the big food], it is fun. Lots of people are there – old and young people and sellers,’ a housewife reminisces (Interview 22, housewife, 14 June 2018). But this scene on the hill was a pressure to some. A mother complained that her child would constantly want to buy food at the safety hill, so she chose to stay at home to avoid spending (Interview 21, seller, 14 June 2018). Gender, age, and disability as factors of mobility During small foods, where only the grasses were fooded, men usually went to the safety hill daily or from time to time to take care of the cattle. During larger foods, some families with children, elderly, or disabled family members moved to the safety hill. But the diffculty of managing this kind of move and living at the safety hill led some families to remain at their residences. This seems to be the case for those with more resources at home, including stronger houses to better resist the food. For most families though, they moved those who needed to be safe by virtue of their physical abilities and age, while leaving others behind in their residences, although such separation caused frustration, worries, fear of drowning, and resource division amongst family members (Interviews 36 and 37, farmers, 27 June 2018). Where the whole or most family members moved to the safety hill, the adult male member regularly would travel between the safety hill to their house to check their property, as well as to catch fsh to sustain their livelihood (Interview 35, farmer, 27 June 2018). Sometimes the male member would even remain much longer at home to continue safeguarding their assets (Interview 17, farmer, 13 June 2018).

130

Ratana Ly

Death by drowning is also gendered. Women may be more likely to drown in a food than men due to their inability to swim or escape from the food. But the regular movement of men between the safety hill and their residences have placed men at high risk as the situation of Phreah Kunlong has shown.

Benefts and drawbacks of movement Oxfam supported the construction of two buildings, a few toilets, a water tank, and a pumping well at the safety hill. The buildings had roofs but no walls, except the two small rooms reserved for the physician and police. These were then turned over to local authorities to provide services to those seeking refuge at the safety hill (Interview 6, NGO offcer, 11 August 2018). The authorities also brought in other facilities such as a bed for sick people. ‘When the food ends, they take the bed away. If they keep it there, it will be damaged’ (Interview 6, NGO offcer, 11 August 2018). The buildings’ facilities were also vandalised when left unattended. Vandals were reprimanded and no legal actions were taken against them (Interview 2, commune chief, 13 June 2018). Regardless of whether they resorted to the safety hill or remained at home, Phreah Kunlong inhabitants faced challenges with accessing shelter, food, clean water, sanitation, and health. These benefts and drawbacks informed their mobility decisions as discussed below. Right to housing Floods may destroy houses, forcing people to move to areas that may be somewhat safer, yet still hazardous (Naser 2010). The inhabitants whose houses were uninhabitable due to food were forced to either move to the safety hill or to stay with relatives (Interview 21, seller, 14 June 2018). The Oxfam buildings had a capacity to shelter approximately 40 people (Interview 1, village chief, 9 February 2020), which were exceeded in some years, so people instead stayed outside the building in tents or without tents, freeing up space at the building (Interview 12, farmer, 12 June 2018). The right to housing, according to the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), does not only refer to ‘having a roof over one’s head,’ and shelter should not be viewed ‘exclusively as a commodity’ (UN CESCR 1991, para. 7). The right to housing should be seen as being able to live in a place that is habitable, safe, and secured with peace and dignity, as well as free from hazards and diseases (UN CESCR 1991; Zetter and Boano 2010). At the safety hill, people faced some illnesses, minor disputes, and challenges, but not necessarily violence (Interview 10, farmer, 12 June 2018). Basic facilities such as toilets and water tanks were insuffcient and broken, leaving people to fnd their way in the woods and foodwater for sanitation. This made it diffcult particularly for women who preferred additional privacy (Interview 16, farmer, 13 June 2018). The Provincial Committee for Disaster Management had plans in August 2018 to fx and protect facilities at the Oxfam buildings (Interview 8,

Cambodia 131 disaster management committee offcer, 19 August 2018), but such plans have not materialised (Interview 1, village chief, 9 February 2020). Right to food People enjoy the right to food only when food is available ‘in a quantity and quality suffcient to satisfy the dietary needs of individuals…[and] the accessibility of such food’ (UN CESCR 1999, para. 8). The CESCR observes that ‘the roots of the problem of hunger and malnutrition are not lack of food but lack of access to available food, inter alia because of poverty’ (UN CESCR 1999, para. 5). Much edible vegetation at the safety hill was cleared to make way for cassava farming, making subsistence more diffcult during the food (Interview 24, farmer, 26 June 2018). Access to food at the safety hill depended on one’s ability to purchase it and some people could not afford that (Interview 10, farmer, 12 June 2018). People remaining at home were in fact considered to be more food secure and more fnancially stable compared with those at the safety hill. Yet those who split their members between the safety hill and home had to divide up their already scarce food (Interview 13, farmer, 13 June 2018). Some people at the safety hill even missed out on the humanitarian aid, such as food, which was being distributed when they were away caring for their cattle. Some people remaining at home would turn up to collect the aid at the safety hill (Interview 31, farmer, 26 June 2018), for they believed they faced similar diffculties accessing food and other facilities (Interview 11, farmer, 12 June 2018). Only on very rare cases would emergency kits be provided to those remaining at home at their fooded houses (Interview 14, farmer, 13 June 2018). The big food damaged agriculture crops, contributed to clean water scarcity, disrupted livestock yields, and thus resulted in food insecurity and shortage. The disaster and displacement further impoverished poor people and affected their ability to prepare for the next food (Interview 10, farmer, 12 June 2018). Rice seeds from the government through the recovery program were also insuffcient (Interview 14, farmer, 13 June 2018). Right to health The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), as reiterated in the ICESCR, the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), specifes that ‘everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being’ (art. 25(1)). The ICESCR also calls on state parties to recognise the right to enjoy the ‘highest attainable standard of physical and mental health’ (art. 12(1)). Adequate food, nutrition, housing, safe water, adequate sanitation, and a healthy environment are essential to the right to health (UN CESCR 2000). The right to water can also be inferred from the UDHR, CRC, and CEDAW. This means having ‘suffcient, safe, acceptable, physically accessible and affordable water for personal and domestic uses’ including for consumption,

132

Ratana Ly

cooking, and other personal and household hygiene (UN CESCR 2003, para. 2). The supply of clean and safe water was diffcult during the fooding, especially for poorer people. When bottled water, piped water, boiled water, and rainwater were not accessible, a 42-year-old local said she ‘would drink directly from foodwater’ (Interview 13, farmer, 13 June 2018). Floods also bring many illnesses, infections, vector-borne diseases, and injuries in Cambodia (Saulnier et al. 2018). While healthy individuals can easily recover from fu and diarrhoea, they can be deadly for young, old, and people with weaker immune systems such as those with poor diets (Winn 2013). Vulnerable groups, especially children would be susceptible to illnesses due to the harsh conditions at the safety hill. It was ‘very hot…muddy, dirty, [and] full of mosquitos,’ a safety hill goer recalled (Interview 9, farmer, 12 June 2018). There were also reports of snakes and other poisonous animals (Interview 19, farmer, 13 June 2018). Cattle owners were also frustrated that humans had to stay close to the cattle in order to prevent them from trampling the cassava feld (Interview 18, farmer, 13 June 2018). The inhabitants thought that staying at home was healthier and thus could reduce expenditure on medical treatment despite their fooded toilet, issues with clean water, fear of windstorm, lightning, drowning, and snakes (Interviews 25 and 28, farmers, 26 June 2018). Sick people enjoyed their right to health only when they had access to acceptable healthcare, goods, services, and other conditions necessary to live a healthy life (UN CESCR 2000). The Cambodian Red Cross and NGOs together with local authorities responded to extreme foods by distributing food, medicine, tents, and water flters to people at the safety hill, with priority given to poorer, older, and vulnerable people (Interview 8, disaster management committee offcer, 19 August 2018). The government also sprayed chemicals to kill the mosquitos (Interview 19, farmer, 13 June 2018) that could cause dengue fever and malaria (Interview 29, farmer, 26 June 2018). Some doctors also stood-by to offer free basic services when many people were at the hill (Interview 5, NGO offcer, 31 July 2018), but when the illnesses became critical, they would transfer the patient to the provincial health centre (Interview 6, NGO offcer, 11 August 2018). Those with more resources could go to other doctors in or outside of the village by themselves (Interview 15, farmer, 13 June 2018).

Unpacking displacement Based on the foregoing case study, asking who is displaced is an important question. It appears that people who resorted to the safety hill were displaced, and people who remained at home and people who moved back and forth between their houses and the safety hill were not displaced. Yet that interpretation does not capture the complexities which drove people’s differentiated mobility and the decisions that underlie these, especially as families increasingly divided up their members to both stay at home and at the safety hill given the specifc circumstances at hand.

Cambodia 133 Analysing people’s reasons to move or not to move during the food is best done by taking into consideration their broader social and fnancial vulnerability. Those with more fnancial resources would be better equipped to prepare, including food and boats, for the upcoming food and strengthen their houses to store their resources during the food rather than inconveniently bringing all their valuable supplies to the safety hill and stored there (Interview 24, farmer, 26 June 2018). They, however, feel the need to remain at home to protect their resources from burglary and from foating, since even the loss of some possessions would affect their livelihoods (Interview 33, farmer, 26 June 2018). To ease their boredom while staying in the fooded village, they occasionally visited the safety hill. Yet it is simplistic to generalise that people remaining at home are always better off than those at the safety hill. There were families with children, elderly, or disabled members, who stayed at home, although they might not be fnancially capable. There were also those who remained at home because their neighbours also stayed behind or to avoid unnecessary spending at the safety hill. Even those who moved to the safety hill out of necessity would return at times to catch fsh in the vicinity of their fooded houses, while keeping an eye on their properties or to simply check on them. Many more families even divided up their members to simultaneously care for the cattle at the hill and the properties at home. People who stayed at home or moved to the safety hill faced similar challenges in terms of accessing safe shelter, nutritious food, and clean water, amongst others, but their access is determined by existing fnancial resources, age, and physical ability. Those with more resources were able to afford better living conditions than poorer villagers, for example, in terms of having tents and enough food (Interview 6, NGO offcer, 11 August 2018). Those who were presumably poorer and had prepared less food prior to the food might further exhaust their fnancial resources to buy food while staying at the safety hill (Interview 39, farmer, 27 June 2018). Moving to the safety hill did not automatically guarantee that they would receive the humanitarian aid. Neither did it automatically mean that people remaining at their houses were not in need of humanitarian assistance. It appears that those who presented themselves in the right place at the right time while the humanitarian aid was being distributed at the safety hill, increased their chances of receiving the emergency kits and food. Mobility during the food is thus a strategic and calculated decision by households depending on circumstances and need. While international soft law frameworks such as the Guiding Principles contain important guidance on how international human rights law applies in situations of internal displacement, the focus on a notion of a ‘displaced population’ may not be useful in a context like Phreah Kunlong, where people’s mobility is fuid and motivated by the desire to maximise overall household welfare. In addition to the Guiding Principles, Cambodia has national laws and policies on disaster, which provide for the roles of responsible government offcers to manage disaster, early warning systems, and the importance of participation of affected communities in making decisions concerning them and their communities,

134

Ratana Ly

amongst others. In addition to their existing local knowledge and experience, people’s level of preparedness and resilience is closely linked to their socioeconomic status. Education, training, and skills, including those supported by NGOs and similar actors, may contribute to people’s abilities to access more work options in order to generate income. While the villagers tried to boost their income, the improvement of public infrastructure, services, and support, such as having food-resistant roads, safe, accessible, and affordable water, fxing buildings at the safety hill, addressing communal issues including land at the safety hill, and safeguarding the inhabitants’ properties, would require the active involvement of the government, at both national and local levels (see Wingqvist 2009).

Conclusion The farmers and fshers in Phreah Kunlong village depended on medium fooding to replenish nutrients and maintain the productivity of their farms. Large or extreme fooding destroyed their crops and properties as well as being a threat to their safety. But their decision to move to the safety hill during this food situation was made strategically. Some moved there because their houses were severely fooded and uninhabitable. In other words, they became ‘displaced persons’ as defned in the Guiding Principles. Yet many chose to remain at home or move back and forth between the safety hill and their residences to protect their cattle at the safety hill and their houses in the village. For those who stayed at home because their neighbours did the same, to avoid spending money at the safety hill, or due to ageing or disability, these groups do not ‘appear’ to be displaced. Considering them as ‘not’ displaced would deny the possibility that they may be somewhat ‘trapped’ at home. Thus, this raises the question of who is displaced by the food and who needs to be protected. Both those who stay at home and go to the safety hill encountered similar challenges in getting clean water, food, and proper shelter as well as accessing sanitation. Although it is diffcult to generalise that those displaced at the safety hill are doing poorly and those remaining at home are fne, one thing is clear: those with better fnancial status could afford better conditions than poorer villagers whether they remained at home or went to the safety hill. In addition to the Guiding Principles, many Cambodian laws and policies related to disaster management are applicable to address the human rights challenges inhabitants in Phreah Kunlong face. Thus far, the legal and policy frameworks described earlier in this chapter are quite remote from the realities in Phreah Kunlong. A human rights framework would go beyond disaster response. Instead, it goes to an overall improvement of human rights, which includes economic and social rights, even prior to disasters. The government is primarily responsible for respecting, protecting, and fulflling people’s rights, in a fair, non-discriminatory, and participatory manner. The local authorities could implement these standards but only when they have the ability, willingness, skills, capacities, and resources to do so. Also, when people are fnancially stable, they are better prepared for

Cambodia 135 the food rather than waiting for humanitarian aid. This overall improvement should range from, but not be limited to, addressing the clean water issue, foodresistant roads, education, training on income-generating activities, promoting gender equality, and encouraging the protection of shared public property and space such as those at the safety hill. In this context, integrating a broader human rights framework with a sustainable development approach is essential.

Notes 1 I would like to sincerely thank my informants for their valuable time and participation despite their very busy schedules. Special thanks to the locals in Phreah Kunlong for kindly talking to me while they were preparing for the coming foods. This research would not have been possible without their kind support. I am also very grateful for the opportunity to take directed studies related to human rights and the environment with Dr Supriya Routh at the University of Victoria in Spring 2018. 2 Commune chief is the superior of the village chief.

References BBC (2018) Laos dam collapse: many feared dead as foods hit villages. Available at: https:// www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-44935495 (Accessed: 4 April 2020). Bernard, V., and Scott, M. (2020) Cambodia national law and policy report on displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. Lund: Raoul Wallenberg Institute of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law. Available at: https://rwi.lu.se/disaster-displacement. (Accessed: 20 July 2020). CFE-DM (2017) Cambodia: disaster management reference handbook. Available at: https ://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/fles/resources/CFE%20DM%20Reference%20Hand book-Cambodia%202017.pdf (Accessed: 4 April 2020). Ellis-Petersen, H. (2018) ‘Laos dam collapse sends foods into Cambodia, forcing thousands to fee’, The Guardian, 26 July. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2 018/jul/26/laos-dam-collapse-sends-foods-into-cambodia-forcing-thousands-to-fee (Accessed: 4 April 2020). Farber, D.A. (2007) ‘Disaster law and inequality’, Law & Inequality, 25(2), pp. 297–321. Ferris, E. (2014) ‘How can international human rights law protect us from disasters?’, Paper prepared for the American Society of International Law, Annual Meeting, 10 April 2014. Available at: https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/ EFerris-ASIL-Human-Rights-and-Disasters-20140730.pdf (Accessed: 22 July 2020). Fisher, D. (2010) ‘Legal implementation of human rights obligations to prevent displacement due to natural disasters’, Studies in Transnational Legal Policy, 41, pp. 551–590. Guadagno, L. (2016) ‘Human mobility in the Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction’, International Journal of Disaster Risk Science, 7, pp. 30–40. IASC (2011) Operational guidelines on the protection of persons in situations of natural disasters. Available at: https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/meeting-humanitaria n-challenges-urban-areas/documents-public/iasc-operational-guidelines-protection (Accessed: 11 May 2020). Imhoff, R.C. (2016) Analyzing future food risks in Cambodia: a quantitative approach using Delft-FIAT. Deltares. Available at: http://spinlab.vu.nl/wp-content/uploads/2017/

136

Ratana Ly

01/Analyzing-future-food-risks-in-Cambodia_FinalVersion2.pdf (Accessed: 4 April 2020). Kaba, M.W., Baesel, K., Poch, B., Bun, S., Cerceau, S., Bury, L., Schwarz, B., Keo, O., Tung, R., Cheang, K., and Rasanathan, K. (2018) ‘IDPoor: a poverty identifcation programme that enables collaboration across sectors for maternal and child health in Cambodia’, BMJ, 363, pp. 1–7. Lewis, B. and Maguire, R. (2015) ‘A human rights-based approach to disaster displacement in the Asia-Pacifc’, Asian Journal of International Law, 6, pp. 1–27. Naser, M.M. (2010) ‘Climate change and forced displacement: obligation of states under international human rights law’, Sri Lanka Journal of International Law, 22, pp. 117–164. Royal Government of Cambodia (2019) Cambodia’s voluntary national review 2019 on the implementation of the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. Available at: https ://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/23603Cambodia_VNR_Publis hingHLPF.pdf (Accessed: 4 April 2020). Saulnier, D.D., Hanson, C., Ir, P., Mölsted Alvesson, H., and von Schreeb, J. (2018) ‘The effect of seasonal foods on health: analysis of six years of national health data and food maps’, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15, pp. 665–678. Scott, M. (2019) Background brief: key international standards and guidelines relating to displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. Lund: Raoul Wallenberg Institute of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law. Available at: https://rwi.lu.se/ download/background-brief-key-international-standards-and-guidelines-relating -to-displacement-in-the-context-of-disasters-and-climate-change/?wpdmdl=17564 (Accessed: 4 April 2020). UN CESCR (1991) General comment no. 4: the right to adequate housing. E/1992/23. ——— (1999) General comment no. 12: the right to adequate food. E/C.12/1999/5. ——— (2000) General comment no. 14: the right to the highest attainable standard of health. E/C.12/2000/4. ——— (2003) General comment no. 15: the right to water. E/C.12/2002/11. UNDRR (2019) Disaster risk reduction in Cambodia: status report 2019. Available at: https ://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/fles/resources/68230_1cambodiaupdaed16oct2019.p df (Accessed: 4 April 2020). Verchick, R.R.M. (2012) ‘Disaster justice: the geography of human capability’, Duke Environmental Law & Policy Forum, 23, pp. 23–71. Wingqvist, G.Ö. (2009) Cambodia environmental and climate change policy brief. Available at: https://sidaenvironmenthelpdesk.se/digitalAssets/1683/1683319_cambodia-envand-climate-change-policy-brief-2009.pdf (Accessed: 4 April 2020). Winn, P. (2013) ‘Cambodia’s fooding brings specter of disease’, The World, 13 October. Available at: https://www.pri.org/stories/2013-10-13/cambodia-s-fooding-brings-spec ter-disease (Accessed: 4 April 2020). Wisner, B., Blaikie, P., Cannon, T. and Davis, I. (2004) At risk: natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters (Second Edition). London: Routledge. Zetter, R. and Boano, C. (2010) ‘Planned evacuations and the right to shelter during displacement’, in Kälin, W., Williams, R.C., Koser, K. and Solomon, A. (eds.) Incorporating the guiding principles on internal displacement into domestic law: issues and challenges. Washington, DC: The American Society of International Law.

Cambodia 137

International legal and policy documents 1948 1966 1979 1989 1998

1998 2015a 2015b

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (adopted 10 December 1948) UNGA Res217 A(III) International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 3 January 1976) 993 UNTS 3 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (adopted 18 December 1979, entered into force 3 September 1981) 1249 UNTS 13 Convention on the Rights of the Child (adopted 20 November 1989, entered into force 2 September 1990) 1577 UNTS 3 Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. Addendum to Report of the Representative of the Secretary-General, Mr. Francis M. Deng, submitted pursuant to Commission resolution 1997/39. UN Commission on Human Rights. (E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2) Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in DecisionMaking and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (adopted 25 June 1998, entered into force 30 October 2001) 2161 UNTS 447 UN General Assembly. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015 (A/RES/70/1) UN General Assembly. Resolution 69/283, Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, (A/CONF.224/CRP.1)

National legal and policy documents 2015 2015

Law on Disaster Management Royal Decree on the Organization and Functioning of the National Committee for Disaster Management

7

Bangladesh Flood-related displacement in Fulchhari upazila Md Abdul Awal Khan

Introduction Bangladesh is highly exposed to natural hazards due to its low-lying deltaic topography and susceptible geographical locations (Fujikura and Kawanishi 2011). Floods and storms are common hazards (CRED and Guha-Sapir 2020). Almost every year, monsoon rains lead to foods in Bangladesh, with the northern parts of the country being especially exposed. As a country adversely affected by disasters and climate change, Bangladesh has developed a robust and detailed legal and policy framework to guide the conduct of responsible actors from national to village levels (Khan and Scott 2020). However, the research conducted for this chapter reveals that implementation remains inadequate. This chapter considers the particular experience of people displaced in the context of the 2017 food that affected Gaibandha district in the north of the country, with a specifc focus on Fulchhari upazila (sub-district). Although this chapter addresses the experience of people generally, it also takes particular note of the situation of persons with disabilities. This focus is also appropriate for a study of the role of law and policy in addressing displacement, as the country’s Persons with Disabilities Rights and Protection Act 2013 articulates concrete duties and commitments on the part of the state to respect, protect, and fulfl the rights of persons with disabilities. The chapter will frst outline the relevant legal and policy framework before considering how this framework was applied in the context of food-related displacement in 2017.

The legal framework Under the 1972 Constitution, ensuring fundamental human rights and freedoms, equality, and political, economic, and social justice for all citizens are major responsibilities of the government of Bangladesh. Protection and improvement of environment and biodiversity are mentioned as one of the fundamental principles of state policy, as are provisions for ensuring basic necessities including food, clothing, shelter, education, and medical care. Rural development and agricultural revolution, public health and morality, equality of opportunity including

Bangladesh

139

the participation of women in all spheres of national life, and the right to work are also fundamental principles under the Constitution. Equality of opportunity in public employment, right to protection under the law, and rights to property are also recognised as fundamental rights, as is the prohibition on discrimination on the grounds of disability. Key elements of law and policy relating to disasters and displacement The government of Bangladesh has developed a variety of programmes, schemes, actions, and plans to respond to disaster risk, which adopt a more needs-based, rather than human rights-based, approach. This sub-section summarises the relevant legal, policy, and institutional framework that relates to displacement in the context of disasters in Bangladesh. The Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief (MoDMR) is the focal ministry for disaster risk reduction and emergency management planning. The Disaster Management and Relief Division (DMRD) is the operational arm of the MoDMR. It coordinates and oversees all activities at national and local levels relating to disaster management. The DMRD also coordinates all activities across ministries and agencies, local governments, NGOs, civil society, and all other stakeholders relating to disasters and climate change. The DMRD assists vulnerable people via activities such as Vulnerable Group Feeding (VGF) and Vulnerable Group Development (VGD). Amongst various initiatives of the government of Bangladesh, the Disaster Management Act 2012 (DMA) is the sole instrument establishing binding legal obligations to address disaster risk. One of the objectives of the DMA is to reduce overall disaster-related vulnerabilities and establish a disaster management structure. Further, the DMA is mainly enacted for the effective implementation of pre- and post-disaster responses, humanitarian assistance, and strengthening of institutional capacity. Displacement as a phenomenon is not directly mentioned in the DMA. The only indirect reference to displacement is made in relation to the provision of emergency shelter. For instance, section 16 identifes the provision of ‘directives on resources, services, complex identifed as emergency shelter, vehicles and other facilities requisition’ as some of the responsibilities of the National Disaster Response Coordination Group. Other references to shelter in the DMA, including at sections 2, 21, and 26, simply include shelter amongst a list of other elements of emergency response. There are no guidelines relating to how to address the shelter needs of displaced people. The draft National Strategy on the Management of Disaster and Climate Induced Internal Displacement 2015 (NSMDCIID), updated for further consultation in 2019, aims to become the central policy document addressing displacement in the context of disasters and climate change in Bangladesh. The rationale for the development of the strategy is grounded in the recognition that climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction law and policy does not adequately address the phenomenon of displacement. As a strategy, it does not

140

Md Abdul Awal Khan

have a binding legal force but rather exists to promote and coordinate further action in this context. The strategy adopts an expressly human rights-based approach, which states that: An RBA [rights-based approach] to climate-induced internal displacement (CIID) is primarily based on rights and entitlements of the displaced population and enshrined under national and international human rights instruments including economic, social and cultural rights as well as the right to access to information and participation in decision-making. Furthermore, since poor and marginalized groups generally face disproportionate level of risk in any internal displacement situation, an RBA gives particular attention to prioritize their needs and ensure their protection. It also takes due cognizance of the principle of non-discrimination. (p. 10) The strategy was frst drafted in 2015 but was not implemented. A revised version of the strategy was proceeding through an inter-ministerial review process at the time of writing. Consequently, the impact that this strategy has on addressing displacement cannot be evaluated in this chapter. A more detailed analysis of this path-breaking strategy is provided in Khan and Scott (2020). The most detailed guidance relating to disaster management is found in the Standing Orders on Disaster (SOD) 2010.1 The SOD provides detailed roles and responsibilities of disaster management committees, ministries, and other organisations in disaster risk reduction and emergency response, and set out the necessary actions required to implement the ‘disaster management model.’ Specifc responsibilities are divided between a wide range of actors at division, district, city corporation, municipality, sub-district (upazila), and union (lowest local government unit) levels. Each of these actors is identifed as having particular responsibilities for disaster management under SOD, with signifcant responsibility falling upon union-level actors. Part three of SOD focuses on local level coordination. It addresses multiple aspects of disaster displacement ranging from risk reduction to durable solutions. The principle articulated at Order 3.6 states that ‘coordination should be carried out at the lowest possible level of government organization.’ Three specifc requirements are selected below for consideration against the facts that emerged from our research in Fulchhari upazila. These relate to preparedness for displacement, protection during evacuation and throughout displacement, and durable solutions. First, as part of its responsibility for disaster risk reduction, Upazila Disaster Management Committees (DMCs) are required under section 3.3.5.1.6 of the SOD to: [a]ssist union and pourashava DMCs to identify the most vulnerable area or people at high risk by sex, age, physical-ability, social status, occupation and economic status, compile the list of people at high risk at different union

Bangladesh

141

and pourashavas and based on the lists prepare a report and location map of people at risk in the Upazila and to send the report to the DDMC. Pre-identifcation of people in situations of vulnerability is an important measure to ensure no one is left behind when disasters unfold, and this provision is therefore signifcant. Second, evacuation centres play a vital role in addressing the immediate human rights issues associated with disaster displacement, including risk to the right to life, shelter, food, health, and so forth. At the same time, if poorly equipped and managed, evacuation centres can also be sites where serious violations of human rights occur. Multiple policy documents focus on the management of evacuation centres, including the National Adaptation Programme of Action 2009, the 2010 Standing Orders on Disaster, the 2016–2020 National Plan for Disaster Management, and the 2011 Cyclone Shelter Construction, Maintenance and Management Policy (Khan and Scott 2020). The Standing Orders on Disaster are particularly detailed and include the following: • • • •

Determine specifc safe centre/shelter where the population of certain areas will go at the time of need and assign responsibilities to different persons for various services and securities at the centre/shelter (SOD 3.3.5.1.15) Ensure the supply of safe water and if necessary other services from specifc points near the shelter/centre with the help of Upazila authority (SOD 3.3.5.1.16) Ensure the security of women, children, and persons with disability during the hazard (SOD 3.3.5.2.2.6) Enforce Union and Pourashava DMCs to prepare water purifcation technology (tablet) at the local level with the help of trained students, youths, clubs, and volunteers; and distribute those products at emergency amongst the people at risk before being caught by diarrhoea or other waterborne diseases (SOD 3.3.5.2.2.9)

Reference to sanitation, water, and security brings international standards and guidelines to the forefront, including, in particular, the Sphere Standards (2018) relating to addressing humanitarian needs in camp or shelter settings, as well as the IASC Guidelines for Integrating Gender-Based Violence Interventions in Humanitarian Action (2015). Accounts from affected people refect a situation during the 2017 food that was not in accordance with these requirements. Third, in relation to durable solutions, housing, land, and property rights are highlighted in relation to the return of persons displaced in the context of disasters at section 3.3.5.2.3.6 of the SOD. The Upazila Disaster Management Committee is to: Ensure that due to hazard the people who were displaced can come back to their previous places; in this case, dispute (if there is any) regarding the land

142

Md Abdul Awal Khan of the displaced people should not be an obstacle to come back to the peace after disaster.

Near identical roles relating to these activities are also assigned to the District Disaster Management Committee, as well as Pourashava and Union DMCs, making it unclear precisely which actor has responsibility for which aspect of voluntary return as a durable solution. The next section of this chapter considers how people experienced displacement and the lack of durable solutions available in Fulchhari, together with comments from local authorities regarding the steps they took and the challenges they face in fulflling their obligations under the SOD and overall legal and policy framework in Bangladesh. However, there is a need to frst briefy highlight details of the legal framework relating to the rights of persons with disabilities. Key elements of law and policy relating to persons with disabilities According to the report of the Department of Statistics in Bangladesh, an estimated 7.5 per cent of people in Bangladesh have different kinds of disabilities (Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics 2015). Therefore, disability prevalence in the country is severe and the estimated number, as stated, is signifcant, considering the total population is approximately 165 million. Following its ratifcation of the 2006 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) in 2007, Bangladesh passed the Persons with Disabilities Rights and the Protection Act 2013, which inter alia calls for the integration of a disability focus into all areas of government responsibility. The entry into force of the Persons with Disabilities Rights and the Protection Act 2013 provides a strong impetus for further integrating the rights of persons with disabilities into disaster risk management in Bangladesh, including in relation to disaster displacement. The Act shifts the paradigm of disability from the welfare-based approach of earlier national law and policy to a rights-based approach. The provisions of the Act not only ‘established the rights of the disabled to protect their dignity, but also ensured their full participation in social and state activities removing all forms of discrimination’ (National Grassroots and Disabilities Organization, National Council for Women with Disabilities and Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Trust 2015, p. 7). Representation of the Ministry of Disaster Management and Relief in the National Coordination Committee and the National Executive Committee is mentioned in the Persons with Disabilities Rights and Protection Act 2013, but there are no direct provisions and detailed information regarding protection of persons with disabilities before, during, and in the aftermath of disasters, which is a major limitation of the Act, particularly in light of the clear obligation in Article 11 of the CRPD to take ‘all necessary measures to ensure the protection and safety of persons with disabilities in situations of risk, including situations of armed confict, humanitarian emergencies and the occurrence of natural disasters.’ Nonetheless, faithful implementation of the Act would clearly entail its

Bangladesh

143

implementation in the context of disaster management as well as in other areas of public life. Key areas where the Act interfaces with disaster management include the overarching non-discrimination obligation in Article 16, and the establishment of committees from national to sub-district levels to protect the rights of persons with disabilities. Regrettably, as noted in the next section, our research in Fulchhari upazila revealed a lack of attention to the non-discrimination obligation in the sense that authorities failed to take positive steps to address the particular situation of persons with disabilities, and there was no evidence that any of the committees identifed in the Act took any steps to address the situation of persons with disabilities either before, during, or after the fooding. According to the Vice Chairman of Fulchhari upazila, committees focusing on the rights of persons with disabilities had not been formed at the upazila level, even if such a committee might exist at the district level (Interview 25, Vice Chairman of Fulchhari upazila, 5 February 2020). Having now set out the key elements of the legal and policy framework relating to disasters and the rights of persons with disabilities in Bangladesh, it is now time to address the question of how this framework actually works in practice. In what follows, the experience of people displaced in the fooding in Fulchhari upazila in 2017 is considered against the backdrop of the legal and policy framework described above, specifcally with respect to issues relating to the prevention of and preparedness for displacement, protection during evacuation and throughout displacement, and the facilitation of durable solutions. It considers the conduct and perspectives of duty bearers at the local level and also discusses the experience of affected people, including persons with disabilities, who were interviewed during the feldwork that took place in 2018 at Fulchhari upazila.

Displacement due to the 2017 food in Fulchhari upazila Method Field research was conducted in Fulchhari upazila in Gaibandha district, which is one of the major affected northern districts of Bangladesh by the July 2017 food. The food wrought havoc to 32 districts across Bangladesh (UN Resident Coordinator for Bangladesh 2017), resulting in the displacement of 436,000 people (IDMC 2018, p. 34). The district is situated next to the Brahmaputra River to the east and Tista Gaghat and Alai Rivers to the north. Compiling information from an August DDM report, the civil society network NIRAPAD reported that 567 villages in Gaibandha district were affected by the food, and 29,612 people were displaced (NIRAPAD 2017). Field study selection was made in consultation with local civil society organisations, our own social and professional networks and government agencies, and was informed by considerations relating to the extent of fooding and the number of people displaced. To gain local level insight, the research team visited Fulchhari upazila, which is one of seven upazilas in the district.

144

Md Abdul Awal Khan

Fieldwork was conducted by the lead researcher and four assistants in April 2018. Key informant interviews with two local authorities responsible for disaster management and semi-structured interviews were conducted with 22 people aged 25–60 years old who were still displaced as a result of the 2017 food. Eighteen of our interviewees were men, and four were women. Of the 22 people interviewed, two were parents of children with disabilities. After initial data analysis, we followed up with additional questions to the local authorities by telephone. We also spoke with the Vice Chairman of Fulchhari upazila and the Fulchhari upazila Executive Offcer by telephone. Details of the interviews are included in Appendix 1 of this chapter. Prevention of and preparedness for displacement Most of the houses observed in Fulchhari were made with tin, wood, and semibrick. People living near riverbanks and lowlands were particularly exposed to fooding. People living on or below the food control dam were comparatively safe. The food engulfed a large part of the village where hundreds of people lived, inundating a school, the bazar, shops, buildings, offces, and homes. People in Fulchhari upazila regularly face fash foods and monsoon fooding or river fooding. They know that monsoon fooding usually occurs from June to September and fash foods caused by heavy rainfall usually occur from April to July. Flash fooding does not create much of a problem because water does not submerge as large an area as monsoon fooding and does not stay long. People suffer a lot due to monsoon fooding (Interview 1, farmer, 23 April 2018). They also shared that river erosion is common, and they suffered a lot from extensive annual fooding and river erosion (Interview 1, farmer, 23 April 2018). Some landless people in Fulchhari live in a char area (a tract of land surrounded by water bodies such as an ocean, sea, lake, or stream) because they have no option to live anywhere else (Interview 2, daily labour, 23 April 2018). They were particularly exposed during the fooding in 2017. In what follows, the steps taken by local authorities to address displacement, together with the experiences of affected individuals we interviewed, are described. As noted earlier, SOD 3.3.5.1.6 requires the Upazila Disaster Management Committee to ‘identify the most vulnerable area or people at high risk by sex, age, physical ability, social status, occupation and economic status.’ Although from time to time local authorities may be asked to provide information to inform district and national level risk and vulnerability assessments, the Fulchhari upazila Executive Offcer could not recall any detailed identifcation of individuals in situations of vulnerability before or after the 2017 food (Interview 24, Fulchhari upazila Executive Offcer, 1 February 2020). Without the pre-identifcation of individuals in situations of vulnerability, it is diffcult to deliver any targeted assistance. As set out in more detail below, families with children with disabilities that we interviewed had not received any particular assistance during or in the aftermath of the food.

Bangladesh

145

Certain measures had been taken to reduce overall food risk and, by extension, displacement risk in Fulchhari. The Vice Chairman of Fulchhari upazila informed the author that the oldest embankment was built before the independence of Bangladesh in 1971 and which has almost been destroyed by foods and river erosion (Interview 23, Vice Chairman of Fulchhari upazila, 25 April 2018). The Bangladesh Water Development Board had built embankments to protect Gaibandha town from fooding after the devastating food in 1988. However, owing to the strength of the fooding in 2017, the embankments were unable to contain the waters. Recently, the government has been repairing embankments and old roads, building new ones, and controlling shallow rivers. Although clearly some initiatives have been taken to reduce the impact of fooding in Gaibandha, it remains the case that food-related displacement is a recurrent form of harm in this part of the country. People of Fulchhari stated that displacement due to food or any other incidents frustrate them. As food and river erosion happens almost every year, people have devised some measures to help cope with the impacts. Most of the people we interviewed did not own the land they had been living on. Every year they try to save money to prepare for the foods because they know that foods will strike at a particular time of the year when they will have no earnings. Based on their experience of previous foods, people explained that they anticipated the arrival of the food about a day before it arrived. It was on this basis that people prepared to move. Although local authorities also raised the alarm through the use of megaphones, both locals and the local authority stated that the early warning system remained inadequate, especially in remote and char areas (Interview 23, Vice Chairman of Fulchhari upazila, 25 April 2018). It also warrants noting that people do not always heed evacuation warnings. People are very concerned about protecting their properties, and therefore employ a range of strategies to stay as close to home as possible (Interviews 1, 2, 3, and 4, April 2018 and interview 24, February 2020, see Appendix 1). In normal foods, when water levels are not so high, people construct wooden or bamboo rafts, known locally as mancha, where they can stay together with their livestock. The people of Fulchhari could not make mancha during the food in 2017 as water levels were very high and they took shelter at embankments. Some people dismantled their houses that were made of tin and then took the pieces to the food control dam (Interviews 1, 2, and 3, April 2018, see Appendix 1). Others made boats out of banana trees (locally known as vela), which can accommodate two to three people (Interviews 1, 2, and 3, April 2018, see Appendix 1). The research found a lack of long-term strategies to address risks associated with fooding. At the time of river erosion, every year the local government along with the water development board take temporary measures to prevent erosion. People interviewed at Fulchhari informed us that food protection embankments are already damaged, and during fooding, sandbags were used to temporarily control the foodwater. These short-term measures do not provide adequate protection for people exposed to recurrent food risk.

146

Md Abdul Awal Khan

Addressing transboundary water management between India and Bangladesh plays a considerable role in food-related displacement in Bangladesh. Thus, bilateral water management arrangements between Bangladesh and India need to be pursued to address this concern (Interview 25, Vice Chairman of Fulchhari upazila, 5 February 2020). Offcials from the food warning centre informed the media that at least fve western districts of Bangladesh may be affected by food due to water discharge from India through the Farakka Barrage (Al Amin 2019). Another prominent media of Bangladesh reported in 2019 that the swelling water submerged 18 chars of three unions of Lalpur sub-district of Natore district and displaced about 3,000 families as the Padma and Mahananda rivers continued to swell after India opened all the gates of the Farakka barrage (The Daily Star 2019). When asked what kind of steps could be taken to help prevent displacement in any future disaster, many people highlighted the importance of a robust food action plan by the government. Most of the people we interviewed repeatedly mentioned the poor condition of the district protection embankments. River dredging, river controlling, and making more embankments to protect the Gaibandha district from fooding were identifed as high priorities by the people we interviewed. In addition, landless, disadvantaged, and the displaced people of Fulchhari want long-term housing facilities. They stated that their housing should be strong and disaster resilient. After every disaster, they receive fnancial assistance from the local authority or NGOs for rebuilding their homes, but they are not able to build adequate, food-resistant shelters. People cannot build disaster-resilient or better shelters because they do not have their own land and it is expensive to acquire. Finally, the limitation of early warning to reach people living in remote areas, including on char land, was highlighted as something that needed to be addressed. Even though people have developed their own methods for predicting foods, many wanted to see enhancements to the existing early warning system as one method to prepare for displacement. Protection during evacuation and throughout displacement Early warning and evacuation People we interviewed recounted mixed experiences regarding protection during evacuation and throughout displacement. Some emphasised the importance of community-based adaptation and protection measures, as neighbours are always the frst to provide assistance during disasters, even though our research also found instances, particularly in relation to children with disabilities, where such assistance was not provided. People recounted how neighbours used their own boats to help others move to shelter. At the same time, they explained that support from local government and other bodies is also crucial.

Bangladesh

147

Some considered that the evacuation process was much better than in previous disasters. The military played a signifcant role in evacuating people and in reconstructing food protection embankments. One informant stated that the military rescued him and his family members by boat (Interview 16, household, 24 April 2018). Civil society organisations and individuals also provided assistance. However, people still faced challenges evacuating, especially with their children, women, the elderly, and people with disabilities, when the food hit. One informant stated that he faced so much horror during the evacuation that he thought that he would not be able to survive (Interview 3, farmer, daily labour, 23 April 2018). One informant recounted how he took shelter on the dam under open sky and did not get any help from anyone for a few days (Interview 2, daily labour, 23 April 2018). In his experience, emergency preparedness and response initiatives were inadequate. They informed that early warning and evacuation were always delayed in char areas. Many had to evacuate themselves after the foods had already arrived by using their own or neighbours’ boats. If the river becomes rough, then they wait until they receive help from the authority. When we asked other local authorities about conditions in the evacuation centre, pointing specifcally to the responsibilities of local authorities under SOD, they explained the same scenario as stated above. The government built a few permanent evacuation centres and provided open spaces. The displaced people took shelter there, but they had to build their own housing. Evacuation centres are few and are not systematically maintained and monitored regularly during the food. Ensuring a hygienic and safe environment was a challenge (Interview 25, Vice Chairman of Fulchhari upazila, 5 February 2020). The conditions inside or outside of evacuation centres were particularly challenging in the immediate aftermath of the food, where access to food, water, and sanitation was diffcult. Despite the very detailed guidelines set out in the SOD, it is clear that a range of impediments prevent adequate implementation on the ground in Fulchhari. Although some people chose not to go to evacuation centres because they had heard that they were already full (Interview 16, household, 24 April 2018), others stayed away because they are aware of the conditions there, privacy was lacking, and sanitation facilities were very poor (Interview 1, 2, and 3, April 2018, see Appendix 1). This perspective was confrmed by people who had stayed at the evacuation centre in 2017 and also by the local authority (Interview 25, Vice Chairman of Fulchhari upazila, 5 February 2020). The diffculties of living in the shelters were expressed by a local woman who was displaced due to the food in Fulchhari: Me and my son with disability faced huge diffculties to fnd suitable shelter because all the shelters were overcrowded. Then we decided to make temporary housing on the dam of the river. We could not travel far due to disability of my son. There are also chances that if we stay away from our place, some infuential people may grab our land. So we decided to stay close to our place. (Interview 12, household, 23 April 2018)

148

Md Abdul Awal Khan

Similarly, the Vice Chairman of Fulchhari upazila explained that there are few evacuation centres and they are not systematically maintained and monitored during fooding. Ensuring a hygienic and safe environment is a challenge (Interview 25, 5 February 2020). He continued: I am Vice Chairman of Fulchhari upazila Council. The 2017 food engulfed my house and property as well. I took shelter in evacuation centre along with my cattle and stayed there for a few days. I had horrible experiences during my stay at the evacuation centre because the place was heavily crowded, unhealthy and not enough sanitation (Interview 25, Vice Chairman of Fulchhari upazila, 5 February 2020). The temporary evacuation centres were closed immediately after the foodwater disappeared. People who had sheltered in the evacuation centres either returned to their homes or joined the other displaced people at the dam or elsewhere. One informant, who has a child with a disability, felt that people would not feel comfortable if she brought her son to the evacuation centre (Interview 12, household, 23 April 2018). Displacement outside of evacuation centres Although some of the people we interviewed sought shelter in evacuation centres (Interview 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, April 2018, see Appendix 1), others had remained closer to home. The food-affected people have also complained about the lack of relief goods. They believed that the government had allocated them more support, but this did not reach them at the local level. Some also expressed the suspicion that the food victims of Fulchhari had received less relief than people in other areas because Fulchhari is one of the more remote areas of Gaibandha and communication is diffcult (Interviews 1, 2, 3, and 4, April 2018, see Appendix 1). Some food victims described corruption, nepotism, and mismanagement. Notwithstanding the earlier-identifed duty to identify and address the particular situation of persons with disabilities, including in disasters, we did not identify any measures in place to help them in the case of the 2017 food. We asked local authorities and civil society representatives about the operation of any of the local level committees required to be established under the Persons with Disabilities Rights and Protection Act 2013, and all confrmed that no such committee had been established at either the local or district level, despite the fact that the Act was passed in 2013 (Interview 25, Vice Chairman of Fulchhari upazila, 5 February 2020). Parents whose children have disabilities recounted how they did not receive additional support from the government or anyone else. Civil society organisations, religious organisations, and NGOs provided support during the food, but that was not adequate considering the large number of people affected. Neighbours were also unwilling to provide assistance. One informant received a negative response even from community members when she

Bangladesh

149

asked help for her child. Another stated that, when moving her family to a safe place, she requested one of her neighbours to stay with her disabled son until she returned, but she did not receive any help (Interview 1, farmer, 23 April 2018). Most of the displaced people we interviewed did not own any land, either before the food or after. Displaced people chose government khas land, char areas, and food protection embankments as temporary shelters, and many were still living in these places at the time of the research. Some people were staying on boats in waist-deep water, and they sent their children to their relatives’ house (Interview 2, daily labour, 23 April 2018). To stay in the char land is risky because sometimes the whole char might go under water suddenly, although they will appear again. People also stayed on privately owned land, both with and without permission (Interview 1, farmer, 23 April 2018). Sometimes displaced people get permission to stay on the barren land of local people especially in the dry season, but which they have to vacate once the land becomes fertile in the rainy season. Sometimes staying on the embankment also becomes problematic. Displaced people were asked to vacate the place when the forest department conducted their tree plantation programme on the embankment (Interview 3, farmer, daily labour, 23 April 2018). Therefore, the clear lack of durable solutions for poor and landless people makes them very vulnerable. This point will be developed further in the next section. The displaced people we interviewed said that people generally prefer to move short distances if they can fnd suitable livelihood opportunities (Interviews 1 and 2, April 2018, see Appendix 1). However, if income from these opportunities is not enough for their households, then they usually move to Dhaka or other urban areas. Both male and female household members move to earn, but those who are weak and the elderly tend to remain in rural areas. Some people we interviewed described the problems associated with the displacement of their livestock. They could not provide any shelter for them and had to leave them in the open close to their shelter. How displaced people manage access to grazing and negotiate space for their livestock is an area that invites further research. Despite the legal obligations described above, the feld study of this research reveals that implementation remains inadequate to effectively address disaster displacement. People described how, despite receiving relief from the government, civil society organisations, and individuals (Interview 2, daily labour, 23 April 2018), basic economic and social rights, especially to food, water, shelter, sanitation, and access to healthcare, were signifcantly impacted during the food leading to displacement because the distribution of relief did not consider the social characteristics of the affected people, such as disability, age, or gender. Although many would have experienced food-related displacement in the past, the potentially traumatic nature of the experience should not be overlooked. One informant recounted: One time, me and my family were stranded for 10–15 days. There was only water everywhere. We cooked, ate, and defecated in the same place. We

150

Md Abdul Awal Khan could not move anywhere. One day, we found a dead body of a baby under our bed. That was really a nightmare for us. (Interview 2, daily labour, 23 April 2018)

People relied on stored dried food in the frst few days of fooding, but these supplies ran out as food waters remained. The local authority, civil society organisations, and local people provided them with some additional food, but there was still a shortage. Although some prepared handmade stoves, others had no means to cook (Interviews 1, 2, and 3, April 2018, see Appendix 1). Food prices went up after the fooding, although there was no shortage of food in the market (Interviews 1, 2, 3, and 4, April 2018, see Appendix 1). Flood-affected children and women faced malnutrition more than men because of the practice of men eating frst and women/children only eating what is left (Interviews 1, 2, and 3, April 2018, see Appendix 1). In order to collect relief items, the authorities required people to present themselves physically, but the nearest relief centre was some kilometres away. Sometimes, women could not go to collect relief, as they would have had to leave their children and belongings unattended. Male members had to convince the authorities to provide more relief as they were not enough (Interviews 16 and 17, April 2018, see Appendix 1). Some people brought their children with disabilities with them to collect relief, which was extremely diffcult because they did not have wheelchairs (Interview 12, household, 23 April 2018). Moreover, waiting in the long queue to collect relief made them tired and sick. Some people also allegedly got more relief because they were supporters of the ruling party (Interview 2, daily labour, 23 April 2018). People collected drinking water from the nearest tube well but most of the tube wells were submerged, and there were no other sources of freshwater during the food (Interview 2, daily labour, 23 April 2018). Mass awareness programmes were undertaken by the local authority to warn people not to drink water from submerged tube wells. The local authority and some civil society organisations distributed water purifcation tablets. Still, some people ended up having to drink dirty water and got sick. There were also signifcant challenges relating to hygiene and sanitation as private toilets had gone underwater, and many people defecated in the open. Women had to wait until evening to defecate in the open, refecting another gendered feature of disaster displacement. Some people used their neighbours’ latrines that had not been submerged. Local authorities built some latrines, but these were not enough for the population. As these were very rarely cleaned, they became so dirty that people did not use them (Interviews 1, 2, 3, and 4, April 2018, see Appendix 1). Furthermore, there were no facilities for handwashing. The condition and position of the latrines were such that they contaminated nearby water sources, contributing to an increased risk of waterborne diseases. In addition to waterborne diseases, many people also suffered from malnutrition and mental health problems. Pregnant women at Fulchhari were particularly vulnerable. Some women became sick staying in the poor conditions during the food, moving their homes, and the stress associated with being displaced.

Bangladesh

151

Local authorities provided inadequate facilities and irregular medical services (Interview 23, Vice Chairman of Fulchhari upazila, 25 April 2018). One informant stated that diarrhoea killed his four family members and relatives in one day (Interview 16, household, 24 April 2018). Temporary medical camps were set up, but they were not suffcient. Moreover, many people could not easily access them because they were located far from their locations, although medicines were given without charge (Interview 25, Vice Chairman of Fulchhari upazila, 5 February 2020). Only patients with very serious conditions were taken to the district or subdistrict hospitals. Mental health issues were not included (Interview 17, household, farming, 24 April 2018). There was a government-appointed midwife in Fulchhari, and birth control measures were available there. One woman received pregnancy-related support during her stay at the evacuation centre (Interview 17, household, farming, 24 April 2018). The 2017 food badly affected the livelihoods of the people of Fulchhari. Daily labourers in both agriculture and non-agriculture lost their jobs. Farmers lost their crops and fsh farms. As a result, a large number of people were unemployed. Displaced women in Fulchhari were overwhelmingly involved in householdrelated work. Some women also used to help their husbands, such as tending to their livestock. During and after the foods, the price of daily products increased but daily labour wages decreased. As their wages were reduced, people were compelled to take loans with excessively high interest rates (e.g., 100–150 per cent (Interviews 3 and 16, April 2018, see Appendix 1). Refecting on key priorities to reduce the adverse impacts of displacement in the event of a future food, informants highlighted the need to increase the number of evacuation centres and to ensure higher standards of hygiene. Some informants, refecting on the critical importance of boats during the foods both as transport for evacuation and for living on during the food, would like to see the government distribute a boat for each family. Although one might foresee administrative challenges in this scheme, the critical importance of having foating transport and shelter warrants closer consideration as part of local-level DRR and climate resilience. In addition to the need to protect people during displacement, some informants also pointed to the lack of protection measures for livestock, which provide a crucial source of food security and income for people in this area. As noted above, this issue of livestock in the context of displacement warrants further research. Additionally, food-affected people at Fulchhari emphasised the importance of creating employment opportunities during displacement. They mentioned that providing only relief would not help them permanently. In fact, some people expressed feeling humiliated when receiving relief. Durable solutions When we visited Fulchhari in 2018, people who had been displaced in the 2017 foods were still displaced, more than nine months later. People who have

152

Md Abdul Awal Khan

no property or land were displaced multiple times (Interview 1, farmer, 23 April 2018). They are unable to settle in any specifc place because they know that within a short time they will be asked to move on (Interview 1, farmer, 23 April 2018). People whose homes were close to the river expressed a reluctance to return owing to a fear of being displaced again in a future food. Therefore, there is a clear lack of durable solutions to disaster displacement. The duty under the SOD to ‘take necessary measures so that people can come back to their previous place after the disaster is over’ did not appear to have been fulflled in the Fulchhari context. To help fnd their own solutions, some people took loans from local civil society organisations to rebuild their homes. Government loans were also available, but people considered these to be diffcult and time consuming (Interviews 3 and 16, April 2018, see Appendix 1). Some people took loans from wealthier neighbours with high interest rates (Interviews 3 and 16, April 2018, see Appendix 1). Without durable solutions to displacement, which is attained when people no longer suffer adversely from the fact that they have been displaced, displaced people continue to be exposed due to ongoing denials of their human rights.

Conclusion This chapter highlighted three specifc elements of the legal and policy framework in Bangladesh relating to prevention and preparedness, protection during evacuation and throughout displacement, and durable solutions. These measures include identifying vulnerable individuals in advance of disaster, maintaining evacuation centres, and facilitating return to their original residences in the aftermath of a disaster. Our research in Fulchhari upazila found that none of these important provisions were adequately implemented at the local level in the context of the food-related displacement in July 2017. Additionally, we found that neither the non-discrimination obligation relating to the rights of persons with disabilities was refected on the ground nor was there a role played by local or national committees established under the Persons with Disabilities Rights and Protection Act 2013. In speaking with individuals who had been and continued to be displaced, we learned that multiple factors contribute to their predicament, including lack of land ownership, poorly designed facilities, and social sources of vulnerability such as where they live and the kind of livelihood activities that are available to them. Although some assistance is available, including in relation to early warning, evacuation, and support with humanitarian relief during the disaster, people clearly faced serious denials of their rights to food, water, shelter, and health during disasters. Evacuation centres, which should guarantee protection from harms associated with displacement, were unsuitable and potentially exposed people seeking shelter to violations of their human rights. The fact that people remained displaced more than nine months after the disaster demonstrates that displacement is a phenomenon that endures long after foodwaters have receded and that there are multiple instances of displacement both in relation to one single hazard,

Bangladesh

153

as with the 2017 food, and in relation to seasonal foods. There is a clear need to address durable solutions to displacement, but these appeared quite distant in the case study. We also considered the particular situation of persons with disabilities in the research. We noted that persons with disabilities did not receive appropriate support from the disaster management authority or the committees that were established under the Persons with Disabilities Rights and Protection Act 2013. We also noted that duty bearers at the local government level lacked awareness of their statutory duties under this Act. As climate change promises to increase the frequency and intensity in this part of the world (IPCC 2019), there is an urgent need to implement measures that prevent and prepare for displacement, protect people during evacuation and throughout displacement, and facilitate durable solutions. The Standing Orders on Disaster, together with the revised NSMDCIID, provide a robust institutional and policy framework for proactively addressing disaster displacement risk from a human rights-based approach. However, as our research demonstrates, the ambition of national-level actors does not readily translate into effective action at the local level. Some support is available, but we found that local actors have a limited grasp of a rights-based approach and lack detailed awareness of their duties both in advance of disasters as well as during and in the aftermath of disasters. The legal and policy framework provides detailed guidance, but, in practice, individuals with responsibilities at the local level operate in a command structure, implementing not legal and policy-based guidelines, but direct instructions within a disaster management hierarchy. Consequently, a key message emerging from this study is that local authorities need both to be given more resources to respond to disaster risk, but also more accountability measures that require them to demonstrate compliance with legal and policy guidelines, such as the maintenance of evacuation centres, and to take steps to provide appropriately tailored protection of the rights of people in vulnerable situations, including persons with disabilities.

Note 1 Bangla version Updated in 2019.

References Al Amin, M. (2019) ‘Bangladesh’s western part may get fooded as India opens Farakka gates’, Dhaka Tribune, 30 September. Available at: https://www.dhakatribune.com/ bangladesh/nation/2019/09/30/country-s-western-part-may-get-fooded (Accessed: 19 May 2020). Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (2015) Disability in Bangladesh: prevalence and pattern. Available at: http://203.112.218.65:8008/WebTestApplication/userfles/Image/PopM onographs/disabilityFinal.pdf (Accessed: 19 May 2020). CRED and Guha-Sapir, D. (2020) EM-DAT: the emergency events database. Université catholique de Louvain. Available at: https://emdat.be (Accessed: 13 May 2020).

154

Md Abdul Awal Khan

Fujikura, R. and Kawanishim, M. (eds) (2011) Climate change adaptation and international development. London: Earthscan, p 25. IASC (2015) Guidelines for integrating gender-based violence interventions in humanitarian action: reducing risk, promoting resilience and aiding recovery. Available at: https://gbvguidelines.org/en/ (Accessed: 1 June 2019). IDMC (2018) Global report on internal displacement 2018. Available at: https://www.int ernal-displacement.org/global-report/grid2018/ (Accessed: 19 May 2020). IPCC (2019) Special report on the ocean and cryosphere in a changing climate. Available at: https://www.ipcc.ch/srocc/ (Accessed: 23 July 2020). Khan, M.A.A and Scott, M. (2020) Bangladesh national law and policy report on displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. Available at https://rwi.lu.se/disasterdisplacement/ (Accessed: 20 July 2020). National Grassroots and Disabilities Organization, National Council for Women with Disabilities and Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Trust (2015) Current status of rights of persons with disabilities in Bangladesh: legal and grassroots perspectives. Available at: https://www.blast.org.bd/content/publications/crpd-report.pdf (Accessed: 19 May 2020). NIRAPAD (2017) Flood situation updated on August 22 2017. Available at https://reliefw eb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/fles/resources/Situation_Report%20of%20Flood%20_Upda ted%20on%20August_22%2C%202017.pdf (Accessed: 19 May 2020) Sphere Project (2018) Sphere handbook: humanitarian charter and minimum standards in disaster response. Fourth edition. Rugby: Practical Action Publishing. Available at: http://www.spherestandards.org/handbook (Accessed: 19 May 2020). The Daily Star (2019) ‘Padma, Mahananda continue to swell in north’, The Daily Star, 1 October. Available at: https://www.thedailystar.net/country/padma-river-waterswells-after-india-opens-119-gates-farakka-barrage-1807840 (Accessed: 23 July 2020). UN resident coordinator for Bangladesh (2017) Monsoon foods: Bangladesh: humanitarian coordination task team situation report no. 5. Available at https://reliefweb.int/sites/re liefweb.int/fles/resources/HCTTSitrep5_Monsoon%20Floods_Bangladesh_Final.pdf (Accessed: 19 May 2020).

International legal and policy documents 2006

Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (adopted 13 December 2006, entered into force 3 May 2008) 2515 UNTS 3

National legal and policy documents 1972 2010 2011 2012 2013 2015

Constitution of Bangladesh Standing Orders on Disaster Cyclone Shelter Construction, Maintenance and Management Policy Persons Disaster Management Act Persons with Disabilities Rights and the Protection Act National Strategy on the Management of Disaster- and Climate Induced Internal Displacement

Bangladesh

Appendix 1: List of interviews Interview 1, farmer, 23 April 2018 Interview 2, daily labour, 23 April 2018 Interview 3, farmer, daily labour, 23 April 2018 Interview 4, unemployed, household, 23 April 2018 Interview 5, unemployed, household, 23 April 2018 Interview 6, daily labour, 23 April 2018 Interview 7, unemployed, household, 23 April 2018 Interview 8, farmer, 23 April 2018 Interview 9, unemployed, daily labour, 23 April 2018 Interview 10, farmer, small business, 23 April 2018 Interview 11, household, 23 April 2018 Interview 12, household, 23 April 2018 Interview 13, farmer, small business, 24 April 2018 Interview 14, farmer, daily labour, 24 April 2018 Interview 15, farmer, small business, 24 April 2018 Interview 16, household, 24 April 2018 Interview 17, household, farming, 24 April 2018 Interview 18, household, 24 April 2018 Interview 19, household, daily labour, 24 April 2018 Interview 20, unemployed, household, 24 April 2018 Interview 21, unemployed, daily labour, 24 April 2018 Interview 22, unemployed, daily labour, 24 April 2018 Interview 23, Vice Chairman of Fulchhari upazila, 25 April 2018 Interview 24, Fulchhari upazila Executive Offcer, 1 February 2020 Interview 25, Vice Chairman of Fulchhari upazila, 5 February 2020

155

8

Indonesia Human rights, persons with disabilities, and the politics of disaster displacement in post-eruption Mt. Sinabung1 Ahmad Rizky Mardhatillah Umar, Ezka Amalia, and Andika Putra

Introduction This chapter describes the recurrent displacement of people living in the vicinity of Mt. Sinabung, North Sumatra, Indonesia. Adopting a socially grounded human rights-based approach, the chapter considers the relevant legal and policy framework and examines how local and national actors manage displacement in this context. The analysis focuses on the situation of persons with disabilities. Drawing upon a series of interviews and document analysis in a multi-level setting, we explore some of the political and legal dynamics of displacement by highlighting how legal and policy frameworks at local and national levels evolve over time to deal with complex post-eruption displacement processes. We fnd that the relevant law and policy relating to disaster displacement was only partially implemented in this case. The gap between law and policy, on the one hand, and practice, on the other, is caused by two important factors: the institutional and the social complexity of the phenomenon of disaster displacement. These complexities hinder the fullest possible protection of human rights in the context of disaster displacement in Sinabung. Our study highlights the importance of understanding social and cultural dynamics that affect the fullest possible protection of human rights in multiple and protracted cases of disaster displacement. We proceed in four sections. The frst section develops an approach to understanding the interconnection between human rights, disaster displacement, and persons with disabilities in Indonesia that combines legal and policy analysis with the socially grounded analysis of displacement in Sinabung. Next, we map the national and legal frameworks that deal with disaster displacement and the rights of persons with disabilities in Indonesia. We then examine disaster evacuation and relocation in Mt. Sinabung, in which social and political complexities at the local level hinder the fullest possible enjoyment of rights by persons with disabilities in Mt. Sinabung. The fnal section refects upon the implications of the story of Sinabung for the protection of persons with disabilities in the context of disaster displacement.

Indonesia

157

Framing the study: A socially grounded human rights-based approach The argument that we develop in this chapter revolves around a socially grounded human rights-based approach to disaster displacement. In this context, states are considered to be responsible for protecting persons from harm associated with displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. In order to address the rights of persons with disabilities, policymakers are obliged to collect relevant information to assist in developing evacuation plans and managing evacuation centres. Policymakers need to consider the degree of vulnerability, specifc needs, and the perspectives of persons with disabilities at the individual level (see Scott 2019; Umar and Scott 2020). A socially grounded human rights-based approach In this chapter, we argue that while this human rights-based approach is important in addressing disaster-related displacement, it needs to be grounded in specifc social contexts and to take into account the multiple levels of governance that address disaster displacement. We will devise this socially grounded approach by taking into account (1) multi-level governance and (2) the everyday logic of ableism in local society that complicates the implementation of a human rights-based approach to the protection of the rights of persons with disabilities during disaster displacement. First, while the national legal and policy framework plays a critical role in addressing human rights issues relating to disaster displacement, local-level implementation remains subject to local politics and governance dynamics (Verchick 2012; Collins and Kapucu 2008; Allen 2007). Disaster risk reduction in Indonesia is heavily decentralised. Local governments play key roles in developing policies regarding emergency preparedness and response, the quality of which depends on the capability and capacity of each local government (Irmansyah et al. 2009; Das and Luthf 2017). Furthermore, recent literature also shows that post-disaster policies are often followed by emerging business interests and the rehabilitation of the local economy, which sets aside the question of ‘protection’ (Leitmann 2007; Pandya 2006). These factors can serve to marginalise the human rights considerations that are often refected in national law and policy documents. We, therefore, argue that understanding human rights in practice necessitates an understanding of how governance works at different levels, particularly national and sub-national levels of governance. Verchick (2012) highlights the need for a local governance approach, in addition to the legal approach, to deliver rights and justice for people adversely affected by disaster. He argues further that a locally grounded approach to disaster governance is necessary to ensure the distribution of justice to all affected societies. This is particularly the case with the question of maintaining resilience during disaster, as well as to ensure social equity in the aftermath of disaster:

158

Rizky Marthadullah Umar, Amalia, and Putra The best protection against internal disparities is a strong local government that can alert its national government to such imbalances and lobby for the resources to correct them. To abate disparities within developing countries (and, perhaps, even in developed countries), one must focus on the local level. (Verchick 2012, p. 481)

To this end, understanding how legal and policy frameworks work in three levels of government (national, provincial, and district-level government) will shed light on the multi-level governance dynamics in one specifc context relating to disaster displacement and the rights of persons with disabilities in Mt. Sinabung. Second, understanding how actors think about what they do is often as important as studying their conduct. Although, for reasons of space, we do not explore this issue in-depth, we note here the relevance of the concept of ‘ableism’ to understand social and cultural dynamics at play in the context of disaster displacement. We defne ‘ableism’ as a belief that judges or perceives people in terms of their ability to perform a physical role in society, which operates through cultural prejudice, negligence of any specifc rights or needs, or negative perception of persons with disabilities (Campbell 2009; Goodley 2014). Studies have suggested that, although disaster and disability are inextricably intertwined (Abbott and Porter 2013), government regulations and the practice of disaster management, including the evacuation process, do not necessarily accommodate the concerns of persons with disabilities (Priestley and Hemingway 2007). From this perspective, we consider the position of persons with disabilities not simply by addressing government policies and implementation during the occurrence of disaster but also by exploring the practices of inclusion and exclusion of persons with disabilities by society as embedded in cultural and social practices.

The legal and policy frameworks: Governing disaster displacement in Indonesia This section analyses the legal and policy frameworks relating to disaster displacement at the national level and considers the extent to which these documents address the rights of persons with disabilities.2 We argue that the rights of persons with disabilities are addressed by several relevant legal and policy documents but note that Indonesia’s decentralised legal system and policymaking process makes the implementation of the law and policies dependent upon local dynamics. In addition, evacuation and relocation are also conducted by multiple institutions, which operate under different legal and policy frameworks, affecting how displacement is prepared for and managed in Sinabung.3 Disaster Management Law (UU 24/2007) and related policies Indonesia has established a specifc legal and policy framework under the Disaster Management Law (Law 24/2007). The law mandates the establishment of a National Disaster Management Agency (BNPB) and Local Disaster Management

Indonesia

159

Agencies (BPBD) in both provincial and district levels as well as providing guidance on evacuation, reconstruction, and rehabilitation. The law considers persons with disabilities as a ‘vulnerable group’ (kelompok rentan), which also includes other groups such as the elderly, pregnant and lactating mothers, and children (Art. 26, Explanation). The law also considers this group to be protected through being prioritised in rescue, evacuations, safety, healthcare services, and psychosocial protection (Art. 55 (1)). The Disaster Management Law defnes vulnerable groups, as follows: Vulnerable groups are members of society who required assistance because of their existing conditions, including elderly people, people with disabilities, children, as well as pregnant and lactating mothers. Even though the law was promulgated in 2007, it took another seven years for the national-level BNPB to develop more specifc guidelines for persons with disabilities. The head of BNPB issued Regulation No. 14/2014 on Handling, Protection, and Participation of Persons with Disabilities during Disaster Management. Regulation 14/2014 brought fresh insights to facilitate the protection, access, and participation of persons with disabilities in situations of disaster. Regulations 12–19 provide for the protection of persons with disabilities during emergency response, which includes fulflment of basic food and non-food needs, clothing, shelter and resettlement, water, sanitation, health, and special needs in the minimum standards (Art. 12). It then specifes the rights to obtain shelter (Art. 13), food and hygiene support (Art. 14), and education (Art. 15). Furthermore, the Regulation stipulates that the policies, programmes, and activities in all aspects of disaster management should provide adequate access for persons with disabilities, both physical and non-physical (Art. 8). Physical access is given in the form of facilities, infrastructure, and equipment in accordance with the standards from relevant government ministries/institutions. Non-physical access is given in the form of access to information (Art. 8). The regulation also stipulates the need to increase the knowledge about the disaster for persons with disabilities, as well as the responsible family and community members, through capacity building, which includes training, socialisation, and mock disaster scenarios (Art. 10).4 The Regulation has also provided for the fulflment of the rights and needs of persons with disabilities be carried out in three stages, namely pre-disaster, emergency response, and post-disaster recovery.5 In pre-disaster conditions, the early warning system needs to reach persons with disabilities in a timely and accurate manner by using media that are appropriate to the type and the degree of disability. During emergency response, the adequate access to physical and non-physical support for persons with disabilities needs to be considered by adjusting to their needs. Finally, in post-disaster situations, the focus is given to resettlement, asset recovery, and access to work. Overall, the Disaster Management Law and Regulation 14/2014 establish a general obligation for the government to provide for the rights of persons with disabilities. However, the law only assumes normative obligations in a general

160

Rizky Marthadullah Umar, Amalia, and Putra

sense without specifc measures for implementation, and the specifc measures are being designed by various institutions. In addition, the law also rendered ‘persons with disabilities’ passive by assuming their social vulnerability without specifying the role that they could play in the policymaking process (Pertiwi et al. 2020). There are also no specifc guidelines for protection and access during the evacuation process, which is critical for the protection of persons with disabilities in situations of disaster. In 2018, the BNPB issued Regulation No. 3/2018 on the Handling of Displaced Person in Disaster Emergency. The Regulation outlines four basic principles to handle displaced persons during disaster emergency, namely, gender equality, sustainability, local wisdom, and participation in disaster management (Art. 2). It also highlights the distribution of authority between BNPB and BPBD at the provincial and district levels (Arts. 5–8), primarily related to data and information management; protection and empowerment of displaced persons; temporary and permanent settlement of displaced persons; and compensation and rehabilitation (Art. 8). However, even though the regulation mentions ‘persons with disabilities,’ it does not specifcally address the protection of persons with disabilities, and instead categorises them as ‘vulnerable groups’ (Art. 1). Overall, this regulation outlines a detailed guideline for local governments regarding the management of displaced persons during disaster emergency, but not necessarily the protection of vulnerable groups during displacement. It is not modelled on the 1998 Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (UN Commission on Human Rights 1998). The specifc protection of persons with disabilities is also absent in the National Framework for Disaster Response (Kerangka Nasional Penanggulangan Kedaruratan Bencana) 2018, which concerns emergency funds and coordination mechanism during emergency response.6 The Disaster Management Law is also accompanied by the National Plan for Disaster Management (Renas PB), a medium-term technical and operational guideline for BNPB. The document is also referred to by other institutions for coordinating with BNPB in disaster-related issues. The frst National Plan was signed for 2010–2014 (also followed by a National ‘Action’ Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction 2010–2012), followed by another National Plan for 2015–2019. Both Renas PB and the Disaster Management Law put emphasis on ‘resilience’ in addressing the disaster. The frst Renas PB (2010–2014) only mentions persons with disabilities once, by establishing that the government should provide a special programme that addresses the needs of persons with disabilities in situations of disasters. The second Renas PB makes no mention of such rights and categorises it broadly in terms of ‘vulnerable groups,’ thus omitting a specifc guideline on the protection and access for persons with disabilities during disasters. Disability Law (UU 8/2016) and related policies The treatment of disability within the disaster management system is complemented by the Disability Law (UU 8/2016). Even though the law was only promulgated in 2016, the frst step was taken through the ratifcation of the Convention

Indonesia

161

on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) in 2011. It took fve years for the government to transform the Convention into a new law, although several provinces preceded the government by establishing a specifc local law (for example, Yogyakarta) (Irwanto and Tohari 2016; Nursyamsi et al. 2015). Aligned with the CRPD, the Disability Law establishes a framework for addressing the rights of persons with disabilities, including in situations of disasters (for example, Arts. 20 and 109 of Law 8/2016) refecting the duty under Art. 11 of the CRPD to take ‘all necessary measures to ensure the protection and safety of persons with disabilities in situations of risk, including situations of armed confict, humanitarian emergencies and the occurrence of natural disasters.’ According to Art. 20 of the Disability Law, there are fve basic rights of persons with disabilities during the occurrence of a disaster: • • • • •

Rights to obtain accessible information relating to disaster Rights to obtain suffcient knowledge relating to disaster risk reduction Rights to obtain priority during the process of rescue and evacuation during the occurrence of disaster Rights to obtain accessible rescue and evacuation facilities and infrastructure Rights to obtain accessible priority, facilities, and infrastructure in the refugee shelter

The law therefore extends the rights of persons with disabilities from the previous Disaster Management Law. It highlights ‘access’ as a basic right that should be fulflled by duty-bearers. Regarding ‘protection,’ Art. 109 of the law stipulates that: (1) National and local governments are obliged to take necessary steps to guarantee the handling of persons with disabilities during pre-disaster, emergency responses, and post-disaster; (2) Management of persons with disabilities as stated in verse (1) should take into account proper and accessible accommodation to persons with disabilities; (3) Persons with disabilities could participate in the disaster management. While the Disaster Management Law mandated the protection of persons with disabilities and other potentially marginalised groups, the Disability Law adds the right of access to information, knowledge, facilities, and infrastructure alongside protection and priority during disaster. It also endorses the participation of persons with disabilities during the disaster.7 Signifcantly, the Disability Law also provides for their prioritisation during evacuation. The military operations other than war in disaster management In practice, the evacuation and relocation processes also involve the military, which has been deployed to assist the disaster evacuation under the ‘Military

162

Rizky Marthadullah Umar, Amalia, and Putra

operations other than War.’ The Head of National BNPB Regulation No. 11/2008 on the Rehabilitation and Reconstruction confrms that both processes need the involvement of various stakeholders, including the military. The Armed Forces Law (UU 34/2004) has stipulated that the military has two forms of operations: War Military Operations (Operasi Militer Perang) and Military Operations other than War (Operasi Militer Selain Perang) (see Haripin 2019). This form of operation has also been incorporated in the Indonesian military doctrine, Tri Dharma Eka Karma (Tridek), which sets out the role of the military in addressing three forms of ‘disaster,’ including natural disaster, non-natural disaster (modernisation failure, technological failure, or epidemic), and social disaster or confict. These forms of disasters are categorised into the non-military threats and are executed under the doctrine of military operations other than war. Prior to that, the national government has also enacted the Law of the Republic of Indonesia No. 3 of 2002 on National Defence, which includes the military role in disaster prevention as part of their military operation other than war.8 According to Art. 7 of the Law 34/2004, the military operations other than war also includes, amongst others, helping in disaster mitigation, displacement, and humanitarian aid distribution, and conducting search and rescue during accidents. The Ministry of Defence has also released another guideline of military involvement during disaster through the different regulations it issued. According to The Minister of Defence Regulation 9/2011, the National Military is involved during the disaster emergency response to assist in search and rescue, evacuation, selecting relevant inventories of humanitarian aid, distribution of aid, and security assistance, as well as matters related to the management of displaced persons (referred to here as ‘refugees’) (Art 12). The Minister of Defence Regulation 6/2015 has also stipulated that the military shall cooperate with other disaster management agencies, particularly BPBD. However, even though the Resort Military Unit should coordinate with BPBD, and the National Armed Forces is also obliged to coordinate with BNPB during the disaster, they do not specifcally address the protection of the rights of persons with disabilities during evacuation. While the legal and policy context has clearly integrated international standards relating to the protection of the rights of persons with disabilities in Indonesia, as demonstrated below, the implementation process has not suffciently addressed their specifc rights and needs. Decentralised setting of local disaster displacement system There is a decentralised legal and policy structure in Indonesia. Since the New Order era,9 Indonesia has adopted decentralisation to distribute power and authority to governments at sub-national levels: provincial, district and city, and village. Disaster Management is amongst the sectors that are decentralised to the district and city levels, in which the local BPBD plays a prominent role in the disaster management process. The decentralised policymaking process and the involvement of multiple institutions in the practice of disaster management

Indonesia

163

could potentially bring variations in the implementation of the disaster management system at local levels. The Disaster Management Law (UU 24/2007) categorises disaster into national disaster and local disaster, where the latter involves the BPBD as the main actor (Art. 7). The Mt. Sinabung eruption is categorised as a local disaster by BNPB, and thus BPBD and related institutions become the key actors. This legal and policy complexity is matched by institutional and social complexity at the local level, as refected in the Mt. Sinabung case study.

Local complexity and the rights of persons with disabilities during evacuation: The case of Mt. Sinabung We have shown that Indonesia has attempted to incorporate the rights of persons with disabilities into the disaster management system, having regard to the CRPD. However, this framework has not been fully integrated into local practice around Mt. Sinabung. The following section will describe the dynamics of disaster displacement between 2010 until 2018 in Mt. Sinabung, illustrating the complexities of the local management of disaster displacement. We use the ongoing eruption of Mt. Sinabung because it provides a good example of recurrent displacement where multiple actors at different levels of government are charged with applying different legal and policy instruments that relate to displacement in the context of disasters. Since 2010, the volcano has erupted on multiple occasions, resulting in the recurrent displacement of inhabitants living in its shadow. In addition to analysing the relevant legal and policy documents at the national, provincial, and district levels, we conducted 13 in-depth interviews with policymakers, persons with disabilities, civil society organisations, and academics. The interviews were conducted between 8 and 11 October 2018 in Karo, Medan, and Yogyakarta (prior to the feldwork in Karo and Medan). We used a combination of semi-structured questions and ‘storytelling’ to collect local perspectives on disaster displacement in Sinabung. To support the fndings, we also collected relevant news from various media, both national and local media, in North Sumatra. Regarding persons with disabilities, we interviewed two families in which one member had a disability. In both cases, the family member had a serious cognitive disability, and in one case, there was also a young child. Consequently, we interviewed other family members about the challenges they face relating to disaster displacement when a member has a disability. The ongoing eruption of Mt. Sinabung Mt. Sinabung is one of the active volcanoes in Indonesia and part of the active ‘Ring of Fire’ in the archipelago. It is located in Tanah Karo, one of the Districts in North Sumatra Province. Before 2010, Mt. Sinabung had been categorised as a B-type active volcano amongst 28 other volcanoes in Indonesia due to over 400 years of dormancy.

164

Rizky Marthadullah Umar, Amalia, and Putra

When the frst eruption occurred in 2010, one citizen was reportedly killed, while an estimated 12,000 people were displaced and were sheltered in eight locations (BBC Indonesia 2014). Between 2013 and 2014, successive waves of eruptions occurred, triggering further displacement. The 2013 eruption killed 14 people, and three others were injured due to pyroclastic fows while visiting the exclusion zone established by the authorities.10 The eruption led to the displacement of 18,166 people, who were returned home after the disaster. The eruption recurred in 2016 and 2017, resulting in the displacement of at least 7,266 people. When we conducted our feldwork, the latest eruption had occurred on 6 April 2018, during which an earthquake and pyroclastic fows were detected in the disaster-prone areas. The ‘disaster status’ has remained at its highest alert level (awas) since 2013.11 Without permanent resettlement including the lack of suffcient legal framework, there will be no sustainable solution to displacement. The practice of ‘returning after evacuation,’ in which the displaced people return to their abandoned villages because of livelihood issues, has continued since 2013. This practice was evident in Mt. Sinabung, in which displaced household members return to their village in the morning and come back to the temporary settlement before sunset due to economic and social reasons, including checking on their original house and pasturing their livestock (Interview 12, lecturer at a public university in Yogyakarta and expert on disaster management, 22 September 2018). With nearly a decade of recurrent displacement, and a protracted process of planned relocation, much more could be written about the dynamics of disaster displacement at the foot of Mt. Sinabung. However, for reasons of space, we restricted our analysis in this chapter to the process of evacuation, and the particular situation of persons with disabilities. Drawing upon interviews and document analysis, we identify two challenges relating to the governance of displacement in Mt. Sinabung since 2010, which directly affect the fulflment of the rights of persons with disabilities. The frst challenge relates to the fact that responsible institutions at local levels do not consistently implement national laws and policies. The second challenge relates to the persistence of a ‘logic of ableism,’ which makes the particular situation of persons with disabilities invisible to authorities responsible for disaster management. Institutional challenges and implementation gaps at local levels The Mt. Sinabung case shows a clear sign of institutional complexities in the management of displacement during disaster. In Karo, there are several important institutions involved in the provision of the rights of the displaced people, most notably BPBD Karo, the Department of Social Affairs at the Karo District Government, and the district military unit (Kodim 0205/TK).12 These institutions, with the exception of the military, are part of the local governance structure of Karo District. BPBD, however, is a new institution in Karo District Government.

Indonesia

165

Between 2010 and 2014, the disaster response in Sinabung was administered by the provincial-level BPBD in North Sumatra, due to the absence of BPBD in Karo. The provincial-level BPBD worked closely with the National Unity and Community Protection Agency (Kesbanglinmas) in Karo District, which authorises the disaster emergency response, according to the District Law.13 After the frst eruption in 2010, the Karo District Government responded by establishing an emergency response task force, coordinated directly by the district head (Lestari et al., 2013).14 A new Head of District's Decision was enacted to establish an emergency response team in 2013 following the increasing activity of Mt. Sinabung,15 with the command function of emergency response and operation directed by the Military Commander of Kodim 0205/TK and each institution having its own tasks and responsibilities.16 Under this Decision, the Emergency Response and Operation Division was responsible for coordinating the evacuation of victims, with technical coordination in the feld led by the military (Korem). The Department of Social Affairs (Dinas Sosial) was responsible for logistics. However, in early 2014, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono decided that the Mt. Sinabung disaster response would be under the direct coordination of national-level BNPB. As mentioned by one informant: even though it is local, not a national level [of disaster], the BPBD North Sumatra and BNPB also provided assistance on the disaster management… so far the BNPB bypass the coordination directly to Karo… The BPBD North Sumatra was not optimal [in their role] due to structural, human resources, and other management issues. (Interview 1, senior offcer of BPBD North Sumatra, 8 October 2018) BPBD Karo was established in 2014. BPBD took over the role that was previously held by several institutions within the local and national governments (Ginting 2018). However, as one of our informants revealed, for a year and a half, BPBD Karo was not yet fully active in carrying out their tasks and functions of disaster management due to institutional problems (Interview 1, senior offcer of BPBD North Sumatra, 8 October 2018), specifcally the lack of capacity, experience, and the skills of human resources in BPBD Karo. Only in 2015, through the Karo Regent Decision No. 361/166/BPBD/2015, was BPBD Karo offcially included within the disaster emergency response task force of the Mt. Sinabung eruption. It is clear that the evacuation process was managed by the military Kodim 0205/ TK, and BPBD Karo only carried out the coordination and executive functions following its establishment in 2014. For example, as one informant mentioned, ‘BPBD announced the emergency response situation (which alerts immediate evacuation for those living in disaster-prone area) and the military will lead the evacuation process as the contingency response task force’ (Interview 2, senior staff at Kodim 0205/TK, 8 October 2018). Therefore, while BPBD is fully responsible for the whole disaster displacement process, in the evacuation process, they

166

Rizky Marthadullah Umar, Amalia, and Putra

need to coordinate with the military, who are also tasked with leading the evacuation under their military operations other than war function. In addition to the institutional complexity described above, at the time of feld research, Karo District had not yet implemented the head of BNPB Regulation No. 14/2014 on the rights of persons with disabilities in disaster. Neither provincial-level BPBD North Sumatra nor district-level BPBD Karo was aware of the regulation, even though it had already been in force for four years (Interview 1, senior offcer of BPBD North Sumatra, 8 October 2018; Interview 8, staff at BPBD Karo, 10 October 2018). Thus, the national disaster management law was not fully implemented in Karo District to deal with the Mt. Sinabung eruption. One particular issue relating to the adherence to Disaster Management Law can be seen in the absence of local disaster management plans or contingency plans.17 Despite the law requiring national and local governments to have a disaster management plan and/or contingency plan (Art. 35), Karo District did not, at the time of the feld research, have any disaster management plan or contingency plan that could prepare the government and community for any disaster (Lestari et al. 2018). From the accessible local government documents, it only incorporates the establishment of the emergency team and their responsibilities.18 In addition, the existing Mt. Sinabung action plan developed by the national BNPB was implemented to oversee the planned relocation for the displaced communities in Karo District, namely the Action Plan of Rehabilitation and Reconstruction for Post-Disaster Sinabung Volcano Eruption in Karo Regency, North Sumatra Province (Lestari et al. 2018; Interview 8, staff at BPBD Karo, 10 October 2018). With the institutional complexity and implementation gaps described above, the ambition refected in national legal and policy documents to prioritise the rights of persons with disabilities is impeded. As mentioned above, additional factors, including social and cultural perspectives on disability and the interrelated logic of ableism, also reduce the impact of this legal and policy framework. Independent evacuation and the persistence of ableism: Implications for the protection of the rights of persons with disabilities The institutional complexities in Sinabung have a profound impact on the protection of the rights of persons with disabilities. Although, in line with the Disability Law (UU 8/2016), authorities at local levels certainly attempt to prioritise the needs of persons with disabilities, social dynamics, combined with an institutional logic of ableism, prevent the full implementation of the legal and policy framework. According to our informants, children, pregnant women, and elderly people are prioritised in evacuations. As one informant recalled: [F]or sure children, pregnant women, and elderly are prioritized. Our expectation is that the [evacuation] management are conducted simultaneously, but it is not possible [due to] limited available vehicles etc … [The point is] they will be prioritized in evacuation process … It is automatically implemented,

Indonesia

167

I think, whoever the leader. Maybe there is a regulation on it, but our way of thinking is similar through using priority scale. (Interview 2, senior staff at Kodim 0205/TK, 9 October 2018) Although there is an ambition, there are no clear guidelines at the local level about how to protect the rights of persons with disabilities in the evacuation process and no oversight from the central government. The Head of BNPB Regulation No. 14/2014 implies that local-level BPBDs need to establish a disability service unit, yet no disability service had been established at either the provincial-level BPBD North Sumatra or the district-level BPBD Karo at the time of feld research. In addition, the Department of Social Affairs of Karo District only manages to provide social assistance and equipment for persons with disabilities. In the context of rehabilitation and habilitation,19 they are regarded as the responsibility of the social service and BPBD during disasters (see Head of BNPB Regulation No. 14/2014). The role is more prominently played by nonstate actors. Our fndings show that even though the government has attempted to lead the evacuation process, particularly during the ‘big’ eruptions in 2013–2014, there are patterns of ‘independent evacuation’ by, for example, evacuating to nearby cities due to family connections (Interview 9, staff at Siosar (Permanent Resettlement Area), 9 October 2018). The fact that individuals elect to move by themselves without waiting for assistance is in itself entirely unproblematic. Indeed, with adequate early warning, preparedness, and coordination, independent evacuation can help authorities to focus on the particular needs of potentially vulnerable groups, including persons with disabilities. However, what informants described about their experiences with evacuation in Mt. Sinabung was a situation where authorities did not have a system in place to prioritise the particular needs of persons with disabilities, which resulted in distress and diffculties for some individuals and their families. Indeed, the issue goes beyond a lack of preparedness. It reveals the persistence of ableism within disaster management at the local levels. It is not the case that authorities knew what they should do but failed to prepare or did not have adequate resources. Rather, the particular situation of persons with disabilities was not even on the radar. For example, the result of the Post Disaster Needs Assessment (PDNA) within the Action Plan of 2015–2017 did not mention any specifc needs assessment relating to persons with disabilities, despite the existence of families with disabled members amongst the displaced persons. As our informant shows, there has been a lack of attention given to families with disabled members. One parent of a child with a disability who was displaced in 2013, recalled: The volcano explosion happened around midnight. I had to carry my children. Her sister was 7 years old at that time. I carried her sister, and she (refer to his daughter, who has a disability) was carried by her mother. People were already on the run, and we were looking for a ride. Me and their mother were separated

168

Rizky Marthadullah Umar, Amalia, and Putra during the chaos and we only met again after we arrived in Kabanjahe. (Interview 6, parent of a person with a disability, 10 October 2018)

Another parent of a youth with a disability recalled how the chaos during the eruption resulted in short separation from their families (Interview 7, parent of a person with a disability, 10 October 2018). They were reunited in a Jambur20 in Kabanjahe designated for temporary settlement for displaced people. In addition, the unpreparedness and the huge number of displaced persons led to scattered locations of temporary settlement camps. Two main consequences were noted. First, there are diffculties collecting data of the displaced population, as villagers were split up in several camps. Second, the distribution of relief from state and non-state actors was uneven and led to social friction amongst the displaced persons (Interviews 3, 5, and 12, October 2018, see Appendix 1). Moreover, and contrary to the requirements of Regulation 14/2014, there was no special assistance for persons with disabilities in the temporary shelter: If there are any persons with disabilities, and we were not able to provide service they needed, we will try to place them in the available home/institution for persons with disabilities. We placed them to the Alpha Omega… also to a psychiatric hospital. After the number of displaced people decrease, we returned the person with disabilities to their own family… we realized that we have limitations in our capacity and ability to provide service for them. But we tried to provide family with a member with disability a special tent, separated from others. (Interview 4, staff at the Department of Social Affairs, 9 October 2018) This picture refects powerfully the logic of ableism and how the authorities respond to people who have physical and/or cognitive disabilities (Rohwerder 2013). In practice, they fall outside the disaster management system. They are not incorporated in local-level preparedness plans that employ principles of universal design and reasonable accommodation, as outlined in the Disability Law (Art. 109) and Disaster Management Law (Arts. 55 and 56).21 This lack of support continues beyond the initial emergency phase: There was not any special care or treatment available for my daughter. I had to carry her even when I went to the feld for around a year. It is a hard time for me even until now. My only source of comfort is the Bible and writing in my diary. A feeting thought to kill myself and my two children came to me sometimes. Fortunately, there is a church and pastor that helped me through it. (Interview 6, parent of a person with a disability, 10 October 2018) The limited role of non-state actors after disasters In a context characterised by limited government assistance, a number of nonstate actors came in to fulfl the rights of persons with disabilities in the Mt.

Indonesia

169

Sinabung area. The role of faith-based organisations (FBOs) was signifcant during the emergency response and post-disaster recovery, particularly related to the provision of economic and social rights.22 We identifed some prominent FBOs active in response to disaster displacement, including the Alpha Omega Foundation, the Caritas PSE Foundation, and the Muhammadiyah Disaster Management Centre.23 The Caritas PSE Foundation is a faith-based catholic organisation under the Archdiocese of Medan, North Sumatra.24 During the emergency response, Caritas PSE and the Catholic Church actively distributed aid and provided space in the church for temporary shelter. They also offered free medical services in collaboration with three Catholic hospitals, which cover health and sanitation issues relating to displacement.25 In post-disaster recovery, the Catholic Church provided assistance for trauma healing, including assistance to the families of persons with disabilities who stayed at the Siosar (Interview 11, senior offcer of Muhammadiyah Disaster Management Centre, 11 October 2018). The Alpha Omega Foundation is a social wing of the Karo Protestant Church (GBKP). During emergency response and post-disaster recovery, the Alpha Omega Foundation temporarily hosted several persons with disabilities in their boarding school. Several people were found by the pastor around the disaster-affected area. Alpha Omega also regularly holds a programme called a Rehabilitasi Berbasis Masyakarat (RBM), a community-based rehabilitation programme that organises life skills training to persons with disabilities in Karo. This programme is a strategy to accelerate the fulflment of the rights of persons with disabilities, rehabilitation efforts, and giving them equal opportunity, which is designed to minimise charity and avoid dependence of persons with disabilities and their family members, and therefore, increasing their resilience during disasters. RBM trains persons with disabilities to use local resources optimally to survive during disasters (Interview 10, priest and staff at Caritas PSE Foundation, 11 October 2018). Lastly, the Muhammadiyah Disaster Management Center (MDMC) was formed by the Muhammadiyah District Branch (Pimpinan Daerah Muhammadiyah Karo) to respond to the condition of the area affected by the 2013 eruption. MDMC sent their volunteers to participate with the joint team in evacuation and post-disaster activities including psychosocial assistance to children and the elderly in the temporary shelter (Interview 12, 10 October 2018). It is important to note that, as non-state actors, the work of faith-based organisations is not to fulfl international human rights obligations, which only apply to them in very limited circumstances (Clapham 2006). Rather, their work provides an essential complement to the state, which has a duty to ensure the fulflment of at least the minimum core of economic, social, and cultural rights (UN CESCR 1999). Critically, although providing necessary support to contribute to the fulflment of economic, social, and cultural rights, non-state actors remain under the jurisdiction of the state, which, in furtherance of its protection obligations, must oversee their activities to ensure the principles of non-discrimination and the protection of vulnerable groups are adhered to.

170

Rizky Marthadullah Umar, Amalia, and Putra

Although states enjoy a wide margin of appreciation in terms of how they ensure the fulflment of rights, they remain responsible for the results. Thus, in light of the examples of family separation, potentially discriminatory and degrading provision of shelter (for example, in psychiatric institutions), the need for more coordinated preparation for and response to disaster displacement, that accommodates in practice the particular situation of persons with disabilities, is clear. The relative neglect of disability rights is not only caused by the government’s lack of experience, or the non-implementation of regulations related to the rights of persons with disabilities, but also the failure to address the social and cultural dimensions of vulnerability, especially in relation to disability rights. While the government has proposed some regulations to protect the rights of persons with disabilities during and in the aftermath of disasters, both evacuation and postdisaster resettlement also involves the family and local community who take care of persons with disabilities. There is clearly a space for more active participation in preparing for disasters.

Refections from Mt. Sinabung: Protecting the rights of persons with disabilities during and after evacuation in the context of recurrent displacement To what extent does evacuation in the context of the recurrent Mt. Sinabung eruptions in Karo District refect legal and policy obligations to address the particular situation of the rights of persons with disabilities? In this chapter, we have identifed two important issues. The frst issue relates to the institutional problem in which the decentralised policy process hinders the full transfer of obligations from the national government. Key issues from this perspective are the institutional arrangements and the ways in which the central and local coordination are improved to incorporate disability rights further at the local level (Das and Luthf 2017). Our research shows that there are some institutional challenges relating to disaster management in Karo that hinder the protection of the rights of persons with disabilities. It is due to the local dynamics and the delays in the implementation of national frameworks at the local level that show the complex relations between national government and local government, which is partially related to the fact that the District Disaster Management Agency (BPBD Kabupaten) has only been recently established. Our research, however, also acknowledges the second important issue, which relates to the underlying logic and social context that shapes the policies and practices of disaster management. Here, we argue that the responsible actors in Mt. Sinabung are affected by a logic of ableism that makes persons with disabilities somewhat invisible to those charged with planning for and responding to disaster. While we acknowledge the increasing adherence of policymakers to the rights of persons with disabilities, the unintended exclusion of persons with disabilities at local levels provides a clear example of the obstacles to implementing national laws and policies at these levels.

Indonesia

171

These observations have implications for persons with disabilities in Mt. Sinabung. While persons with disabilities are traditionally protected by the family and the local community, the current responses to recurring eruptions show that family and communal protections can be insuffcient, particularly in emergencies. Therefore, the government’s protection is necessary to complement them in order to ensure the fullest possible protection of persons with disabilities during evacuation. While the government has attempted to establish regulations for this purpose, the implementation is still ineffective due to institutional complexity, which has hampered the best possible fulflment of the rights of persons with disabilities at local levels. Addressing this complexity requires the strengthening not only of state capacity in human rights protection but also the knowledge and practical understanding of all actors, including family and community members, related to the rights of persons with disabilities. These fndings necessitate further rethinking of the provision and protection of human rights of persons with disabilities from a multi-level perspective. We suggest that attempts to protect the rights of persons with disabilities also need to consider local practices and dynamics, as well as taking into account the social and cultural characteristics of people displaced. Taking a mere legal and national perspective fails to capture these dynamics. While the provision and protection of rights have progressed well in national legislation, the specifc frameworks are yet to be adequately implemented by local governments. The lack of clear guidance on evacuation, particularly at local levels, led to the absence of a specifc human rights-based framework of evacuation, which is central in international standards. Therefore, with multiple legal frameworks in national and sub-national levels, it is important for the Indonesian government to synchronise these regulatory frameworks at all levels of governance. In addition, empowering and ensuring that the responsible family and local community members are equipped with good knowledge and practical understanding about the rights of persons with disabilities are also equally important, as well as deeper coordination with nonstate organisations whose concerns touch on the rights of persons with disabilities Finally, the fact that people living in the shadow of Mt. Sinabung have been displaced multiple times since 2010 points to the critical importance of fnding a durable solution. For the reason of space limitation, we do not outline this further in this chapter. However, our research found that attempts to secure durable solutions, including through planned relocation, were characterised by serious delays and inconsistencies, pointing to the importance of following established international standards and guidelines. Notes 1 We thank Matthew Scott, Albert Salamanca, Dr Pradytia Pertiwi, and the collaborators of the Disaster Displacement in Asia and Pacifc research project for constructive comments and feedback. Rafyoga Johan Pratama, Dwi Fadilah Aryani, Dhea Puspa Wardini, and Chitito Audhitio provided research assistance, and we thank the ASEAN Studies Centre, Universitas Gadjah Mada for administrative and institutional support. A research grant from the Raoul Wallenberg Institute, Lund University

172

2 3 4 5 6

7

8

9 10

11 12

13 14 15 16

Rizky Marthadullah Umar, Amalia, and Putra is gratefully acknowledged. Preliminary versions of this chapter have been presented at various workshops in Jakarta, Manila, Bangkok, Yogyakarta, and Dhaka. The original legal framework is written in Bahasa Indonesia. The quotation that we provide here is our translation of the legal documents. A more comprehensive treatment of the legal and policy framework in Indonesia is developed further by Umar and Scott (2020). For a more detailed explanation over the regulation on the protection and fulflment of the rights of persons with disabilities, see Umar and Scott (2020). These three stages are also stipulated in Law 24/2007 as the ‘cycles’ of disaster management, which serve as the operational guidelines for policymakers and practitioners in dealing with disaster. See Sumbung (2018). The National Emergency Fund and coordination mechanism is outlined in BNPB Regulation 2/2018. We thank Pradytia Pertiwi for highlighting this framework. The full document of the National Disaster Response Framework is not available online, but BNPB regulates the national emergency fund through Peraturan BNPB 02/2018. The Law does not establish the obligation for the participation of persons with disabilities in the disaster management, but rather endorses the participation. In addition to this, the Disaster Management Law only provides generally for the protection of persons with disabilities, alongside other marginal groups (women, children, and elderly people) while the Disability Law reiterates the protection specifcally for the persons with disabilities. Tri Dharma Eka Karma (‘Tridek’), the offcial doctrine of Indonesian National Armed Forces (Tentara Nasional Indonesia) is stipulated under TNI internal regulation Kep/555/VI/2018, which was a continuation of the previous doctrine, Catur Dharma Eka Karma (‘Cadek’). In the literature on Indonesian politics, Soeharto’s long-standing authoritarian rule between 1966 and 1998 was known as the ‘the New Order.’ The establishment of exclusion zones raises critical human rights challenges, as the government is required to take steps to protect the population from foreseeable harm but must not disproportionately interfere with the enjoyment of freedom of movement and residence, or the right to work. When exclusion zones are introduced, people can suffer seriously adverse impacts on their ability to earn a living, as they may be unable to grow crops, care for livestock, and so forth. Deaths in the exclusion zone highlight this tension and help to illustrate the complex human rights challenges associated with disaster management generally. We thank Matthew Scott for raising this point. ‘Awas’ is translated as ‘warning/caution’ in English. Kodim is an abbreviation of Komando Distrik Militer, the district-level military unit in Indonesian military hierarchy. The district military unit is a military unit under a resort military unit (Korem) in Medan and is controlled by the Central Command in Jakarta. In North Sumatra, the Central Command delegates some of its supervisory function to Regional Military Command (Kodam) Bukit Barisan, also based in Medan. For an overview of Indonesian military structure see Rinakit (2005) and Haripin (2019). The agency is referred to as Kesatuan Bangsa dan Perlindungan Masyarakat (‘Kesbanglinmas’) in district government. See Karo District Head Decision No. 800/174/Kesbang/Tahun 2010 on the Organizational Structure of the Disaster Management Task Force of Sinabung Volcano Karo District 2010. See Decision No. 361/289/Bakesbang/2013 on the Establishment of Emergency Response Team for Sinabung Volcano Eruption Disaster Karo District 2013. During our feldwork, we note that each institution periodically rotated their personnel, which makes access to information problematic as the persons in charge have

Indonesia

17

18 19

20 21 22

23

24 25

173

left and are transferred to other military units. However, the district military unit has specifc evacuation guidelines provided by the central command in Jakarta. According to UU 24/2007, a disaster management plan refers to the policy planning process to anticipate disaster risk, which is conducted by the government by identifying the disaster risks, vulnerability, potential impacts, the disaster risk reduction action plan, mechanism of preparedness, and disaster impact management, as well as broader policy and budget planning processes (see Art. 36). These processes are conducted prior to disaster as anticipatory actions, while the contingency plan relates to the emergency response and evacuation process. See Karo District Decision No. 361/180/BPBD/2015. As per the Head of BNPB Regulation No. 14/2014, rehabilitation is the process of restoring functions and development to persons with disabilities to be able to carry out their social functions appropriately in their social life. Meanwhile, habilitation is the use services in the form of training or provision of equipment and/or equipment provided to persons with disabilities to learn, maintain, or improve certain skills or functional abilities that they do not have under normal conditions, so they are able to carry out their daily activities independently. A Jambur was a building designated for community affairs, such as meetings, weddings, parties, and cultural occasions in Karo tradition. We thank Matthew Scott for pointing out this point. During the feldwork, we found that BPBD in the Provincial Level (North Sumatra) set up a plan for a coordination mechanism with the non-governmental organisations, particularly those who were focused on the rights of persons with disability. The government also recently facilitated NGOs for training in Jakarta for capacity building. See Interview 1, senior offcer of BPBD North Sumatra, 8 October 2018. In Karo, at least 224,578 citizens are Protestants and 66,304 citizens are Catholics, making these religions, besides Islam, as the most powerful religious groups in Mt. Sinabung (Karo Statistics Agency 2015). GKBP itself is a native church organisation in Karo that is culturally assimilated with the local community. In the Catholic Church structure, the foundation is managed under the division of Justice and Peace, which also covers advocacy and disaster risk reduction. Some notable networks of hospitals include Harapan Hospital in Pematang Siantar, Elizabeth Hospital in Medan, and Sari Mutiara Hospital also in Medan.

References Abbott, D. and Porter, S. (2013) ‘Environmental hazard and disabled people: from vulnerable to expert to interconnected’, Disability & Society, 28(6), pp. 839–852. Allen, B.L. (2007) ‘Environmental justice and expert knowledge in the wake of a disaster’, Social Studies of Science, 37(1), pp. 103–110. BBC Indonesia (2014) ‘Sinabung meletus lagi, keluarkan awan panas’. Available at: https ://www.bbc.com/indonesia/berita_indonesia/2014/10/141005_gunung_sinabung_me letus_lagi (Accessed: 19 May 2020). Campbell, F. (2009) Contours of ableism: the production of disability and abledness. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Clapham, A. (2006) Human rights obligations of non-state actors. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Collins, M.L. and Kapucu, N. (2008) ‘Early warning systems and disaster preparedness and response in local government.’ Disaster Prevention and Management, 17(5), pp. 587–600.

174

Rizky Marthadullah Umar, Amalia, and Putra

Das, A. and Luthf, A. (2017) ‘Disaster risk reduction in post-decentralisation Indonesia: institutional arrangements and changes’, in Djalante, R., Garschagen, M., Thomalla, F., and Shaw, R. (eds.) Disaster risk reduction in Indonesia. Fujisawa, Japan: Springer. Ginting, T.S.B. (2018) ‘Coordination of District Disaster Management Agency (BPBD) Karo during Mt Sinabung eruption management’ (Koordinasi badan penanggulangan bencana daerah (BPBD) Kabupaten Karo dalam penanggulangan bencana erupsi Gunung Sinabung). Undergraduate Thesis. Medan: Universitas Sumatera Utara. Goodley, D. (2014) Dis/ability studies: theorising disablism and ableism. Abingdon: Routledge. Haripin, M. (2019) Civil-military relations in Indonesia: the politics of military operations. Abingdon: Routledge. Irmansyah, I., Prasetyo, Y.A., and Minas, H. (2009) ‘Human rights of persons with mental illness in Indonesia: More than legislation is needed.’ International Journal of Mental Health Systems, 3(1), p. 14. Irwanto, I. and Thohari, S. (2016) ‘Understanding CRPD Implementation in Indonesia’, in Cogburn, D.L. and Reuter, T.K. (eds.) (2017) Making disability rights real in Southeast Asia: implementing the UN convention on the rights of persons with disabilities in ASEAN. Lanham: Lexington Books. Leitmann, J. (2007) ‘Cities and calamities: learning from post-disaster response in Indonesia’, Journal of Urban Health, 84(1) Supplement, pp. 144–153. Lestari, P., Paripurno, E., and Nugroho, A. (2018) ‘Disaster risk reduction based on community through a contingency plan for Mount Sinabung’, Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Ilmu Politik, 21(3), pp. 231–245. Lestari, P., Sembiring, I.D.P.B., Prabowo, A., Wibawa, A., Hendariningrum, R. (2013) ‘Management of disaster communication during the emergency response of 2010 Mt. Sinabung eruption '(Manajemen Komunikasi Bencana Gunung Sinabung 2010 saat Tanggap Darurat)’, Jurnal Ilmu Komunikasi, 10(2), pp. 139–158. doi: 10.24002/jik. v10i2.350 Nursyamsi, F., Arifanti, E.D., Aziz, M.F., Bilqish, P., Marutama, A. (2015) Legal framework of disability in Indonesia: towards disability-friendly Indonesia. (Kerangka hukum disabilitas di Indonesia: Menuju Indonesia ramah disabilitas.) Jakarta: Pusat Studi Hukum dan Kebijakan. Pandya, C. (2006) ‘Private authority and disaster relief: the cases of post-tsunami Aceh and Nias’, Critical Asian Studies, 38(2), pp. 298–308. Pertiwi, P., Llewellyn, G., and Villeneuve, M. (2020) ‘Disability representation in Indonesian disaster risk reduction regulatory frameworks’, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 45, p. 101454. Priestley, M. and Hemingway, L. (2007) ‘Disability and disaster recovery: a tale of two cities?’, Journal of Social Work in Disability & Rehabilitation, 5(3–4), pp. 23–42. Rinakit, S. (2005) The Indonesian military after the new order. Copenhagen: NIAS Press. Rohwerder, B. (2013) ‘Intellectual disabilities, violent confict and humanitarian assistance: advocacy of the forgotten’, Disability & Society, 28(6), p. 770–783. Scott, M. (2019) Background brief: key international standards and guidelines relating to displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. Lund: Raoul Wallenberg Institute of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law. Sumbung, J. (2018) ‘National disaster response framework and on call fund’ (Rencana Penanggulangan Kedaruratan Bencana (RPKB) dan Dana Siap Pakai). Presentation at Side Event of Best Practice and Learning for National Meeting for National Safety (Rakerkesnas), Tangerang, 13 February 2018.

Indonesia

175

Umar, A.R.M. and Scott, M. (2020) Indonesia national law and policy report on displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. Lund: Raoul Wallenberg Institute of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law. UN CESCR (1999) General comment no. 12: the right to adequate food. E/C.12/1999/5. Verchick, R.R. (2012) ‘Disaster justice: the geography of human capability’, Duke Environmental Law and Policy Forum, 23, pp. 23–71.

International legal and policy documents 1998

2006 2015

Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. Addendum to Report of the Representative of the Secretary-General, Mr. Francis M. Deng, submitted pursuant to Commission resolution 1997/39. UN Commission on Human Rights. (E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2) Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (adopted 13 December 2006, entered into force 3 May 2008) 2515 UNTS 3 UN General Assembly. Resolution 69/283, Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, (A/CONF.224/CRP.1)

National legal and policy documents 2002

2004

2007 2008

2008

2010

Law of the Republic of Indonesia No 3 Year 2002 on National Defense (Undang-Undang Nomor 3 Tahun 2002 tentang Pertahanan Negara). Available at: https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Home/Details/44421/uu-no-3tahun-2002 (Accessed: 24 May 2020). Law No. 34 Year 2004 on the Indonesian National Armed Forces (UndangUndang Republik Indonesia Nomor 34 Tahun 2004 tentang Tentara Nasional Indonesia). Available at: http://www.dpr.go.id/dokblog/dokumen/F_201506 16_4760.PDF (Accessed: 24 May 2020). Law No. 11 Year 2007 on Disaster Management (Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 24 Tahun 2007 tentang Penanggulangan Bencana). Available at: https://bnpb.go.id/ppid/fle/UU_24_2007.pdf (Accessed: 24 May 2020). District Law No. 19 Year 2008 on the Organization and Working Procedure of Local Technical Institutions in Karo District (Peraturan Daerah No. 19 tahun 2008 tentang Organisasi dan Tata Kerja Lembaga Teknis Daerah Kabupaten Karo). Available at: https://www.karokab.go.id/id/attachments/ article/707/Perda19_2008.pdf (Accessed: 24 May 2020). Head of National Disaster Management Agency Regulation No. 11 Year 2008 on the Guideline for Post-Disaster Rehabilitation and Reconstruction. (Peraturan Kepala Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana Nomor 11 Tahun 2008 tentang Pedoman Rehabilitasi dan Rekonstruksi Pascabencana). Available at: https://www.gitews.org/tsunami-kit/en/E6/further_resources/national_le vel/peraturan_kepala_BNPB/Perka%20BNPB%2011-2008_Pedoman%20R ehabilitasi%20dan%20Rekonstruksi%20Pasca%20Bencana.pdf (Accessed: 24 May 2020). National Action Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction, 2010–2012. (Rencana Aksi Nasional Pengurangan Risiko Bencana 2010-2012). Available at: https://ww w.gitews.org/tsunami-kit/id/E6/sumber_lainnya/produk_hukum_nasional/ RAN-RENAS/RAN-PRB-2010-2012-BAPPENAS.pdf (Accessed: 24 May 2020).

176 2010

2011

2014

2015

2015

2015 2016

2018

2018

2018

Rizky Marthadullah Umar, Amalia, and Putra National Plan for Disaster Management, 2010–2014. (Rencana Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana 2010–2014). Available at https://bnpb.go.id/buku/ rencana-nasional-penanggulangan-bencana-2010-2014 (Accessed: 24 May 2020). Ministry of Defence Regulation No. 09 Year 2011 on the Principles of Indonesian National Armed Forces Involvement Tasks in Natural Disaster Management, Internal Displacement, and Humanitarian Aid. (Peraturan Menteri Pertahanan Republik Indonesia Nomor 09 Tahun 2011 tentang PokokPokok Penyelenggaraan Tugas Bantuan Tentara Nasional Indonesia dalam Menanggulangi Bencana Alam, Pengungsian dan Bantuan Kemanusiaan). Indonesian Ministry of Defence, Jakarta. Head of National Disaster Management Agency Regulation No. 14 Year 2014 on the Handling, Protection, and Participation of Persons with Disabilities in Disaster Management. (Peraturan Kepala BNPB Nomor 14 tahun 2014 tentang Penanganan, Perlindungan dan Partisipasi Penyandang Disabilitas dalam Penanggulangan Bencana). Available at: http://bnpb.go. id/uploads/regulation/1085/Perka%20No%2014%20Tahun%202014.pdf (Accessed 24 May 2020). Karo District Head Decision No. 361/166/BPBD/2015 on the Establishment of Emergency Response Team for Mount Sinabung Volcano Eruption Disaster in Karo District 2015 (Surat Keputusan Bupati Karo No. 362/166/ BPBD/2015 tentang Pembentukan Tim Tanggap Darurat Bencana Erupsi Gunung Sinabung di Kabupaten Karo tahun 2015). Available at: https ://www.karokab.go.id/id/g-sinabung/status-tanggap-darurat/4066-keputus an-bupati-karo-nomor-361-166-bpbd-2015 (Accessed: 24 May 2020). Ministry of Defence Regulation No. 06/2015 on the Guideline for Indonesian National Armed Forces Involvement in Disaster Management. (Peraturan Menteri Pertahanan Republik Indonesia Nomor 06 Tahun 2015 tentang Pedoman Pelibatan TNI dalam Penanggulangan Bencana.). Indonesian Ministry of Defence, Jakarta. National Plan for Disaster Management, 2015–2019. (Rencana Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana 2015-2019), Available at: https://bnpb.go.id/u ploads/24/buku-renas-pb.pdf (Accessed: 24 May 2020). Law No 8 Year 2016 on Persons with Disabilities (Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 8 Tahun 2016 tentang Penyandang Disabilitas). Text Available at: http://pug-pupr.pu.go.id/_uploads/PP/UU.%20No.%208 %20Th.%202016.pdf (Accessed: 24 May 2020). Commander of Indonesian National Armed Forces Decision No. Kep/555/ Vi/2018 on the Doctrine of Indonesian National Armed Forces Tri Dharma Eka Karma. (Keputusan Panglima Tentara Nasional Indonesia Nomor Kep/555/ Vi/2018 tentang Doktrin Tentara Nasional Indonesia Tri Dharma Eka Karma). Head of National Disaster Management Agency Regulation No. 03 Year 2018 on the Handling of Internally Displaced Persons during Emergency Response. (Peraturan Kepala Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana Nomor 03 tahun 2018 tentang Penanganan Pengungsi pada Keadaan Darurat Bencana). Available at: https://bnpb.go.id/uploads/24/peraturan-kepala/201 8/perban-3-tahun-2018-tentang-penanganan-pengungsi-pada-keadaan-d arurat-bencana-bn-827.pdf (Accessed: 24 May 2020). Disaster Management Agency Regulation No. 02 Year 2018 on the Use of Emergency Response Fund (Peraturan Kepala Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana No. 02 tahun 2018 tentang Penggunaan Dana Siap Pakai).

Indonesia

177

Appendix 1: List of interviews 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

Senior offcer of BPBD North Sumatra, 8 October 2018 Senior staff at Kodim 0205/TK, 8 October 2018 Staff at the Department of Social Affairs, 9 October 2018 Staff at the Department of Social Affairs, 9 October 2018 Senior offcial of Sukanalu Village, 10 October 2018 Parent of a person with a disability, 10 October 2018 Parent of a person with a disability, 10 October 2018 Staff at BPBD Karo, 10 October 2018 Staff at Siosar (Permanent Resettlement Area), 9 October 2018 Staff at Alpha Omega Foundation, Protestant Batak Church, 11 October 2018 11. Senior offcer of Muhammadiyah Disaster Management Centre (MDMC), Karo, 10 October 2018 12. Lecturer at a public university in Yogyakarta and expert on disaster management, 22 September 2018

Durable solutions

9

Nepal Protracted displacement from Haku Village, Rasuwa District in the aftermath of the 2015 earthquakes Bala Raju Nikku

Introduction On 25 April 2015, a devastating earthquake with a magnitude of 7.8 struck Nepal. The epicentre was in the district of Gorkha, approximately 80 kilometres Northwest of the capital Kathmandu. A second earthquake with a magnitude of 7.3 struck on 12 May 2015. These seismic events further triggered landslides and avalanches in remote, rural, and mountainous regions of the country, killing approximately 9,000 people and affecting over 5 million (EM-DAT 2020). Thirty-nine of the country’s seventy-fve districts were affected (BBC 2015). About a million houses were either partially or fully damaged. The Government of Nepal identifed 14 districts as most affected: Gorkha, Dhading, Rasuwa, Nuwakot, Kathmandu, Lalitapur, Bhaktapur, Makwanpur, Kavre, Sindhupalchok, Dolakha, Ramechhap, Sindhuli, and Okhaldhunga (NHRC 2015). About 150,000 people were reported as internally displaced right after the earthquakes, living in more than 400 campsites by June 2015 (ICRC 2015). By late June 2015, an estimated 50,000 displaced people came into Kathmandu Valley from the Northern districts and Kathmandu became a tent city. Over the next 12 months, the number of internally displaced persons (IDPs) living in temporary camps across the country decreased by 90,000. There were still at least 20,000 IDPs reported living in 65 temporary camps in the hard-hit districts by the end of 2016 (Hayes et al. 2015). In that year, Nepal had the third-highest number of disaster-displaced persons in the world (IDMC 2016). The quantifcation/ census of IDPs is a complex activity in the case of Nepal because they frequently move in and out of informal urban settlements or seek shelter with host families, where they are effectively unreachable by humanitarian agencies for census purposes (see Lu et al. 2010). The National Human Rights Commission of Nepal conducted a detailed assessment of the human rights situation facing IDPs in the aftermath of the earthquakes (NHRC 2015). The report noted that the immediate relief in several instances failed to consider the needs of potentially vulnerable groups, including children, persons with disabilities, and women. Distribution of relief was complicated due to the remoteness of many of the affected communities and resource limitations of the government. Evacuations and relocations were conducted, at

182

Bala Raju Nikku

times without adhering to procedural guidelines. The movement of orphaned children was not always well-documented. Many instances were documented where relief was not distributed or was perceived to have been distributed in an unfair manner, including on the basis of political affliation. The relief received was found in many cases to be of substandard quality, with implications for the duty of the state to fulfl the rights to food and shelter (Khazai et al. 2015). Instances of sexual and gender-based violence were also reported. However, the report provided only a snapshot of the scale of the human rights impacts of the earthquakes. It was limited to the immediate aftermath. Also, as a national-level initiative, it did not provide a depth of insight into the experience of displacement in the context of the earthquakes. As such, this chapter aims to delve deeper into the human experience of disaster displacement, focusing on the situation of people from one district in the country. Informed by the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (the Guiding Principles) (UN Commission on Human Rights 1998), this research examines how the Nepalese state addressed its obligations to protect people during displacement and facilitate durable solutions in the aftermath of the 2015 earthquake disaster. It also considers the role played by non-state actors, including social networks and civil society. Against this backdrop, the purpose of this chapter is twofold: (1) to analyse the disaster displacement dynamics in a specifc part of Nepal during and post-2015 earthquakes and (2) to understand the role of law and policy in protecting people during displacement and facilitating durable solutions. Although the Guiding Principles also highlight the responsibility of the state to take steps to prevent displacement, this element is beyond the scope of this chapter. The chapter is divided into fve sections. After the introductory section, the methods used for the study are described. The next section sketches a brief overview of the feld research site (Rasuwa district and Haku Village Development Committee (VDC)). Then, a description and analysis of the experiences of Haku people during displacement and their struggle to achieve durable solutions are provided. It explores, in a qualitative manner, the role played by the domestic legal and policy framework, including policies specifcally focusing on IDPs, as well as those addressing disaster risk reduction and community reintegration, in addressing disaster displacement. The fnal section offers conclusions and ways forward.

Method A brief review of relevant legal frameworks related to disasters and displacement in the context of Nepal was carried out prior to the formulation of research questions in 2018. A qualitative research design and tools were applied to conduct the research by seeking to explain the ‘how’ and ‘why’ of internal displacement due to the 2015 earthquake disasters. Data sets came from a variety of qualitative and quantitative sources, including images, media and government reports, and respondents’ spoken words.

Nepal

183

Most of the data were gathered in 2018 through individual and focus group discussions conducted in Haku VDC and Kathmandu using semi-structured topic guides. A human rights-based approach to disasters and displacement was applied in conducting feld research and analysis. This approach clearly recognises that disasters take place within a social context where pre-existing patterns of discrimination can engender or exacerbate vulnerability to disaster-related harm (Wisner et al. 2004). Many of the affected families moved to different places in search of livelihoods to survive. Some people who left their homes after the earthquakes have gradually returned, with the return rate varying between districts. According to a report by Flowminder, World Pop, and Ncell (2015), by 19 August 2015, an estimated 130,000 people had internally migrated into the Kathmandu Valley from neighbouring districts since the earthquake. The districts heavily affected had about 15 to 25 per cent of total inhabitants still displaced from their original homes that had not returned to them even after six months after the disaster. Districts to the north of Kathmandu Valley, including Sindhupalchok, Rasuwa, Ramechhap, Gorkha, and Dhading, showed the fastest relative rate of return after the earthquakes and only the smallest proportion of people who have not yet returned (Flowminder et al. 2015). Through initial discussions with key informants and colleagues in Nepal, we decided to focus on Kathmandu and Rasuwa districts for the in-depth feld study. Three reasons informed this selection: the level of displacement, connectivity and accessibility, and impacts of disaster. First, we looked at the level of displacement. Rasuwa district caught our attention. In many villages of this district, almost all the households had been forced to leave their place of habitation in the immediate aftermath of the April 2015 earthquakes. More than 10,000 people, or one-ffth of the total population of Rasuwa district, were displaced in the frst few days after the earthquakes. Second, amongst the other VDCs of the Rasuwa district, about 1,550 families were displaced from Haku and Dandagaon VDCs of Rasuwa alone.1 Haku reported a total of 550 displaced households. Third, after comparing other parameters like the availability of local support, transportation, accessibility, and representativeness of the sample, Haku VDC was selected for the in-depth case study, along with Kathmandu district, which had received displaced families from Haku. We conducted feld research from May to December 2018. We interviewed Haku families in Rasuwa district and selected Haku families that had moved to Kathmandu and who had not returned to Haku at the time of feld research. Altogether, ten in-depth interviews were carried out (six men and four women) in Haku. All of them belong to the Tamang ethnic group, which is described below. The age group ranged from 25 to 80 years old. One community consultation was conducted in Sano Haku, in which 22 men, women, and young people took part. In addition, six focus group discussions (FGD) with at least six members were conducted in Haku (2), Dhunche (1), and Kathmandu (3). These discussions helped us to triangulate the data. As researchers, outsiders, and nonvictims of these disasters, we had the privilege to listen to these stories with respect and humility. We paid particular attention to our role in the production

184

Bala Raju Nikku

of the narrative and the representation of lived experience as text in this chapter (see Eastmond 2007). We followed a research ethics protocol. We explained our research objectives and our institutional affliations to participants in the research. The goals of this research were explained at the beginning of any conversation so as not to create expectations of relief or other assistance. Respondents could withdraw at any point during the interview, and oral consent was sought for their participation. The names used in this chapter have been changed to protect the identity of the interviewees. The research team consisted of trained social workers including myself, and they were equipped to offer critical stress debriefng interventions, if needed. This chapter further builds on the earlier studies carried out by this author and his colleagues right after the 2015 earthquake relief activities (see Nikku 2015; Nikku 2018; Nikku et al. 2019).

Research study site: Rasuwa district Rasuwa district is located in the Bagmati zone, approximately 124 kilometres north of the capital Kathmandu. The district is one of the richest districts in terms of natural, religious, and cultural heritage,2 yet has one of the lowest levels of economic development in Nepal (Uprety et al. 2010). However, in the last decade, Rasuwa district has hosted an array of complementary infrastructure projects developed in partnership with the Chinese Government and private sector actors. Most importantly, these include several hydropower projects under the leadership and management of Chinese contractors, all of which are served by the Kyirong–Rasuwa Highway (Galen et al. 2016). The district has an area of 1,544 square kilometres and consists of 18 VDCs (now reorganised into fve rural municipalities). This district is one of the northernmost districts of the central development region, with a population of about 50,000. Buddhism is the major religion practised in this district. There are daily private transportation services (bus, van, or jeep) from Kathmandu up to Syabrubesi, which lies at the base of a green hill on the way to Langtang Valley. Syabrubesi is located about 15 km from Dhunche (the district headquarters of Rasuwa), the starting point of trekking to Langtang and Tamang heritage treks. Tamangs are the dominant indigenous population of the district, and some of them claim Tibetan origin. The solitary lifestyle, coexisting with the nature and serenity of the Himalayas, is refected in their artisanship, dress, language, traditionally built stone houses, and the artistic wooden carvings. Indigenous people in Nepal experience deeply rooted structural discrimination (Anaya 2009), as recognised by the National Human Rights Commission of Nepal: many indigenous communities are yet to enjoy full-fedged human rights and fundamental freedoms due to the ages-old discrimination, marginalization

Nepal

185

and disregard to their languages and identities by the state and ruling practices. (Ansari 2018) Subsistence agriculture and animal husbandry coupled with tourism resources and cross-border services (China and Nepal) form the main sources of livelihood of the Rasuwa people. The Rasuwa people are still heavily dependent on agriculture and livestock for their food security and livelihoods, despite the involvement of a signifcant proportion of households in non-agricultural income-generating activities, such as tourist services and labour outmigration to the Middle East and Southeast Asia. Labour migrants end up working as daily wage labourers in road constructions and hydropower projects. Those who are left behind continue to cultivate traditional food crops such as millet, buckwheat, local beans, and barley in addition to rice, potato, and vegetables (Joshi and Joshi 2016). The impacts of climate change to date are mixed. Changes in the patterns of snowfall and snowmelt, rainfall, and temperatures are having both positive and negative impacts on the livelihoods of Rasuwa people who are also exposed to recurring natural hazards. The main site selected for this research was Haku VDC in Rasuwa district. The whole settlement was affected by the 2015 disasters and is inhabited by dominant Tamangs (janajati community) located on a hillside. It took fve hours hike from Dhunche (the district headquarters of Rasuwa) to reach Haku Besi and another two hours to reach Sano Haku. Haku is located about 100 km north from Kathmandu. The 2015 earthquakes and the numerous tremors post the quakes caused secondary hazards like landslides. The Haku Besi residents shared that altogether 60 members lost their lives.3 Almost all houses (95 per cent), public buildings (fve primary schools, one lower secondary school, and one sub-health post), and religious places (Haku Gumba) were fully destroyed or damaged. The agricultural crops, animals, and farmlands that form the core sources of livelihoods of Haku families are no longer suitable for farming due to the landslides, soil erosion, and loss of irrigation sources. As a result, the majority of households of Haku Besi, Thulo Haku, Sano Haku, and Gagane villages were displaced. As such, they had no choice but to live in IDP camps set up in Dhunche (Rasuwa) and Betrawati (Nuwakot), and in Machegau in Kathmandu. These camps were organised by multiple agencies. Some of the camps were established by victims themselves with the support of locals and some philanthropic and religious organisations. Some camps were erected by the local government with support from NGOs and INGOs including the International Organization for Migration (IOM). The duration of camps varied from one week to more than a year. The facilities in the camps also varied from very basic to somewhat serviced under the supervision of camp supervision groups. The Nepal NHRC report recounts how women were exposed to the risk of traffcking in the camps in Rasuwa district (NHRC 2015). The report also notes that 233 families from Haku VDC did not receive the relief amount allocated by the government for displaced citizens, although no further information is provided in the report.

186

Bala Raju Nikku

Displacement and durable solutions A number of themes emerged from interviews, informal conversations, and focus group discussions. The issues that we focus on in this chapter relate to the issue of fnding durable solutions to displacement, specifcally in relation to the restoration of housing, land, and property, relocation, and long-term, long-distance rural to urban displacement. As Nepal is one of the few countries in the world to have adopted a bespoke policy on internal displacement, key features of this policy that relate to durable solutions are set out frst. Thereafter, the three issues that arose in our research are addressed in turn. In these sections, relevant national laws and policies are highlighted. The 2007 National Policy on Internally Displaced Persons The Government of Nepal approved the National Policy on Internally Displaced Persons on 22 February 2007. The policy, which is based expressly on the Guiding Principles (s. 2.2), defnes an internally displaced person (IDP) as: a person who is living somewhere else in the country after having forced to fee or leave one’s home or place of habitual residence due to armed confict or situation of violence or gross violation of human rights or natural disaster or human made disaster and situation or with an intention of avoiding the effects of such situations. Paragraph 1 declares: the State is required to play a lead role to prevent internal displacement, provide security to displaced persons, protect human rights, make provisions for immediate relief and necessary humanitarian support and service as well as facility and also make appropriate provisions for their return to their place of habitual residence or settling them voluntarily in other places in the country. Durable solutions are clearly in focus in the document, which identifes objectives to prevent displacement, protect people during displacement, and to facilitate durable solutions (s. 6). The aim is: To create [a] conducive environment for safe, voluntary and dignifed return of displaced persons or construction and rehabilitation of social, economic infrastructures for their settlement in other locations. In relation to the ambition of facilitating safe, voluntary, and dignifed return, s. 7.12 provides for the formulation of a rehabilitation plan. Section 8.3.5 envisages ‘programmes relating to subsidized loan and provisions will be made for assisting them in the activities of purchasing land.’ The Inter-Agency Standing Committee’s Framework on Durable Solutions (2010) identifes eight elements of a durable solution. These include:

Nepal 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

187

Safety and security Adequate standard of living Access to livelihoods Restoration of housing, land, and property Access to documentation Family reunifcation Participation in public affairs Access to effective remedies and justice

All of these elements are addressed in Nepal’s IDP policy, as well as in the numerous disaster risk reduction legal and policy documents drafted since the 2015 earthquake. The frst fve elements in the IASC Framework featured prominently as issues for the displaced persons from Haku VDC, who we spoke with as part of the research. Despite evidence of work being done to facilitate durable solutions, particularly under the 2015 Post-Disaster Recovery Framework, many Haku residents displaced in 2015 remained in situations of internal displacement three years later. Principle 10 on Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation states that the principles set out in the Policies on Internal Displacement shall be mainstreamed across government departments, owing to the cross-cutting issue of displacement. The Chief District Offcer is identifed as the responsible person at the local level for maintaining ‘the statements of potential bodies which could provide support to displaced persons at local-level and also coordinate or cause to be coordinated programmes.’ However, although the people we met in Haku and Kathmandu, who had been displaced in the context of the 2015 Nepal earthquakes, would clearly satisfy the IDP defnition set out in the National Policy, we did not fnd evidence that the policy played any role in addressing their predicament. Rather, the stories collected during feldwork in Haku VDC and Kathmandu suggest the document played little or no role in response to displacement triggered by the earthquake. This is perhaps unsurprising given the lack of reference to the Policies on Internal Displacement across the range of national disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation legal and policy documents in Nepal (see Nikku and Scott 2020). Reconstruction Reconstructing livelihoods is a major theme in all the stories shared with us. Despite the signifcant number of actors and stakeholders involved in the reconstruction process, no signifcant relief in terms of reconstruction had reached remote communities like that of Haku even after three years of the disaster. The National Reconstruction Authority (NRA) was established on 25 December 2015 under the Reconstruction of the Earthquake Affected Structures Act 2015 (2072) as a lead agency to implement the post-disaster activities in Nepal. The Preamble to the act proclaims that the role of the NRA shall be to: promptly complete the construction works of the structures damaged due to the devastating earthquake of 25 April 2015 (12 Baishakh 2072) … provide

188

Bala Raju Nikku social justice by making resettlement and translocation of the persons and families displaced by this earthquake.

Despite good intentions to rebuild Nepal as a resilient country, only a little progress was evident three years after the earthquakes. Of more than 400,000 homes that were earmarked for reconstruction, only 12 per cent had been rebuilt and very little of the USD 4.4 billion in aid4 pledged has been received or disbursed for reconstruction. Government payments are dependent on progress and building code compliance. Those who do not own land are locked out of reconstruction support. The evidence shows that the NRA undertook a lengthy consultation period in the name of building back better. Development of a building code compliance process and a catalogue on rural housing took 18 months to produce and disseminate (Ahmed et al. 2018; von Meding et al. 2017). The Post-Disaster Recovery Framework repeatedly points to the need for benefciaries of fnancial support to comply with building codes (i.e., p. 16). This certainly contributes to the Sendai Framework’s aim of ‘building back better’ and is also an important measure to reduce the risk of displacement in future earthquakes. At the same time, the delays and complexity that accompanies such an approach have implications for people’s ability to return home and rebuild their lives. This highlights the complexity of securing durable solutions, where the imperative of safety and security can clash with the imperative of returning home and restoring livelihoods. In order to get families back to their villages and homes, the Government of Nepal and donors developed the Nepal Rural Housing Reconstruction Program (RHRP). The NRA is the responsible institution for coordinating the assessment and cash grant distribution. The Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) at the behest of the NRA was entrusted with the damage assessments. On the basis of this identifcation and level of damage, a family will qualify for government assistance and fnancial support from the authority (Asia Foundation 2016). The CBS assessment teams graded the level of damage of houses on a scale of one to fve, with one being the lowest damage (‘negligible to slight damage’) and fve being the highest (destruction). Heavily damaged houses were listed under damage grades three, four, and fve, depending on the extent of structural damage and levels of destruction. Houses graded three to fve were deemed eligible for reconstruction cash grant assistance (Asia Foundation 2016). The Government of Nepal provided NPR 200,000 (about USD 2,000) to each eligible household to reconstruct the frst phase of the house regardless of the severity of damage and the capability of the family. The government provides another NPR 300,000 (USD 3,000) for the house reconstruction in some cases.5 Shradha Ghale, a researcher at Martin Chautari, a research and policy institute in Kathmandu, succinctly captures the situation: Nine months after the earthquake, following extended political wrangling, the National Reconstruction Authority fnally got in full shape. The dispute was not over reconstruction plans or policy matters but over which party

Nepal

189

would control the billions of dollars pledged by the international donors. The hardest-hit communities, who have the most legitimate claim to the funds, have no representation in the body. Led entirely by high-caste men, the authority is removed from the concerns of marginalised victims. For instance, people from Haku still don’t know if or when they will receive the [frst and second instalments] of NRs. 200,000 (USD 2,000) promised by the government. The amount is not enough to build a house. If the money comes, they will receive it in three instalments, but only after meeting numerous conditions at each stage. Given their lack of political connections or access to bureaucracy, the displaced families will have a diffcult time fulflling those conditions. (Ghale 2016) At last, nine months after the earthquakes in 2015, the Nepalese Parliament passed the NRA bill. According to this bill, the government provides a housing grant in three instalments: the frst instalment of NPR 50,000 (USD 477) upon signing an agreement; NPR 150,000 (USD 1,437) after completion up to plinth level; and NPR 100,000 (USD 958) upon completion of the structure. The process of cash grant agreements was only made in early 2016 across the country. With the help of these cash grants, only a few houses were built in Haku at the time this research was conducted in 2018. Another 40 houses are yet to be built in Sanu Haku alone. Mr Hemnath, who is associated with the Human Rights and Community Development Resource Centre (HRCDRC), the local NGO and involved in facilitating this process, shared that there were many issues with the grant process, such as the fnal identifcation of benefciaries, bureaucratic procedures, and requirements of documents that were lost in the disaster. The cash withdrawal process was not easy and accessible for families who had lost crucial documents in the earthquake, including citizenship cards. There was no clarity on the selection of benefciaries and who qualifed for these grants. Recognising the considerable impact of the loss of civil documentation on displaced persons’ ability to enjoy their human rights, Principle 20 of the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement provides expressly for ‘the issuance of new documents or the replacement of documents lost in the course of displacement.’ Principle 8.2.5 of the 2007 National Policies on Internally Displaced Persons similarly provides for the issuance of documents, including citizenship certifcates, to IDPs. Here is one context where the better integration of this policy into the post-earthquake legal and policy framework focusing on reconstruction and disaster risk reduction is important. Although these documents address the different aspects of durable solutions, they do lack systematic attention to the distinctive human rights challenges faced by IDPs, including the widespread challenge of re-establishing a legal identity. The issue of clarity of criteria for the selection of benefciaries is also important from a human rights perspective. As described in the introduction to this volume, transparency and accountability are key features of a human rights-based approach. The state has a duty to ensure that information about how to access

190

Bala Raju Nikku

support is available and accessible, considering the particular circumstances of the people who are potential benefciaries. The process of reconstruction has been widely criticised for its lack of transparency (Asia Foundation 2016; Adhikari 2017) as well as the role of politics in decision-making and differential outcomes based on caste and remoteness (Bownas and Bishokarma 2019). These concerns were also echoed by Haku residents during the focus group discussions with them. Although issues relating to direct discrimination on the basis of indigenous status did not arise during the research, the widely recognised patterns of discrimination against indigenous peoples in Nepal (Ansari 2018) are also likely to have direct as well as indirect impacts in the context of post-disaster reconstruction and the achievement of durable solutions. Discrimination against indigenous peoples in the immediate aftermath of the earthquakes was reported by the Committee on the Rights of the Child in its 2015 Concluding Observations for Nepal. The Committee expressed concern about: (a) Reports of discrimination against children and indigenous people, particularly with regard to access to water during rescue and relief efforts after the 2015 earthquake. (b) Denial of indigenous peoples’ free, prior, and informed consent with regard to resettlement and reconstruction decisions affecting them and their children after the 2015 earthquake. (UN CRC 2016, para 65) Examples of indirect discrimination relate to criteria based on land ownership and access issues relating to the remoteness of Tamang communities. For instance, we learned that some people faced diffculty in accessing support because their homes were built on Ghuti land,6 and therefore not technically owned by them. Haku is a remote settlement and disconnected from the urban power centres and policymaking bodies. Their remoteness and lack of political party affliations with the agents of political power made them more vulnerable to disasters, and less able to rebuild in the aftermath. This refects how pre-existing structural factors, often described as ‘root causes’ in legal and policy documents relating to disaster risk reduction, need to be addressed in the process of fnding durable solutions to displacement. A human rights perspective promotes this holistic approach to fnding durable solutions. According to Santosh Tamang, a member of the Healing Haku project, at the time of feldwork in 2018, about 20 houses were under repair and a few houses had been rebuilt in some of the wards of Haku. He expressed that very few families in Haku could afford to wait for too long for external support. Instead, they started to rebuild their houses and construct temporary shelters using materials scavenged from collapsed structures and corrugated galvanised iron sheets from earlier humanitarian operations in the area. Santosh noted that the Haku community is remote and inaccessible by road, making it diffcult for many NGOs and

Nepal

191

volunteers, as well as government machinery, to reach them to provide relief at a time when they are needed the most to survive. Haku people shared that they have to use donkeys to transport cement bags, sand, bricks, and other house construction materials from Dhunche. The daily wages for local labour in the village are higher compared with other non-remote and accessible places in the neighbouring districts. They need to spend at least three times more to build a house compared with a family that lives in Dhunche, the market centre for the district. Community members complained that the blanket policy of government support for reconstruction was slow, delayed, and inadequate even to start building the foundation of a house. The lack of a road to Haku has also multiplied the hardships of community members who ended up spending their lives in makeshift camps for longer times and risking their wellbeing. With the pace of reconstruction sluggish, most families in Haku whose houses were severely damaged were forced to live in temporary and improvised shelters for over two to three years after the earthquakes. The UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights considers the existence of different levels of enjoyment of rights, including the right to shelter, between rural and urban dwellers to potentially amount to discrimination. Its General Comment No. 20 explains: The exercise of Covenant rights should not be conditional on, or determined by, a person’s current or former place of residence; e.g. whether an individual lives or is registered in an urban or a rural area, in a formal or an informal settlement, is internally displaced or leads a nomadic lifestyle. Disparities between localities and regions should be eliminated in practice by ensuring, for example, that there is even distribution in the availability and quality of primary, secondary and palliative health-care facilities. (UN CESCR 2009) What this guidance means in practice is that states need to take steps, to the maximum of available resources, to respect, protect, and fulfl the rights of all persons within their jurisdiction. Where there are different levels of enjoyment, for example, between rural and urban areas, or between indigenous peoples and non-indigenous populations, positive measures must be taken to address that imbalance. Although resource constraints will always present challenges, the imperative of non-discrimination requires active steps to be taken. Sijal Pokharel, an environmental researcher from Tribhuvan University, stated in our conversation that the damaged infrastructure and community rehabilitation is taking time, toil, and treasure even after three years of post-earthquake disaster that shook the social fabric of Nepal. The announced international donor support did not arrive fully on time, and its relevance is questioned. Local people criticised the process saying as ‘more words and less action.’ Even the survivors of the earthquakes have lost interest in rebuilding their houses and expressed helplessness. (pers. comm., Sijal Pokharel, 25 October 2018).

192

Bala Raju Nikku

Similar perceptions were expressed by other key informants interviewed during the feld research. Local land rights activists shared that the selection process for housing benefciaries was terribly slow due to bureaucratic procedures and power struggles of the political parties. Without NGO involvement, the process of the selection of benefciaries could have taken many more months. Talking about the reconstruction of other critical infrastructure in their community, Haku residents shared that even though the school in Pangling has been rebuilt, many families are struggling to send their children to school due to the distance. As a result, about 20 families moved to Dhunche and Kathmandu in search of better livelihoods and education for their children (pers. comm., Mr Hemnath and Mr Bishwas, 20 December 2018).7 For others, however, moving elsewhere is not an option. Bikash Tamang refected upon his situation: Haku people have good skills in vegetable production, livestock and handicrafts like basket weaving. Before the earthquake, our life was good in Haku and we were busy all year round living in harmony. We were poor but happy practicing our cultural lifestyle. However, life in makeshift camps was suffocating but we bore the brunt. My youngest son was born there without any medical help. I quit my job with the hydro company and now trying to rebuild my house so that I can bring all my family together. We did not receive any help from the outside nor from the Nepal government. Some of my friends from the camp left to Himachal Pradesh villages (North India) and are doing all kinds of odd jobs. Initially, I planned to go to Malaysia but had no money to pay the brokers. I decided to stay back and try to build our lives again, where I was born and perhaps I like to die here only. (Interview, Bikash Tamang, 21 December 2018) Even Nepalese people working abroad felt compelled to return in order to deal with reconstruction challenges. Ms Devi Gurung, who is 35 years old, did not return to Dubai where she was working as a housemaid but decided to stay back with family and support them. She runs a small hotel. Her life in the Gulf was miserable, but she was able to earn some money. She chose to stay despite the hardship because of the contract she signed, and her family had already borrowed money to pay an employment agency. After the disaster, she was forced to come back. Although she gained some skills from her experience abroad, she was not able to use them after her return. She told us that the community was not able to reconstruct their homes, schools, and their temple (Ghumba) in Sano Haku. They could also not do the repairs due to bureaucratic rules and lack of government support. Their families cannot afford to contribute any cash other than their sweat. She added that the devastating earthquakes followed by dry landslides at Gagane and Tiru and a fre at Thulo Haku further made the community members vulnerable. The precarity of the villagers’ existence is captured in the story of Mr Subba Tamang, who was 75 years old at the time of the interview and had been displaced

Nepal

193

since the earthquake. He stayed for 26 months at Bogatitar in a place he rented. When he could not pay the rent anymore, he shifted to stay in a public land at Khalte. Life was miserable during the freezing cold winter inside a one-room zinc sheet roofed house. But Subba Tamang is not alone; there are about 100 families still living in temporary houses at Khalte. Tanmaya Tamang, from Haku Besi, remembers that she was born a few years after the big earthquake in 1934 in Nepal. She could easily be in her 90s and enjoys the respect of her family and the village. Her family reared cows, goats, chickens, and has a small yard to grow vegetables. She has two sons, three daughters, and many grandchildren to her pride. Everything changed after the 2015 earthquakes. Tanmaya was spinning cotton to make handmade thread that is used in making Tamang traditional cloths, and her daughter-inlaw was cooking meals when her stone-mud house shook and collapsed. She saw her pregnant daughter-in-law ran for her life. Tanmaya has the skill for weaving bamboo baskets, head caps, and clothes. Her oldest son, Bikash Tamang, works for the hydroelectric power company as a labourer. He was out of the house when the earthquake struck their village. He left his work site and was fortunate to fnd that there had been no fatalities in his family. Relocation Although reconstruction is a durable solution that is being pursued by many in Haku, this option is not available to all. Some areas are simply no longer inhabitable as a consequence of the geological changes brought about by the earthquake. Entire wards where people used to live have been designated as no-build zones, owing to the risk of landslides and other hazards. Out of nine wards of the Haku VDC, Gagane and Tiru wards were declared unsafe by the government. Mr Bishwash, a member of the local Human Rights and Community Development Resource Centre, introduced us to the camp leader that helped our further discussions with the approximately 30 Haku families that were still camped at Kalika-2, Bhumighar, Kalikasthan. The camp leader, who is from Gagane, told us that government offcials declared his village completely unsafe; families were not allowed to go back and hence they were forced to stay in the camp. They receive no formal assistance from the government and rely on help from organisations such as the HRCDRC for issues relating to documentation, for example. There is a perception that the hydropower operations in the area are exposing the inhabitants of Haku to more risks. The Rasuwagadhi Hydropower Project by the China International Water and Electric Corporation, Upper Trishuli A, Rasuwagadi, Trishuli 3A, Sanjhen, Upper Sanjhen, Langtang Khola, and Upper Mailung Hydropower projects are currently under construction with different investors. The road building and drilling of hills that are continuing make the hills loose and fragile. The nature and frequency of landslides have increased due to these haphazard infrastructure developments in the district. Mr Gagan Nepali, a youth member of Haku who was still living in Kalikastan camp located in Nuwakot district commented:

194

Bala Raju Nikku Our lives are again at risk. The political people did not deliver their promises. The hydro projects did not give us the jobs. But they increased landslides and foods which will sweep us away anytime. At night, we are not able to sleep peacefully even after the big earthquake disasters are now a thing of the past. (Interview, Gagan Nepali, 30 September 2018)

The Haku families have shown to be resilient but fear that they will be displaced again in the near future by the hydro projects in the district. They have also expressed fears about multiple displacements in the future as a result of earthquakes and related landslides they have been exposed to. Dinesh Tamang, a founder of Haku Relief (NGO), who is involved in the tourism business, shared that relocation in a safer place by the government is the only alternative at present for many Haku people. This view was shared by many of the people we spoke with. Authorities appear to be facilitating relocation in some cases, although many households in Haku VDC were fnding the process diffcult. In a similar vein, Mr Bishwash explained that in Sano Haku, 114 houses were identifed for relocation but only 93 households were listed as benefciaries by the National Reconstruction Agency (NRA), out of which only 73 houses received clearance to build their house on allotted plots of land. However, the basic facilities of drinking water and sanitation were not provided by government authorities. The remaining 41 households struggled to get the offcial clearances. Overall, government support was not immediate and clear; these families were neither able to mobilise additional resources nor did the local banks extend interest-free loans to them as the government promised. As a whole, bureaucratic procedures resulted in further delays to the families in their process of relocation (Interview, Mr Bishwash, 29 July 2019). Relocation is widely addressed within the legal and policy framework in Nepal. The 2007 National Policy on Internal Displacement provides that ‘programmes relating to subsidized loan and provisions will be made for assisting them in the activities of purchasing land’ (s. 8.3.5). Under the heading ‘Approaches for Policy Implementation,’ the Post-Disaster Recovery Framework provides that [l]and for relocation of villages will be acquired as per the National Reconstruction Act, or pooled through community-based arrangements. Settlement plans will be prepared to include required civic amenities. Maintaining employment patterns and social networks are important considerations when evaluating options for the relocation of villages. (p. 16) Although no reference to key international standards and guidelines relating to resettlement or planned relocation is made in this framework, the section on relocation articulates an expressly rights-based approach, affrming that the National Reconstruction Authority ‘will also develop social safeguards when implementing relocation of villages, ensuring that peoples’ rights are respected and that

Nepal

195

they have equal access to basic services’ (p. 18). Further refecting an awareness of the potentially adverse impacts of displacement, the framework requires that ‘when relocation does take place, settlement, within the same district if possible, or in a nearby district, to ensure the continuity of community life, livelihoods and cultural practices’ (p. 14). Under the 2017 Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Act, a range of national and sub-national actors are given responsibility for relocation, including the national-level Executive Committee (s. 8(l)), the Provincial Disaster Management Executive Committee (s. 14(2)(q)), and the District Disaster Management Committee (s. 16(2)(o)). The provision relating to the role of the Executive Committee directs this authority to: Relocate or cause to relocate the people and communities in safe zones who are living along the riverbanks, in steep-slope lands threatening to landslide and inundation threatening areas or any other disaster risk threatening areas. (s. 8(1)) Relocation is also identifed as a priority under the 2018–2030 DRR National Strategic Plan of Action, which prioritises the relocation of settlements from high-risk areas to low-risk areas (p. 176). In a hazard-prone mountainous environment like Haku VDC, it is understandable that relocation is seen as a preferred form of a durable solution, particularly for those living in areas deemed unsafe for habitation. However, as noted above, multiple barriers stand in the way of achieving this solution. Of note for the purposes of this research is that it is not the lack of a legal and policy framework that stands in the way of the achievement of durable solutions to displacement. The Post-Disaster Recovery Framework provides for both reconstruction and relocation and includes relevant rights-based safeguards. The challenges relate to the multiple social, political, geographical, and other factors that complicate the implementation of law and policy in other contexts. Some aspects of the legal and policy framework might need to be improved to better refect key international standards and guidelines. However, in light of the insights gained from this research, it seems that a better approach would be to focus on improvements in public administration of the existing system and address underlying issues such as the lack of formal land title. Displacement to Kirtipur, Kathmandu valley The challenges relating to reconstruction and relocation described above concern the implementation of the Post-Disaster Recovery Framework and other legal and policy instruments. As noted, although the Government of Nepal is clearly taking steps to address the displacement caused by the earthquake, many people have not benefted from these initiatives. Indeed, a number of the families we spoke with had moved away from Haku entirely and had been living in a

196

Bala Raju Nikku

part of Kathmandu inhabited by other Tamangs from Haku. The experience of some of the people we spoke with appears far from the ideal of a durable solution and was characterised by insecure livelihoods and uncertainty about the future. Dinesh Tamang explained: Our NGO reached out to twelve Haku families/IDPs settled in Kirtipur (Kathmandu). They reported that most of their village settlements are no longer habitable. There is also very high risk of further landslides and hence continued (multiple) displacement of Haku people. They are showing high levels of vulnerability to exposure and low resilience due to failure of policies and lack of protection of their rights as IDPs induced by the disasters. (Interview, Dinesh Tamang, 25 October 2018) Around 40 households moved to Kathmandu from Haku. They were living in temporary structures made of corrugated iron sheets and bamboo in Kirtipur in the Kathmandu Valley. These families came to Kirtipur with the help of 35-yearold Chiru Tamang, a Haku native who moved before the 2015 disasters. Chiru Tamang left Haku six years ago for Kathmandu to earn money through a poultry farm business and to provide a better education for his children. Chiru Tamang helped IDPs from Haku by making referrals for land to be leased for poultry farming or vegetable gardening as sources of livelihoods for IDPs. He worked with many displaced Haku villagers and provided some support for their children’s education. He shared during a focus group discussion that: For many families, Kirtipur is a new place with no sources of work or income. We like to access earthquake relief materials that are sent in their name and be provided to them in Kirtipur itself where they live now instead of going back to their mountain village. Until Haku is safe and even otherwise, we will remain in Kirtipur for a few years. (FGD no 4, Haku, 26 September 2018) About 110 children from 40 displaced families from Haku were living in Kirtipur in the Kathmandu valley with their families and extended families. Children had started going to Balkumari Secondary School, which was already crowded with students. Speaking to some of the Haku children admitted to the new school, it was clear that these children had to go through many physical, language, and mental adjustments. It was also evident from the discussions with school management that no extra support from the government to accommodate these new students was provided. The local club members and friends distributed textbooks, notebooks, and pencils to each new student. At least in this context, it appears that the IDP policy provision at s. 8.2.6 ‘proper arrangements of school education’ has not been implemented. The experience is diffcult even for able-bodied young men. Ramesh Tamang, a 22-year-old young man who hails from Sano Haku, had been living in Kathmandu for three years at the time of our interview in 2018. Severely

Nepal

197

affected by the April 2015 earthquakes, many of Ramesh Tamang’s relatives have been displaced and were residing in Chisopani, Lolang, Dhunche, Betrawati, and Shanti bazaar. Ramesh was staying with his uncle and mother in Kirtipur. He worried about surviving in this new and expensive place, but he was not willing to return to Haku due to monsoons and the danger of landslides. He also had not found any work in the hydro projects in the districts and was frustrated about his unemployment situation. He had been helping his mother in preparing wool rolls and hanging out with his friends most of the time. The two-member family unit was surviving on meagre earnings. Ramesh said that there was no certainty or plan in place about how long they would remain in Kirtipur or when they would return to Haku (Interview, Ramesh Tamang, 27 September 2018). Similarly, Mrs Dekhi Tamang, 26 years old, described being forced to travel to Kathmandu from Thulo Haku. As a family, they lost everything they possessed. They frst moved to a nearby camp in Nuwakot and then moved to Kathmandu after a harsh year in the camp. They believed that moving to a city like Kathmandu would help them to secure a safe place and work opportunities, or even to migrate abroad in search of employment (Bideshi rojgar). The family had no certainty about their future, including how long they would remain in Kathmandu. Dekhi Tamang said that whether they stayed in Kathmandu or moved on depended on her husband’s decision. She narrated that the situation was so hard in Haku that she could not imagine going back. She had enrolled two of her daughters in a nearby school and thought that they were getting better education then back in Haku. She spent her time looking after her baby and family and tried to grow vegetables in her kitchen garden. Dekhi Tamang was visibly stressed and cursed her fate. She reported having sleep problems and worried that she could not fnd work to feed her family. The income from her husband’s daily work in a construction site was not enough to feed her family of six. There was no privacy, not enough to eat, sleep, and pray. The family tried to maintain their ties with relatives who moved back to Haku and were trying to build their house back in the village (Interview, Dekhi Tamang, 2 October 2018). It is noteworthy that, rather than relying on assistance from the state, these families found support through social networks. The ambition refected in the National Policies on Internal Displacement relating to the provision of shelter, economic support, and livelihoods initiatives (see s. 9) simply did not reach these families, despite their relocation to the capital. More concretely, the livelihood restoration and employment creation initiatives sketched in the Post-Disaster Recovery Framework (p. 17) do not appear to have reached those displaced families living in Kirtipur.

Concluding remarks Applying the IASC Framework to the case of Nepal, we argue that durable solutions remain a distant prospect for Haku families who continued to be displaced even three years following the 2015 earthquakes. Reconstruction and development assistance is still a critical source of livelihoods. However, there are some

198

Bala Raju Nikku

indications and hope that some Haku families are moving towards a durable solution, even though considerable obstacles remain. The dynamics of displaced families of the Haku community provided insights on the weak protection mechanisms extended to them as IDPs. The Haku case showed that IDPs were more vulnerable as there were lapses in the implementation of these mechanisms. There was a huge gap between their post-disaster needs and the resources available. I argue that Nepal can only be successful in addressing vulnerabilities and implementing preventive policies that prepare communities to deal with future disasters if there is enough political will to implement human rights guided policies and programmes in response to disaster displacement. This chapter argues that the legal and development frameworks were not fully implemented by Nepal, and hence, failed in protecting the rights of IDPs during and after the 2015 earthquakes. The various sections of the chapter described the shortcomings in the implementation and compliance with the Guiding Principles. A greater engagement with existing human rights treaties and better implementation of soft-law principles is needed in Nepal. At the same time, the scale of devastation in a country with limited resources must be acknowledged. To this end, the delays in reconstruction and relocation need to be seen in light of the imperative of building back better, including reducing the risk of displacement in the event of future extreme hazard events. Similarly, the challenges faced by IDPs, both in Haku and in Kirtipur in relation to livelihoods need to be understood in context, considering that Nepal is a country where precarious livelihoods are the norm in everyday life. Notwithstanding substantial international fnancial support, it is clear that dealing with displacement is part of a wider goal of sustainable development.

Notes 1 Initial discussions with the staff at the Community Self-reliance Service Centre (CSSC). The organisation works in 54 districts of Nepal collaborating with a nationwide organisation of landless, land-poor, and smallholder farmers to lead the Land and Agrarian Rights Campaign. 2 See Campbell’s (2013) ethnographic study of Rasuwa, which describes its landscapes and cultural heritage. 3 Collected from the focus group discussion with Haku Besi people (Haku Besi known as Haku-3 – old administrative structure) and now known as Parvati Kunda Gaonpalika of 1 and 2 (new administrative structure). 4 On 25 June 2015, the Government of Nepal hosted the International Conference on Nepal’s Reconstruction where international partners pledged USD 4.4 billion in grants and loans for reconstruction of the affected areas. As of 30 September 2015, a total of USD 241 million was contributed against the appeal (57 per cent funded) including USD 18 million from the UN Central Emergency Response Fund (UN OCHA 2015). 5 India extended fnancial aid of 1.6 billion NPR to Nepal in 2019 to help 50,000 people in Nuwakot and Gorkha districts to rebuild their houses damaged in the devastating earthquakes in 2015. India has so far granted Nepal a total of NPR 4.5 billion for housing reconstruction projects. India is partnering with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the United Nations Offce for Project Services (UNOPS) for

Nepal

199

providing socio-technical facilitation to house owners to ensure that they rebuild their homes as per Nepal government’s earthquake-resilient policies (see The Hindu 2019). 6 The Guthi is a traditional institution that has been part of the Newa social system since the 5th century BC. The Guthi system is a trust, whereby land is donated to this trust. This land is then tilled upon by members of the local community and the revenue generated is not only a source of economy for the community members but a portion of it is also utilised to undertake various works within the community such as restoration of temples, patis (rest houses), maths (priest houses), dhunge dharas (stone water spouts), and so on. 7 There are no statistics on the number of families that moved from Haku to Kirtipur, and different people we spoke with gave different estimates. On the whole, it would appear that around 40 families moved, but estimates ranged between 20 and 60.

References Adhikari, N. (2017) ‘Nepal’s earthquake disaster: two years and $4.1bn later’, Al Jazeera. 25 April. Available at: https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2017/04/nepal-eart hquake-disaster-years-41bn-170412110550808.html (Accessed: 12 May 2020). Ahmed, I., Gajendran, T., Brewer, G., Maund, K., von Meding, J., and MacKee, J. (2018) ‘Compliance to building codes for disaster resilience: Bangladesh and Nepal’, Procedia Engineering, 212, pp. 986–993. Anaya, J. (2009) Report by the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people, James Anaya: addendum: report on the situation of indigenous peoples in Nepal. A/HRC/12/34/Add.3. Ansari, M. (2018) Submission of the National Human Rights Commission of Nepal to United Nations permanent forum on indigenous issues (16–27 April 2018). Available at: http: //www.nhrcnepal.org/nhrc_new/doc/newsletter/New:York-UNPFII-Regional_ Dailogue_in_New:York_24_April_2018%20-%20speech_by_Hon_Mohna_Ansari .pdf (Accessed: 12 May 2020). Asia Foundation (2016) Nepal government distribution of earthquake reconstruction cash grants for private houses, IRM-thematic study. Available at: https://bit.ly/3dSuM97 (Accessed: 12 May 2020). BBC (2015) ‘Nepal earthquake: hundreds die, many feared trapped’. 25 April. Available at: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-32461019 (Accessed: 12 May 2020). Bownas, R. and Bishokarma, R. (2019) ‘Access after the earthquake: the micro politics of recovery and reconstruction in Sindhupalchok District, Nepal, with particular reference to caste’, Contemporary South Asia, 27(2), pp. 179–195. Campbell, B. (2013) Living between juniper and palm: nature, culture, and power in the Himalayas. Delhi: Oxford University Press. Eastmond, M. (2007) ‘Stories as lived experience: Narratives in forced migration research’, Journal of Refugee Studies, 20(2), pp. 248–264. EM-DAT (2020) The international disaster database. Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters. Available at: https://www.emdat.be/ (Accessed: 12 May 2020). Flowminder, World Pop and Ncell (2015) Executive summary: Nepal population estimates. 19 August. Available at: https://www.worldpop.org/resources/docs/nepal/Flowminde r-Nepal-2015-08-27_(V3).pdf (Accessed: 12 May 2020). Galen, M., Lord, A., and Beazley, R. (2016) ‘A handshake across the Himalayas: Chinese investment, hydropower development, and state formation in Nepal’, Eurasian Geography and Economics, 57(3), pp. 403–432.

200

Bala Raju Nikku

Ghale, S. (2016) ‘Nepal: a year after Nepal’s killer quake, the Tamangs continue to struggle on the margins’, The Wire. 22 May. Available at: https://thewire.in/world/ a-year-after-nepal-earthquake-tamang-community-continues-to-struggle (Accessed: 12 May 2020). Hayes, G.P., Briggs, R.W., Barnhart, W.D., Yeck, W.L., McNamara, D.E., Wald, D.J., Nealy, J.L., Benz, H.M., Gold, R.D., Jaiswal, K.S., Marano, K., Earle, P.S., Hearne, M.G., Smoczyk, G.M., Wald, L.A., Samsonov, S.V. (2015) ‘Rapid characterization of the 2015 Mw 7.8 Gorkha, Nepal, earthquake sequence and its seismotectonic context’, Seismological Research Letters, 86(6), pp. 1557–1567. IASC (2010) IASC framework on durable solutions for internally displaced persons. Brookings Institution. University of Bern. Project on Internal Displacement. Available at: https:// interagencystandingcommittee.org/other/iasc-framework-durable-solutions-internally -displaced-persons (Accessed: 12 May 2020). ICRC (2015) Nepal earthquake: operational update. June 2015. Available at: https://ww w.icrc.org/en/document/nepal-earthquake-operational-update-june-2015 (Accessed: 12 May 2020). IDMC (2016) Global report on internal displacement 2016. Available at: https://www.int ernal-displacement.org/globalreport2016/ (Accessed: 12 May 2020). Joshi, B. and Joshi, G.R. (2016) ‘Climate change perception and determinants of adoption of agricultural practices in Rasuwa District of Nepal’, Nepal Journal of Environmental Science, 4, pp. 63–70. Khazai, B., Johannes, A., Trevor, G., Susan, B., James, D., Tina, B., Bernhard, M., Verena, F., Tina, K.-P. (2015) ‘Shelter response and vulnerability of displaced populations in the April 25, 2015 Nepal earthquake. EDIM, SAI, KIT, GFZ’. Available at: https:// www.cedim.kit.edu/download/CEDIM_FDA_NepalEarthquake_Report2Shelter.pdf (Accessed: 12 May 2020). Lu, X., Bengtsson, L., and Holme, P. (2010) ‘Predictability of population displacement after the 2010 Haiti earthquake’, Proceedings of the National Academic of Sciences of the United States of America, 109(29), pp. 11576–11581. NHRC (2015) Traffcking in persons: national report 2013-2015. Available at http://www .nhrcnepal.org/nhrc_new/doc/newsletter/Trafficking_in_Persons_National_Repo rt_2013-15.pdf (Accessed: 12 May 2020). Nikku, B.R. (2018) ‘Social work response to Himalayan disasters: insights from green social work’, in Dominelli, L., Nikku, B.R., and Ku, H.B. (eds.) The Routledge handbook of green social work. Abingdon: Routledge. ——— (2015) ‘Editorial: living through and responding to disasters: multiple roles for social work’, Social Work Education, 34(6), pp. 601–606. Nikku, B.R., Kadambari, P., and Riggs, A. (2019) ‘Recreating creative social work: insights from Nepal 2015 disasters’, in Huss, E. and Bos, E. (eds.) Art in social work practice. London: Routledge. Nikku, B.R. and Scott, M. (2020) Nepal: national law and policy report on displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. Lund: Raoul Wallenberg Institute. Available at: https://rwi.lu.se/disaster-displacement/. The Hindu (2019) ‘India extends Rs 1.6 bn aid to Nepal for rebuilding earthquake-hit houses’, The Hindu. 10 June. Available at: https://bit.ly/3bXnoYx (Accessed: 12 May 2020). UN CESCR (2009) General comment no 20 on non-discrimination in economic, social and cultural rights. E/C.12/GC/20.

Nepal

201

UN CRC (2016) Concluding observations on the combined third to ffth periodic reports of Nepal. CRC/C/NPL/CO/3-5. UN OCHA (2015) ‘Nepal earthquake humanitarian response: April to September 2015’. Available at https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/fles/resources/nepal_earthquake_ humanitarian_response_report_lr.pdf (Accessed: 12 May 2020). Uprety, Y., Asselin, H., Boon, E.K., Yadav, S., Shrestha, K.K. (2010) ‘Indigenous use and bio-effcacy of medicinal plants in the Rasuwa District, Central Nepal’, Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, 6(1), p. 3. Von Meding, J., Shrestha, H.D., Kabir, H., and Ahmed, I. (2017) ‘Nepal earthquake reconstruction won’t succeed until the vulnerability of survivors is addressed’, The Conversation. 23 November. Available at https://theconversation.com/nepal-earthq uake-reconstruction-wont-succeed-until-the-vulnerability-of-survivors-is-address ed-87335 (Accessed: 12 May 2020). Wisner, B., Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., and Davis, I. (2004) At risk: natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters. Second Edition. London: Routledge.

International legal and policy documents 1998

2015

Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. Addendum to Report of the Representative of the Secretary-General, Mr. Francis M. Deng, submitted pursuant to Commission resolution 1997/39. UN Commission on Human Rights. (E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2) UN General Assembly. Resolution 69/283, Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, (A/CONF.224/CRP.1)

National legal and policy documents 2007 2015 2016 2017 2018

National Policy on Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) 2063 B.S. (2007 A.D.) Reconstruction of the Earthquake Affected Structures Act (2072) Post-Disaster Recovery Framework Disaster Risk and Management Act 2074 2018–2030 DRR National Strategic Plan of Action

10 Solomon Islands Flooding, displacement, and durable solutions: The April 2014 food in Honiara Joseph Daniel Foukona

Introduction The Solomon Islands are exposed to various kinds of hazards including high tides, foods, volcanic eruptions, landslides, droughts, tsunamis, and sea level rise (World Vision 2019). The country is ranked fourth by the World Risk Index (Day et al. 2019). As a developing country, the Solomon Islands are vulnerable to disasters due to natural hazards, and such vulnerability is likely to increase due to climate change. Disasters also have signifcant human impacts, including potentially displacing people from their homes. Honiara is the capital city of the Solomon Islands and has an urban growth rate close to twice the rate of the rest of the country, and one of the highest in the region, increasing ‘approximately 4.7 per cent every year— that’s a doubling of the urban population almost every 16 years’ (Keen et al. 2017, p. 19). One of the challenges arising from rapid urbanisation is access to land and affordable housing. Those moving to Honiara and other urban areas are limited by the high cost of registered urban land, known locally as fxed-term estates (FTE). Many are forced to live in informal settlements without a secure land title that are often in areas particularly exposed to natural hazards (Keen et al. 2017; Wilson 2018). These conditions create ‘acute sensitivity to external shocks and stresses due to existing adaptation defcits, in urban infrastructure, housing and service provision’ (Adaptation Fund 2019). The expansion of informal settlements is associated with increased vulnerability to fooding, which leads to more displacement, while such expansion could also be a result of displacement. This chapter focuses on the April 2014 food in Honiara as a case study for examining the human rights implications of displacement in the context of fooding. The approach adopted in 2014 did not refect international standards relating to planned relocation. Since that time, the government has taken considerable steps towards incorporating human rights-based approaches into the management of disaster policy frameworks, notably in the National Disaster Management Plan 2018 (NDMP). However, this chapter argues that, notwithstanding signifcant rights-based enhancements to the relevant legal and policy framework, many people in the Solomon Islands remain exposed and vulnerable

Solomon Islands

203

to displacement in the context of disasters and climate change, as mechanisms to promote effective implementation are limited, and the pressures associated with limited access to land and conditions in informal urban settlements remain exposed and vulnerable to natural hazards. The chapter is structured as follows. The frst section discusses the research method. The next section outlines the relevant legal frameworks created by the Solomon Islands government for addressing disaster displacement. A case study of fooding that led to the displacement of over 1,000 people in Honiara in 2014 is then provided, followed by an analysis of how relevant laws and policies were implemented in the case study. The fnal section develops the conclusion and provides recommendations for how displacement can be addressed and displacement risk reduced in the future.

Method The chapter draws on a desktop survey of disaster and displacement frameworks in the Solomon Islands (Foukona, Bernard and Scott 2020) with a qualitative case study on the April 2014 food in Honiara. Based on the author’s own local knowledge and review of the literature, Koa Hill and April Valley were selected as sample sites for the research. This is because the impact of the food disaster on the Koa Hill community in Honiara led to a government proposal for relocation of internally displaced persons to April Ridge. The April 2014 food was chosen as a case study because it provides a clear trajectory showing the interface between disaster, displacement, and durable solutions. Having secured ethics approval from the University of the South Pacifc and a research permit from the Ministry of Education and Human Resource Development, Solomon Islands, feldwork began in Honiara, initially in May 2018, with a follow up in September of that year. The data to reconstruct what happened during the April 2014 food and how government actors responded was collected through semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions. The interviews lasted an average of 45 minutes, and some were recorded while notes were taken for others. Informants involved in the response and recovery process that was initiated by the government included fve key government offcers from the Ministry of Environment, Climate Change, Disaster Management and Meteorology, the Ministry of Lands, Housing and Survey, two members of the National Disaster Management Offce, and one informant from the Solomon Islands Red Cross. An additional 15 informants (nine males and six females) were members of the Koa Hill community. These informants were identifed and interviewed because they had been badly affected by the food and had either lost their home, property, or loved one as a result of the disaster. Interviewing those that had been internally displaced helped reconstruct what happened and the measures that responsible government actors took to protect people during displacement and to facilitate durable solutions.

204

Joseph Daniel Foukona

Solomon Islands legal framework relating to disasters and displacement The Constitution of the Solomon Islands 1978 under (s. 3) provides for the protection of fundamental rights of individuals such as ‘life, liberty, security of the person and the protection of the law,’ (s. 7) freedom from inhuman treatment, (s. 8) freedom from deprivation of property, and (s. 14) freedom of movement. It does not address economic and social rights, such as the right to shelter and the highest attainable standard of health. These rights are covered under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) that the Solomon Islands ratifed in 1982 (UN OHCHR 2019). The constitutional protection provisions and ratifcation of the ICESCR indicate the Solomon Islands’ commitment to protect the human rights of people within its jurisdiction. Such commitment includes creating legal and policy frameworks as well as strategies to address the situation of internally displaced persons (IDPs) in the context of disasters and climate change. Building on decades of enhancements informed by the country’s recurrent experience of disaster, the Solomon Islands Government (SIG) fnalised its National Disaster Risk Management Plan (NDRMP) in 2010. This plan provided for ‘both the management of disasters and the management of disaster and climate risk. It aligned with the Pacifc Disaster Risk Reduction and Disaster Management Framework for Action 2005–2015 as the Regional DRM Framework for Action (RFA) of the time’ (NDMP 2018, p. 10). It ‘supported the establishment of institutional arrangements for the Government to address disaster risk management (DRM) in the country’ (GFDRR 2019). The 2010 Plan introduced a cluster system for dealing with disaster. Notwithstanding signifcant instances of large-scale displacement in the country,1 the NDRMP provides very limited guidance on how to prevent displacement, protect people during evacuation and throughout displacement, and facilitate durable solutions. Indeed, the plan mentions displacement only three times, and then only as bullet points as targets for relief operations and recovery and rehabilitation. Evacuation is referred to only once in the document, and again only as a bullet point under the functions of the disaster coordinator. Although there were also other legal and policy documents in operation at the time of the April 2014 food, these also lacked substantive guidance relating to displacement. Consequently, at the time of the 2014 food, responsible actors lacked clear guidance on how to effectively fulfl their obligations to protect people within their jurisdiction. The 2010 NDRMP came under review following the April Flood 2014. This review provided the basis for SIG to develop the 2018 National Disaster Management Plan, which superseded the 2010 Plan. The NDMP 2018 addresses institutional arrangements regarding the management of disasters including elements of preparedness, response, and recovery (NDMP 2018, p 10). However, the NDMP, like the NDRMP, does not expressly provide measures to prevent displacement and only briefy addresses protection during evacuation and

Solomon Islands

205

throughout displacement. It provides no direct guidance concerning the facilitation of durable solutions. The NDMP makes extensive provision for the development of specifc sectoral and sub-national policies and procedures, and for such procedures to be incorporated as part of the NDMP upon approval under the procedure. For instance, the conduct of village and ward disaster risk committees is to be guided by local level standard operating procedures (SOPs), which shall, in accordance with paragraph 132, expressly address the establishment of evacuation camps, paying particular attention to ‘frst line protection and needs of women, children and other vulnerable groups.’ These SOPs have the potential to integrate rights-based approaches. Paragraph 8 of the draft SOP for the Protection Committee provides a good indication: To ensure quality response, the PC will ensure members are briefed on the NDMP and relevant government policies, guidelines and technical standards. The PC will take account of international minimum standards and guidance for protection response, such as the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement and the IASC Guidelines on Protection of Persons in Situations of Natural Disasters. (National Protection Committee, n.d.) The following section describes how displacement was managed in the absence of clear, rights-based standards and guidelines.

The April 2014 food in Honiara In April 2014, prolonged heavy rains from Tropical Cyclone Ita caused heavy fooding across the Solomon Islands, severely impacting Honiara, the national capital and commercial hub of the Solomon Islands. The heavy rains caused the Mataniko River to overfow on 3 April, causing massive destruction to residential areas and informal settlements situated close to and along the riverbank. Honiara and other areas on the island of Guadalcanal were declared disaster zones by the Solomon Islands Government (IFRC 2014). Residential communities that were affected included Koa Hill, Vara Creek, Tuvaruhu, and No 3. These communities are situated within the Central Honiara constituency political boundary (Trundle and McEvoy 2016). Each area had an estimated population of between 500 and 600 people (SINEOC 2014). The Koa Hill settlement is located in a hazardous area exposed to fooding. The majority of people from this settlement are from Malaita Province. Settlers ended up living at Koa Hill because of rural-urban migration, poverty, cost, and a limited supply of urban land and housing. They are categorised as ‘informal settlers’ despite lengthy occupation because they did not have a formal title to the land. The Commissioner of Lands, as an agent of the state, holds the registered title to the public land. The settlers have limited options for formalising their right to the land because the existing legal and policy framework, as well as a proposal for a new law, does not explicitly address the issue. Since the land is classifed as a hazardous area, the Ministry of Lands, Housing and Survey

206

Joseph Daniel Foukona

(MLHS) has not issued any fxed-term estate title or temporary occupation license to settlers that occupy this public land area. The informal status of the settlements means that they are not consulted in government-led disaster risk reduction initiatives. The fooding completely destroyed 246 houses along the Mataniko riverbank.2 About 80 per cent of the destroyed households in Honiara were in informal settlements, which included expired temporary occupation licenses held by individuals in some areas outside of Koa Hill (UN OCHA 2014d). Those that completely lost their houses and belongings such as shell money, clothing, and important documents were mainly from the Koa Hill settlement. Data collected by a group from the MLHS revealed that 271 households and 209 buildings/shelters were affected in Koa Hill (MLHS 2014b). There were 21 acute deaths accounted for, most of them women and children. All the acute deaths, ‘with the exception of one, occurred in communities located directly adjacent to the Mataniko River’ (Natuzzi et al. 2016, p. 308). According to informants from Koa Hill, the April 2014 fooding was abnormal. The fash food happened around midday on Thursday, 3 April, while some people were at work, and others, mostly women and children, were at home. One informant recalled being at work during the time of the food, and when he returned, his house was gone. His wife and child were missing and were later pronounced dead. He expressed that he was psychologically and emotionally affected, but there was no counselling service available (Interview 15, IDP, 21 May 2018). One of the informants explained that in the past, prolonged heavy rain would cause the river to rise, but it would then subside without causing any severe damage to residential areas or even loss of life (Interview 1, IDP, 16 May 2018). He stated that the April 2014 fooding caught him and others in the area unprepared. People did not expect that the river would rapidly rise to such a high level that their houses and belongings would be either submerged or washed away by the water (Interview 1, IDP, 16 May 2018). One female survivor recounted that she was still in her house when water rushed in. She jumped out of the house with her sister and swam to higher ground, but swimming was a challenge because the current was strong (Interview 2, IDP, 16 May 2018). People from the Koa Hill community living along the Mataniko riverbank panicked, jumped out of their houses, and struggled in a rush to swim against the speed of the river to higher ground using containers and other materials as foating devices. Those that survived lost all their belongings. They were told by the chiefs in their community to go to Mbokonavera school and the Holy Cross Catholic Church community hall for shelter. They walked to these shelter places, which were designated by Honiara City Council (HCC) as temporary evacuation centres for the Koa Hill community. The NDMO mandated HCC to procure and distribute disaster relief goods and manage the evacuation centres within the Honiara City Boundary. These operations were carried out by three central operational groups: (a) the Welfare/IDP Group; (b) Logistics/Finance Group; and (c) the Initial Rapid Assessment Group (HCDMO 2014).

Solomon Islands

207

There were 30 designated evacuation centres set up for IDPs from foodaffected communities in Honiara and Guadalcanal (SINEOC 2014). Many of these centres were schools. When evacuees from Koa Hill community arrived at Mbokonavera school, there was no food or accommodation available. The immediate assistance in terms of clothing and food was from relatives, friends, and church groups. One of the evacuees who lost his house and personal property to the food recalled that he had to seek assistance from his employer to support his family and other survivors at the evacuation camp with blankets and linen (Interview 1, IDP, 16 May 2018). It was a day after the food that offcial assistance from the NDMO and HCC was activated. On 6 April, an Australian military aircraft arrived in Honiara, providing personnel and relief supplies for 1,000 families worth USD 230,000 (UN OCHA 2014a). On 8 April, World Vision, as part of the Welfare and Internal Displaced Persons Group Relief Team, distributed 306 family kits, tents, and water containers to the Mbokonavera evacuation centre (HCDMO 2014). The government worked together with aid and humanitarian organisations to support approximately 10,000 people that were evacuated to the evacuation centres. According to the evacuees interviewed, they received food, mainly rice and noodles, from groups coordinated by the NDMO but some of these goods were expired. One informant highlighted that authorities gave them a noodle referred to as ‘kokorako,’ which was expired and had a terrible taste (Interview 6, IDP, 17 May 2018). He alleged that the distribution of basic foodstuffs was unfair because some families received less, and others were left out. Some of the female evacuees interviewed said they did not feel safe or comfortable at the evacuation centres because it was crowded with no privacy (Interview 2, IDP, 16 May 2018; Interview 4, IDP, 17 May 2018). They pointed out that equitable access to sanitation needs and support services were issues they faced in the evacuation centre. The Protection Monitoring Team of the Welfare and IDP Cluster, which is comprised of UNICEF, World Vision, Oxfam, and Save the Children Australia in coordination with SIG partners also identifed similar issues (HCDMO 2014; UN OCHA 2014b; UNICEF 2014). Two female informants who were pregnant during the time of the food were particularly vulnerable. One woman miscarried when at the evacuation centre (Interview 5, IDP, 17 May 2018). The other woman gave birth at the hospital, moved back to the evacuation centre, and not long after, her baby died (Interview 3, IDP, 17 May 2018). Both women interviewees mentioned they lost their babies because they were under tremendous stress. There was also delayed access to medical care. Public servants were appointed and tasked by the HCC to manage these evacuation centres. The NDMO, Welfare and IDP Cluster, and HCC developed an evacuation centre management plan for managing the designated evacuation centres in Honiara and Guadalcanal. The Solomon Islands Red Cross, with the support of Oxfam, was responsible for registering people and helped Honiara City Council to manage the evacuation centres (UN OCHA 2014a). These centres were re-registered on 8 April to validate the data (UN OCHA 2014b). Oxfam provided a two-hour training on evacuation centre management for them on

208

Joseph Daniel Foukona

10 April to provide an overview of their roles and responsibilities, how to ensure safety and security, and operational aspects like maintaining infrastructure, equitable distributions, water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH), and identifying vulnerable individuals (HCDMO 2014). The Welfare and IDP Cluster created a special management team for the Mbokonavera evacuation centre. The evacuees at this centre set up their committee to represent them in meetings with government, NDMO, and those providing disaster relief assistance. The secretary of this committee expressed that he found it challenging to be part of the committee because people who lost property and loved ones were demanding support without any clear direction from the government (Interview 7, IDP, 17 May 2018). The committee worked with their Member of Parliament to assist with relocation options. The MLHS and the Deputy Prime Minister met with the committee and provided assurance that the government was working on a relocation package for evacuees who had completely lost their homes and belongings. The NDMO, with support of the HCC, developed repatriation and consolidation/relocation packages for IDPs in schools designated as evacuation centres. The IDPs living in these centres were categorised by HCC as follows: A. B. C. D.

Those who have lost everything At least have a shelter Either A or B but living with the family Those with other kinds of damages, i.e., damage to their gardens (HCDMO 2014, p. 2)

Many of the evacuees living in the Mbokonavera evacuation centre were categorised under ‘A’ and ‘B.’ The secretary of the evacuees’ committee recounted they met with government members who advised them to do a listing of most affected families for the purpose of relocation (Interview 7, IDP, 17 May 2018). He said his committee came up with a list identifying 242 evacuees as vulnerable persons who would require government support. The government’s recovery approach was coordinated through the Recovery Coordination Committee (RCC), led by the Ministry of Development Planning and Aid Coordination (MDPAC). The RCC was activated with the support of the UNDP Pacifc Risk Resilience Programme (PRRP) to oversee the performance of sector committees and clusters (UN OCHA 2014f). The RCC developed a Recovery Action Plan (RAP) (Ministry of Development Planning and Aid Coordination 2015), which was fnalised in 2015. The RAP stipulates that RRC’s role includes ensuring the sector’s implementation is in accordance with the UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (UN Commission on Human Rights 1998) and the Inter-Agency Standing Committee Framework for Durable Solutions for Internally Displaced Persons (IASC 2011). According to the Shelter Cluster Group, the proposal for the return of IDPs to their homes ‘would be voluntary, and the Ministry would provide an option for every victim who cannot return to their home’ (MLHS 2014a). A Geohazard

Solomon Islands

209

survey team supported by the Secretariat of the Pacifc Community (SPC) carried out a survey of food-affected areas such as communities along the Mataniko River and relocation sites to determine whether they were safe for human habitation (UN OCHA 2014c). The MLHS, as the lead government agency of the Shelter Cluster Group, established by the NDMC, had the mandate to assess the situation faced by IDPs, including looking at relocation options. The MLHS created a task force comprising of government offcers who went out to the feld and identifed April Ridge as a suitable site for permanent resettlement of IDPs because it was vacant and road access was easier to construct (MLHS 2014c; Interview 8, government offcer, 18 May 2018). April Ridge is about 36 ha and located south of Jackson Ridge and 2 km from Kombito. MLHS surveyed and pegged the area. It created a new subdivision of 303 lots for longterm settlement (IFRC 2014). According to the government’s policy, the lots would be offered based on a tender process. The IDPs from the April food would be required to apply for the titles. Those that had food-affected fxed-term estates (FTE) could be given an alternative title if they had forfeited their current title. It was envisaged that the Commissioner of Lands would initially issue Temporary Occupation Licences (TOL) to an IDP from the foods then upgrade this to an FTE when the IDP could be able to purchase the FTE title (MLHS 2014a). Many of the IDPs moved out of the evacuation centres. A total 1,467 evacuees remained in four major evacuation centres in Honiara by the end of June 2014. The return strategy for these IDPs was further defned to classify them regarding whether they had title to land they occupied prior to the food. The majority (240 families) of IDPs did not have any form of title to the land they occupied at Koa Hill. Consequently, the IDPs were told to return to their place of origin following the receipt of repatriation packs (IFRC 2014). The Solomon Islands National University area at FOPA (Festival of Pacifc Arts) village was made as one of the transitional shelters for IDPs categorised as ‘(A) those who have lost everything.’ Those who have lost their homes, including IDPs from Koa Hill, were advised to either move to FOPA or to be voluntarily repatriated to their place of origin (MLHS 2014d). Some of the evacuees interviewed claimed they were not consulted prior to the move nor given a choice to decide whether to move to FOPA or elsewhere (Interviews 1–7, IDPs, 16–17 May 2018). Additionally, they expressed that FOPA was worse in terms of food distribution and support because it also supported IDPs from other communities, such as Burnscreek. By the end of June, a total of 261 families, comprising 1,009 individuals had moved to FOPA (IFRC 2014). The NDMO continued to support the evacuees at FOPA as well as four other remaining transitional evacuation centres with the aim of having the evacuation centres vacated within a given timeframe ‘in accordance with the return strategy’ (IFRC 2014). As a result of the government’s relocation proposal, the evacuees from the Mbokonavera evacuation centre who had moved to FOPA formed a Flood Victim Task Force (FVTF). The FVTF was formed to act as the focal point that the government should consult about relocation. NDMO and government offcers

210

Joseph Daniel Foukona

claimed they followed a return plan to move IDPs out of FOPA; however, it was not well received. Evacuees claimed the NDMO basically told people to move out of FOPA without providing any relocation options (Interviews 8–11, IDPs, 19 May 2018). The Chairman of the FVTF claimed that the NDMO denied having any knowledge of the government’s proposal of relocating IDPs to April Ridge and just focused on telling people to vacate the FOPA evacuation centre (Interview 12, IDP, 21 May 2018). He claimed that the evacuees from his Koa Hill community at FOPA were told by offcers from the NDMO to move a day before the state of emergency order was lifted. He stated that when he asked the offcers where the evacuees would go, their response was back to their provinces and that ‘the NDMO will provide a form to sign then transport evacuees to the wharf to board the ship with their iron roofng for housing and a bag of rice’ (Interview 12, IDP, 21 May 2018). In addition, the chairman of the FVTF stated that he requested that the NDMO give evacuees with jobs a bit more time because the government moved them to FOPA (Interview 12, IDP, 21 May 2018). He claimed that the response he received from the NDMO offcers was ‘no, the Solomon Islands National University made an agreement with NDC to use FOPA as a transitional shelter only for a certain time period and that would now lapse so people must move out’ (Interview 12, IDP, 21 May 2018). On that same day, the chairman stated that he went to see the Deputy Prime Minister (DPM), who had discussions with the Prime Minister. The DPM handed him a note with the following instructions ‘remain at FOPA until demarcation of land at April valley is complete’ (Interview 12, IDP, 21 May 2018). He showed the note to offcers of NDMO. Later, he was called to attend a meeting arranged by the NDMO at their offce. Seven police offcers including the Deputy Police Commissioner also attended the meeting. During the meeting, the NDMO denied having any knowledge of the proposal for relocation of IDPs to April Ridge. However, the chairman and members of the FVTF maintained that there was assurance from their Member of Parliament and the Minister of Lands, Housing and Survey that food victims would be relocated to April Ridge. The resolution from the meeting was that the NDMO would assist food victims with iron roofng for housing and facilitate their move to April Ridge (Interview 12, IDP, 21 May 2018). The narrative from the chairman of the FVTF indicated that information on the relocation proposal was inconsistent. The IDPs from Koa Hill who were at the FOPA transition shelter were confused and distressed because there were mixed messages regarding the relocation process. This resulted in tensions between some IDPs and government offcers representing the NDMO (SIBC 2014b). As the FOPA transition centre came to a close, IDPs received repatriation packages but few returned to their home provinces while others either returned to Koa Hill, lived with their relatives, or moved to April Ridge. Although April Ridge had been surveyed and subdivided, it lacked key utilities such as water and electricity supply. It is also a food-prone area. Those that returned to Koa Hill or were living with their relatives explained that they did so because the land earmarked for relocation was undeveloped, far from the city,

Solomon Islands

211

and did not cater for their livelihood (Interviews 12–14, IDPs, 21 May 2018). Furthermore, having lost everything in the food, their situation was no longer the same. Those that moved to April Ridge based their decision on assurances from certain political leaders that they would be given land to settle on. The move by IDPs to April Ridge after the closure of FOPA was uncoordinated and was not based on any land allocation from the MLHS. As a result, when MLHS made a public tender for plots in April Ridge, some of the IDPs who already settled there did not receive any land offer. Others that were given land offers by MLHS could not afford to pay for them. Some people have taken advantage of the uncoordinated relocation strategy to occupy land in April Ridge, then go back to Koa Hill, build informal houses, and put them out for rent (Interview 13, 21 May 2018).

The role of law and policy: What more could have been done? This section takes stock of the law and policy used to address response, recovery, and relocation issues that were identifed in the April 2014 food case study. These issues will be examined in three subsections: (1) the prevention of displacement; (2) protection during evacuation and throughout displacement; and (3) durable solutions. This is important to draw attention to the international standards applied to the issues identifed in the case study. Prevention of displacement Principle 5 of the Guiding Principles stipulates that prevention efforts of government agencies and international actors must respect ‘their obligations under international law, including human rights and humanitarian law, in all circumstances, so as to prevent and avoid conditions that might lead to displacement of persons.’ This concept of prevention refers to efforts that government agencies and international actors must undertake before displacement occurs (Zapater 2010). In the April 2014 food case study, it was apparent that government agencies mandated to deal with disasters did not develop any strategies that sought to prevent displacement. The government’s protection responsibility includes providing early warning systems (EWS). Such systems did not assist the IDPs from Koa Hill in their preparedness. People from Koa Hill developed their own strategies of coping with foods because they had survived past foods by staying in their houses. They adopted a similar approach in April 2014 when the Mataniko River started to rise (Yeo et al. 2015). The government did not provide written updated food information, nor was there information on the radio to the vulnerable populations in areas such a Koa Hill. Such information is key to ensuring that at-risk individuals are able to prepare, particularly in a way that is ‘integrated with livelihood promotion and the overall socio-economic development’ of the community (Mallick et al. 2005, p. 67). The IDPs’ experience of the April 2014 food suggests that communicating the risks of fooding was not effective due to the lack of adequate food detection and communication infrastructure. Additionally, localised food

212

Joseph Daniel Foukona

information in simple language both before and during the foods was not made available in a way that could easily be understood by vulnerable communities (Yeo et al. 2015). Koa Hill is a hazard-prone urban area, yet people settled there because of its proximity to the central market, jobs, and schools. Urban land is becoming scarce due to the increase in Honiara’s population, leading to the construction of settlements on road reserves, steep slopes, and along riverbanks (UN Habitat 2012). Like in Koa Hill, many of these people live in substandard homes that are not safe from disasters (see Reuben and Lowry 2016). While building in hazard-prone areas is a concern, there are no proactive measures taken by the government to restrict informal settlements in these areas and no measures to reduce disaster risk, including through upgrading. Hence, displacement due to the April 2014 fooding disaster was foreseeable and remains foreseeable in the event of future foods. People living in informal settlements are particularly vulnerable to disasters. Not only is their vulnerability related to issues of urban ‘land use, planning and tenure’ (Fitzpatrick 2010, p. 12), but it is exacerbated by a lack of clear linkages between policies addressing urban land issues as well as settlement and preventive strategies towards displacement. There is a high rate of urban poverty and unemployment in informal settlements ‘and most residents depend on informal economic activities for their livelihood’ (UN Habitat 2012, p. 15). Many informal settlement residents do not have a fxed-term estate title or a valid temporary occupation licence to occupy urban land. For instance, a 2006 survey highlighted that ‘households in Temporary Housing Areas under the temporary occupation license scheme noted that only 10 out of 3,000 households had a valid temporary occupation license’ (UN Habitat 2012, p. 15). This shows that a majority of households do not have any form of secured property rights to urban land. In the case of the April 2014 food, the people from Koa Hill did not have a fxed-term estate title nor a temporary occupation licence to the public land they occupied because it was considered as a hazard-prone area. These people continued to be exposed to displacement risks because they did not have a secure legal title to the land and lived in substandard homes. As an agent of the government, the MLHS included a policy to transform the temporary occupation licences held by settlers in Honiara to fxed-term estates by 2020 in its corporate plan. A temporary occupation licence taskforce established by the government in 2011 to implement the policy could not carry out its work plan because of inadequate funds and skilled planners. Due to poor planning and development control, people continued to construct ‘unregulated temporary houses on road reserves and in planned residential areas’ (UN Habitat 2012, p. 6). This MLHS policy had no linkage to the 2010 NDRMP for the prevention or mitigation of natural hazard induced displacements. This suggests a disconnect between the government’s efforts to formalise temporary occupation licences and its approach to address informal settlements in infrastructure improvement initiatives and other disaster risk reduction measures. Despite the policy’s existence, it was restrictive in application because it applied only to those who had a

Solomon Islands

213

temporary occupation licence. For others like the people from the Koa Hill community who had no temporary occupation licence, they remained vulnerable to disaster risk, including the risk of displacement. After the April 2014 food, a good number of IDPs returned to Koa Hill where they constructed substandard housing and remained vulnerable to foodinduced displacement based on their social vulnerability and hazard exposure. The Honiara City Council’s effort to pass an ordinance that would require buffer zones along riverbanks within the city was futile (SIBC 2014a). This ordinance as a measure to prevent displacement in the event of a future food had no legal effect because, according to the HCC’s lawyer, it was still in draft form. Existing laws such as the River Waters Act (Rev. Edition 1996), which provides at s.4 for the Minister to prohibit the construction of buildings ‘in the food channel of any river or in any place in which it appears to him that such building, structure or erection may impede, or obstruct, or otherwise affect the fow of a river’ was not enforced to prevent food-induced displacement. The 2010 NDRMP provided a platform for disaster preparedness, but its implementation was more response and relief oriented to disaster risk management, thereby not focusing on strategies to facilitate the prevention of displacement. The 2018 new disaster management framework that supersedes the 2010 NDRMP takes a similar approach. As a result, the actions of the existing state actors involved in disaster activities are inadequate, particularly in light of the rapid rate of urbanisation. Their approach is more towards protection during and throughout displacement. Protection during displacement Key international standards and guidelines relating to the protection of IDPs during and throughout displacement are provided in, amongst others, the Guiding Principles and the IASC Operational Guidelines on the Protection of Persons in Situations of Natural Disasters (2011). The relevant national law and policy framework including the 2010 NDRMP accommodates these protection obligations by creating institutional structures to address disaster risk reduction and management. The framework covers areas such as responsibility of various actors at the national and provincial level, sectoral and sub-national policies and procedures, EWS, evacuation, camp management, climate change adaptation, and disaster risk reduction. The framework assigns the NDC and NDMO key roles and responsibilities in addressing and coordinating disaster management activities. While the framework provides clear roles and responsibilities of relevant institutions at the national and provincial levels, the experience from the April 2014 food case study suggests that coordination to address the protection needs of IDPs was inadequate. This is partly due to issues of institutional capacity and resourcing, which impacts the efforts of relevant government institutions to carry out their responsibilities to protect those who have been displaced. The focus of relevant government institutions on protection during the April 2014 food and throughout displacement did not adequately take into account

214

Joseph Daniel Foukona

the human rights and needs of those displaced. The level of government commitment required to apply international standards and guidelines relating to the protection of people during evacuation and throughout displacement is an ongoing challenge. The implementation of the legal and policy framework for ‘protection’ appears to put more emphasis on disaster relief than on specifc needs or protection of people during displacement. Evidence from the April 2014 food case study indicates that the protection of IDPs was more about addressing the survival and physical safety of those affected by the food rather than promoting protection as encompassing all forms of human rights. Implementation of the law and policy framework tends to be a reactionary response rather than a proactive protection approach addressing displacement. The April 2014 food case study revealed that the legal framework on disaster response at that time did not provide for any mechanisms for IDPs to raise their complaints or concerns regarding how the government and associated actors addressed their protection. This gap is also evident in the NDMP 2018. Consequently, how to hold government institutions and other stakeholders accountable for not fulflling their ‘protection’ responsibilities as affrmed under both international and domestic legal and policy frameworks is unclear. Establishment and management of evacuation centres during the April 2014 food lacked clear planning and a management framework prior to the disaster. The NDMO and HCC, as part of the institutional structure provided for under the NDRMP 2010 in their work, made an effort to adhere to the international principles of protection of the displaced. The decision on how to run these evacuation centres was dictated by NDMO and HCC without much input from IDPs. For example, the government’s strategy for the distribution of relief items in evacuation centres created a situation whereby IDPs felt they did not have the same human rights as other people in the country. Relief efforts were led by government and civil society organisations with international assistance from donor governments, international NGOs, and UN agencies, but there was no control mechanism in place to ensure that relief items were equitably delivered or targeted the specifc needs of IDPs by government actors. Issues like the theft of relief items and unequal distribution of relief supplies without anyone being held accountable were raised by IDPs in reference to the April 2014 food. Under the new NDMP 2018, there is no explicit provision regulating the administration and distribution of relief items to avoid similar issues from arising in future disasters. How IDPs were processed and dealt with in the evacuation centres and temporary shelters impacted their human rights. The respondents in the case study highlighted that food was of poor quality in the evacuation centres and there was no access to food during their last week at the temporary shelter. This suggests a failure to fulfl the right to food as described in General Comment No. 12 of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights on the distribution of relief assistance (UN CESCR 1999). Some of the respondents in the case study expressed that there was discrimination in the way relief assistance was distributed to people in temporary shelters. Some received more assistance than others.

Solomon Islands

215

This is contrary to the non-discrimination obligation of duty bearers, which includes a positive duty to ensure that marginalised people, such as the elderly, women, and persons with disabilities receive equal assistance. There were other human rights issues associated with the April 2014 food displacement such as safety, privacy, and security in the evacuation centres. The evacuation centres and the FOPA temporary shelter were crowded, which created additional risks of harm to people in situations of potential vulnerability, such as women, children, and persons with disabilities. Under the NDRMP framework, there was no explicit provision dealing with issues of distribution of relief and safety in evacuation centres. Even the 2018 framework does not provide explicit provisions to address these issues head-on. Durable solutions It is imperative to consult IDPs when planning and preparing for their return either to their place of origin, new relocation site, or elsewhere. IDPs must be allowed to extensively participate in any planning processes focused on durable solutions. This means duty bearers must adequately consult IDPs and listen to their concerns regarding their protection issues, priorities, and solutions as part of the process of formulating durable solutions. Inviting IDPs to actively participate recognises their dignity, puts them at the centre of the solution, and makes them visible (Brookings 2008). Principle 28(2) of the Guiding Principles highlights this by stating ‘[s]pecial efforts should be made to ensure the full participation of internally displaced persons in the planning and management of their return or resettlement and reintegration.’ The UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) Tool for Participatory Assessment in Operations (2006) provides a framework that promotes consultation with IDPs through a participatory assessment approach. Consultation gives people the opportunity to provide input in the decisions that will affect their lives (Brookings 2008). As the Durable Solutions Preliminary Operational Guide 2016 points out, consultation with IDPs is central to the design and implementation of durable solutions. Respondents from the case study revealed there was inadequate consultation with IDPs in the evacuation centres and the FOPA shelter regarding a return to their homes, a new relocation site, or elsewhere. People felt they were pressured to leave the evacuation centres and the temporary shelter at FOPA without adequate assistance to make preparations for their next steps. For many IDPs at the FOPA temporary shelter, the transition to either April Ridge as a new relocation site or elsewhere was a daunting experience. This was partly due to the police involvement in moving people out of the FOPA temporary shelter, and there was confusion for those who lost their homes and properties at Koa Hill on where to return to. Although the government selected April Ridge as the relocation site for IDPs, there was conficting information about the relocation site from the NDMO, the MLHS, and members of parliament. This suggests that there was inadequate consultation with IDPs in the selection of the April Ridge relocation site. IDPs were not extensively involved in the decision-making process or

216

Joseph Daniel Foukona

selecting the relocation site. This arguably is a denial of IDPs right to participate in decisions that would affect their lives. The relocation of IDPs, mainly for the affected community of Koa Hill, was a government policy decision. It was a strategy designed to secure land in Honiara for IDPs. While this was a commendable solution, it was not durable due to a number of reasons. The IASC Durable Solutions Framework (2011) identifes eight key factors that affect whether any solution can be considered ‘durable.’ These include: • • • • • • • •

Safety and security Adequate standard of living Access to livelihoods Restoration of housing, land, and property Access to documentation Family reunifcation Participation in public affairs Access to effective remedies and justice

The key issues in the April Ridge context are an inadequate standard of living, lack of access to livelihoods, and the restoration of housing, land, and property. The IDPs that moved to April Ridge, settled elsewhere, or returned to Koa Hill continued to have protection needs due to their displacement. IDPs were given iron roofng and bags of rice as a return strategy. This was an ineffective strategy because it did not provide people with any guidance or assistance on how they would rebuild their houses. This strategy also did not address how people could rebuild their lives from scratch. Apart from the return and relocation strategy, IDPs no longer received any assistance from the government to remake their lives either in their place of origin or residence, April Ridge, or elsewhere. IDPs that moved to April Ridge later found out that they were required to purchase the land. This highlighted a lack of communication and transparency about the relocation and costs involved. The IDPs found this diffcult because the land price was beyond their earning capacity. The other issue the many IDPs faced was their claim to access land in April Ridge was not prioritised, because they did not have title to the land they used to occupy before the disaster. What this meant was those that occupied land without title prior to the disaster were not treated the same as those that had title in terms of land allocation at April Ridge. This was the approach that informed the government’s decision regarding whether IDPs should be offered land at April Ridge or return to their place of origin following the receipt of repatriation packages. As a result of this approach, many IDPs did not take ownership of the relocation solution in order to make it durable. Elements of durable solutions, such as standard of living, employment and livelihoods, and housing, land, and property after the April 2014 food were not at all better than before the food, as the case study reveals. Even though the government supplied IDPs with iron roofng, provided repatriation packages, and

Solomon Islands

217

allocated land at April Ridge, this did not adequately address all elements of durable solutions. There were no programmes designed to protect people’s human rights through other forms of assistance and government support to rebuild livelihoods after the disaster. As a result, many IDPs that were repatriated to their place of origin returned to Koa Hill without measures to facilitate their return there. While Koa Hill is considered a food risk area, ‘people trade off the food risk against the reward of access to work and services; some have rebuilt in foodways’ (Yeo et al. 2015, p. 1). The needs and human rights of IDPs were not adequately accommodated in the government’s durable solutions strategy. It seems the government’s strategy was more focused on relief, recovery, and return without providing much leverage through the existing legal and policy frameworks on how to accomplish the elements of durable solutions through a human rights-based approach. This is unsurprising because the 2010 NDRMP did not address durable solutions. There is also no explicit provision under the existing law and policy frameworks for durable solution approaches. The current 2018 NDMP framework focuses on disaster risk reduction and management but is silent on guiding principles and durable solutions. It is the Recovery Action Plan 2015 in reference to the RCC’s role that referred to the Guiding Principles and the IASC Durable Solutions Framework. While the 2010 NDRMP and the superseding NDMP 2018 do not expressly address the concept of durable solutions, there is scope for incorporating international guidelines and standards through operational policy documents such as standard operation procedures, camp management, relocation or resettlement, and recovery plans.

Conclusion The research fndings that this chapter draws on to show that displacement is not addressed in suffcient detail in the national law and policy framework. Displacement is only mentioned in policy documents with limited qualifcation. The needs and vulnerabilities of IDPs are not adequately addressed at the national and local levels. At the national level, the existing law and policy framework does not explicitly outline the measures and initiatives that should be pursued to ensure international guidelines and standards guide measures to prevent displacement, protect people during evacuation and throughout displacement, and facilitate durable solutions. This suggests that in order for IDPs to fully realise their human rights, there is a need to explicitly integrate displacement into the national legal and policy framework with clear linkages to sectoral laws such as environmental, building, planning, and land use laws, together with more express and detailed integration of key international standards and guidelines. Since the research did not look at the linkages between national disaster laws and sector laws in addressing displacement, this is an area that can be pursued in the future through more in-depth research. Based on the research fndings, it is also recommended that strong coordinating links should be created between NDMO, Sector Committees such as

218

Joseph Daniel Foukona

Protection and Camp Management, and External Humanitarian Clusters regarding disaster prevention, protection, and durable solutions. This should include creating clear policies, guidelines, and plans on preparedness and evacuation processes that safeguard the rights and needs of IDPs, which include women and other potentially vulnerable groups. IDPs need to be actively engaged in displacement prevention, protection, and the durable solution process. They should extensively participate in consultations at all levels in the design, planning, and management of processes that provide a clear pathway for durable solutions. It is also recommended that clear policies on settlement options (i.e., reintegration, return, relocation) should be developed in consultation with IDPs. Such processes should allow IDPs, including women and potentially vulnerable groups, to make informed and voluntary decisions on returning either to their place of origin or moving elsewhere. To ensure the effective implementation and enforcement of such policies, there is a need to secure adequate funding to build technical and resource capacities of state actors through training and collaboration with international humanitarian agencies to ensure they have a clear understanding of their roles as duty bearers in preventing displacement, protecting people during displacement, and facilitating durable solutions.

Notes 1 For instance, 90,000 people were displaced in the context of cyclone Namu in 1986 (UN DHA, 1986) and 5,000 were displaced in the context of a tsunami in 2007 (ADB 2007). 2 See minutes of shelter sector/cluster meeting No. 4, 22 April 2014.

References Adaptation Fund (2019) Enhancing urban resilience to climate change impacts and natural disasters: Honiara. Available at: https://www.adaptation-fund.org/project/enhancingurban-resilience-climate-change-impacts-natural-disasters-honiara-3/ (Accessed: 19 May 2020). ADB (2007) Solomon Islands: Western and Choiseul provinces earthquake and tsunami. Available at: https://reliefweb.int/report/solomon-islands/solomon-islands-western-a nd-choiseul-provinces-earthquake-and-tsunami (Accessed: 19 May 2020). Brookings (2008) Consulting IDPs: moving beyond rhetoric. Available at https://www.bro okings.edu/research/consulting-idps-moving-beyond-rhetoric/ (Accessed: 7 July 2019). Fitzpatrick, D. (2010) Land and natural disasters: guidance for practitioners. United Nations Human Settlements Programme. Available at https://ssrn.com/abstract=2007665 (Accessed: 19 May 2020). Foukona, J., Bernard, V., and Scott, M. (2020) Solomon Islands national law and policy report on displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. Lund: Raoul Wallenberg Institute of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law. Available at https://rwi.lu.se/ disaster-displacement/ (Accessed: 19 May 2020). GFDRR (2019) Solomon Islands. Available at: https://www.gfdrr.org/en/solomon-islands (Accessed: 10 April 2019).

Solomon Islands

219

Honiara City Disaster Management Offce (2014) HCC situational report −5 April. Honiara: Honiara City Operations Centre. Available at: https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/ fles/resources/HCC%20SITREP%20April%2011.pdf (Accessed: 10 February 2019). IASC (2011) Operational guidelines on the protection of persons in situations of natural disasters. Inter-Agency Standing Committee, Brookings-Bern Project in Internal Displacement. Available at: https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/IDPersons/OperationalGuide lines_IDP.pdf (Accessed: 3 June 2019.). International Federation of Red Cross (IFRC) (2014) Emergency Plan of Act Solomon Islands/Pacifc: fash foods. Available at: https://reliefweb.int/report/solomon-isl ands/solomon-islands-pacifc-fash-foods-revised-emergency-appeal-n-mdrsb003-0 (Accessed: 23 July 2020). Keen, M., Barbara, J., Carpenter, J., Evans, D., and Foukona, J. (2017) ‘Urban development in Honiara: harnessing opportunities, embracing change’, State Society and Governance in Melanesia. Canberra: Australian National University. Available at: http://dpa.bell school.anu.edu.au/experts-publications/publications/5567/urban-development-honia ra-harnessing-opportunities-embracing (Accessed: 19 May 2020). Mallick, D.L., Rahman, A., Alam, M., Juel, A.S.M., Ahmad, A.N., Alam, S.S. (2005) ‘Case study 3: Bangladesh foods in Bangladesh: a shift from disaster management towards disaster preparedness’, Institute of Development Studies Bulletin, 36(4), pp. 53–70. Available at: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/43539521.pdf (Accessed: 25 April 2019). Ministry of Development Planning and Aid Coordination (2015) Recovery action plan. Honiara: Solomon Islands Government. Ministry of Lands, Housing and Survey (2014a) Minutes of shelter sector/cluster meeting, 13 April. ——— (2014b) Minutes of shelter sector/cluster meeting, 14 April. ——— (2014c) Minutes of shelter sector/cluster meeting, 17 April. ——— (2014d) Minutes of shelter sector/cluster meeting, 22 April. Day, S.J., Forster, T., Himmelsbach, J., Korte, L., Mucke, P., Radtke, K., Thielbörger, P., Weller, D. (2019) World risk report 2019. Bündnis Entwicklung Hilft and Ruhr University Bochum, Institute for International Law of Peace and Armed Confict (IFHV). National Protection Committee (n.d.) Standard operating procedures. Honiara: Solomon Islands Government. Natuzzi, E.S., Joshua, C., Shortus, M., Reubin, R., Dalipanda, T., Ferran, K., Aumua, A., Brodine, S. (2016) ‘Defning population health vulnerability following an extreme weather event in an urban Pacifc island environment: Honiara, Solomon Islands’, American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 95(2), p. 307–314. Reuben, R. and Lowry J.H. (2016) ‘Effectiveness of evacuation facilities in Honiara City, Solomon Islands: a spatial perspective,’ Natural Hazards, 82, pp. 227–244. SIBC (2014a) ‘HCC passed new river bank building ordinance’, 1 May. Available at: http: //www.sibconline.com.sb/hcc-passed-new-river-bank-building-ordinance/ (Accessed: 20 April 2019). ——— (2014b) ‘Chairman of FOPA evacuation centre before court.’ 11 June. Available at: http://www.sibconline.com.sb/chairman-of-fopa-evacuation-centre-before-court/ (Accessed: 20 April 2019). SINEOC (2014) ‘Situation report 01’. 4 April. Honiara: NDMO. Available at: https:// reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/NEOC%20Situation%20Report%2 0No%201.pdf (Accessed: 10 February 2019).

220

Joseph Daniel Foukona

Trundle, A. and McEvoy, D. (2016) Honiara urban resilience and climate change: A joint strategy for the Honiara City Council and the Solomon Islands Government. UN-Habitat and RMIT University. Available at: http://www.fukuoka.unhabitat.org/programmes/c cci/pdf/HURCAP_fnal_Endorsed.pdf (Accessed: 10 February 2019). UN CESCR (1999) General comment No. 12: The right to adequate food. E/C.12/1999/5. Available at: https://www.refworld.org/docid/4538838c11.html (Accessed: 13 April 2020). UN DHA (1986) ‘Solomon Islands Cyclone Namu May 1986: UNDRO situation reports 1–8’. Available at: https://reliefweb.int/report/solomon-islands/solomon-islands-cycl one-namu-may-1986-undro-situation-reports-1-8 (Accessed: 10 February 2019). UN Habitat (2012) Solomon Islands: Honiara urban profle. Available at: https://unhabit at.org/solomon-islands-honiara-urban-profle (Accessed: 10 February 2019). UN OCHA (2014a) Solomon Islands: fash foods, situation report no. 1. 7 April. Available at: https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/fles/resources/OCHA_SLB_FlashFloods_S itrep1_20140507.pdf (Accessed: 10 February 2019). ——— (2014b) Solomon Islands: fash foods, situation report no. 2. 10 April. Available at: https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/fles/resources/OCHA_SLB_FlashFloods_S itrep2_20140508.pdf (Accessed: 10 February 2019). ——— (2014c) Solomon Islands: fash foods situation, report no. 4. 18 April. Available at: https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/fles/resources/OCHA_SLB_FlashFloods_S itrep4_20140418.pdf (Accessed: 10 February 2019). ——— (2014d) Solomon Islands: Flash foods, situation report no. 7. 15 May. Available at: https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/fles/resources/OCHA_SLB_FlashFloods_S itrep7_20140514_FINAL.pdf (Accessed: 10 February 2019). ——— (2015f) Pacifc risk resilience programme country briefs - Solomon Islands. 28 May. Available at: https://reliefweb.int/report/solomon-islands/pacifc-risk-resilience-progra mme-country-briefs-solomon-islands (Accessed: 10 February 2019). UN OHCHR (2019) UN treaty body database. Available at: https://tbinternet.ohchr. org/_layouts/15/TreatyBodyExternal/Countries.aspx?CountryCode=SLB&Lang=EN (Accessed: 10 February 2019). UNHCR (2006) The UNHCR tool for participatory assessment in operations. Available at: https://www.refworld.org/pdfd/462df4232.pdf (Accessed: 10 February 2019). UNICEF (2014) Solomon Islands humanitarian and recovery response update 2. 10 June. Available at: https://www.unicef.org/appeals/fles/UNICEF_Solomon_Islands_Human itarian_Response_and_Recovery_Update_2_-_10Jun14.pdf (Accessed: 22 July 2019). Wilson, C. (2018) ‘The hidden epidemic in the shanty towns of Honiara’, The Interpreter, 22 February. Available at: https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/hidden-ep idemic-shanty-towns-honiara (Accessed: 15 April 2019). World Vision (2019) Solomon Islands: earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanoes, and foods. Available at: https://www.worldvision.org/disaster-relief-news-stories/solomon-islan ds-earthquakes-tsunamis-volcanoes-foods (Accessed: 15 April 2019). Yeo, S., Butcher-Gollach, C., and Bonte-Grapentin, M. (2015) Lessons from the April 2014 food disaster in Honiara, Solomon Islands. Poster Presentation, Floodplain Management Association National Conference. Brisbane Convention and Exhibition Centre Australia. 19–22 May. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication /308697828_Lessons_from_the_April_2014_food_disaster_in_Honiara_Solomon_Is lands (Accessed: 10 February 2019). Zapater, J. (2010) ‘Prevention of forced displacement: the inconsistencies of a concept’, New Issues in Refugee Research, Research Paper No. 186. Geneva: UNHCR. Available at: https://www.unhcr.org/4bbb2a199.pdf (Accessed: 22 July 2019).

Solomon Islands

221

International legal and policy documents 1966 1998

International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 3 January 1976) 993 UNTS 3 Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. Addendum to Report of the Representative of the Secretary-General, Mr. Francis M. Deng, submitted pursuant to Commission resolution 1997/39. UN Commission on Human Rights. (E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2)

National law and policy 1978 1996 2010 2018

Solomon Islands Constitution River Waters Act (Rev. Edition 1996) National Disaster Risk Management Plan National Disaster Management Plan

Conclusion A research and policy agenda for addressing displacement in the context of disasters and climate change Matthew Scott and Albert Salamanca This volume has addressed internal displacement in the context of disasters and climate change across Asia and the Pacifc, adopting a human rights-based and gender-equal approach. The review of legal and policy frameworks, combined with research into how these frameworks are implemented in specifc instances of displacement, has generated a rich qualitative foundation enabling the identifcation of areas that warrant particular attention from a policy perspective. Avenues that appear particularly open to further research are also identifable. This concluding chapter suggests ways forward in both policy and research.

Policy implications emerging from the research This volume was being fnalised during the period when the recently convened UN High Level Panel on Internal Displacement was seeking recommendations on how to improve the protection of persons (at risk of being) internally displaced.1 Drawing on our research, contributors to this volume also made a collective submission to the High Level Panel in the name of the Asia Pacifc Academic Network on Disaster Displacement.2 The core of the submission emphasises the importance of systematically integrating displacement into national and sub-national law, policy and practice through a combination of technical cooperation, capacity strengthening, targeted research, and institutional engagement that promotes a human rights-based approach while prioritising measures that are practical, relevant, and achievable in local context. At the national and sub-national level, while acknowledging that each country has particular conditions that will affect the measures taken to protect people from and during displacement and facilitate durable solutions, the research indicates that two issues warrant particular attention. First, legal and policy frameworks can be enhanced by further and more systematically integrating displacement considerations, refecting key international standards, and in particular the 1998 Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement. This applies across disaster risk reduction and management, climate change adaptation, and sustainable development frameworks. As noted in the introduction to this volume, climate change adaptation legal and policy documents tended to refect lower levels

Conclusion 223 of integration of displacement considerations, and there is therefore scope for much further work in this context. National actors should also weigh the benefts of adopting a specifc policy on internal displacement, similar to those adopted in Vanuatu and under consideration in Bangladesh and the Philippines. Second, the chapters included in this volume clearly establish that legal and policy frameworks have little value without implementation, and multiple factors beyond these frameworks affect the extent to which people are protected from and during displacement and whether durable solutions to displacement are ultimately realised. In the frst instance, local level plans and procedures that refect international standards and guidelines and national legal and policy frameworks can help to tailor a human rights-based and gender-equal approach that is relevant to local context. Such an initiative may require signifcant support from national and, potentially, international level actors. However, as many of the chapters in the volume highlighted, displacement risk cannot solely be addressed through enhanced policies and procedures. In this context, tackling ‘root causes,’ an ambition refected in many of the legal and policy frameworks considered as part of this research, requires a human rights-based, gender-equal, whole of society, sustainable development, and climate-adaptive approach that works towards reducing the structural underpinnings of differential exposure and vulnerability. There is a need here to increase the funds available to states particularly exposed to displacement risk, and for states to prioritise measures that break down barriers to the full enjoyment of human rights by persons facing discrimination on grounds of gender, age, disability, ethnicity, nationality, and so forth. Neither the editors nor the contributors to this volume are under any illusion about the scale of such a project, but it lies at the heart of the human rights, disaster risk reduction, climate change adaptation, and sustainable development programme, as refected in the international, regional, and national legal and policy documents that we have considered. Crucially, although these four frames of human rights, disaster risk reduction, climate change adaptation, and sustainable development were listed separately above, they are so deeply interconnected and interdependent that there would be value in pursuing their integration to the fullest possible extent at international, regional, national, and sub-national levels. To some extent, this ambition is already refected in the ‘coherence agenda’ that is discussed in these circles.3 Beyond addressing root causes, another mechanism involves capacity strengthening at national and local levels to provide actors with the conceptual, budgetary, administrative, and physical resources to implement and further develop existing law and policy. Additionally, mechanisms to monitor implementation of national law and policy, as well as compliance with international human rights standards, can be strengthened or developed. There is a clear role here for national human rights institutions, some of which are already actively involved in monitoring how states manage disasters.4

224

Matthew Scott and Albert Salamanca

Gathering data on displacement risk can help states and other actors to identify pockets of heightened exposure and vulnerability to displacement, and monitor and evaluate the achievement of durable solutions, but the drive for more and better data needs to be tempered by considerations around the right to privacy and should be informed by legislation regulating the collection, storage, access, and use of personal information. At the regional level, Chapter 2 has already highlighted how processes such as the Asia Ministerial Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction have promoted the adoption by states of a coherent, human rights-based approach to implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals, the Sendai Framework, and the Paris Agreement. More work can be done in this context by continuing to highlight the phenomenon of disaster- and climate change-related displacement at relevant gatherings, and by promoting and supporting research and the exchange of good practices across the region. Progress could also be promoted through mainstreaming displacement into the agenda of relevant regional bodies such as ASEAN through its different working groups and committees, notably the ASEAN Committee on Disaster and Management (ACDM) and the ASEAN Technical Working Group on Climate Change. There is also a clear role for engagement with this issue by the ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance. In addition, regional human rights institutions and bodies such as the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights and the Asia Pacifc Forum of National Human Rights Institutions are well-placed to promote a human rightsbased approach to the issue. Internationally, UN agencies, treaty monitoring bodies, and mandate holders such as the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons can continue to draw attention to the human rights issues that arise when people are exposed to displacement risk. The issue also invites consideration under the Universal Periodic Review process. Civil society, academic, and other actors have an opportunity to highlight displacement in the context of disasters and climate change in shadow reports and other communications that inform these processes. It is also important to note in this regard that internal displacement can also become cross-border displacement, and the critical work of the Platform on Disaster Displacement5 in promoting effective practices for addressing this distinctive challenge must continue. The ongoing work of the Task Force on Displacement6 under the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage of the UNFCCC will continue to be instrumental in integrating displacement considerations into climate change adaptation and, indeed, loss and damage processes. Work on each of these points will contribute to the enhanced protection of people from and during displacement, and towards durable solutions. However, when addressing a phenomenon so diverse, complex, and large-scale as this, particularly at a time when climate change promises an increase in the frequency and intensity of many hazard events, it is also important to recognise that the challenges will often outweigh the capacity of states and the international

Conclusion 225 community to guarantee even a bare minimum of protection to the millions of people affected. It is important to acknowledge that the era of climate change in which we are now living is characterised by a potentially signifcant decline in the enjoyment of human rights, and not only for those displaced in the context of disasters and climate change. With this in mind, the volume does not conclude with solutions, but rather an approach to trying to cope with a daunting and increasingly dire existential crisis on a planetary scale.

Avenues for further research In our submission to the UN High Level Panel on Internal Displacement, the members of the Asia Pacifc Academic Network on Disaster Displacement recommended that Research examining displacement in the context of disasters and climate change should be promoted and facilitated, prioritizing support for academics working in countries with high levels of exposure and vulnerability to the phenomenon and carried out in a manner that is inclusive of diverse voices and sources of knowledge. (p. 1) Systematic human rights-based research into national and sub-national legal and policy frameworks provides important insight into good practices, facilitates comparison across countries and regions, and establishes a foundation for technical cooperation. Some of the avenues that have opened up in light of this research include the following. First, there is signifcant scope for further research at the intersection of displacement, the sustainable development and climate change adaptation, particularly in relation to addressing the ‘root causes’ of displacement, and the challenges associated with the achievement of durable solutions. These challenges often relate to entrenched poverty and inequality and are likely to become more acute as a consequence of the risk amplifer effect of climate change. In this space, some of the questions relating to the endemic exposure and vulnerability of informal settlements (see the Solomon Islands chapter), the tensions between ‘Building Back Better’ and returning home (see the Nepal chapter), and the displacement associated with adaptation interventions such as canal construction (see the Thailand chapter) could be further explored. More focus could be devoted here to the role of urban planning, housing policy, and environment and development ministries, whose role in the displacement situations discussed in the present volume were less obvious than that played by disaster management authorities. Second, there is also a need to further explore the factors that impact on the implementation of these frameworks. What combination of law, policy, funding, capacity strengthening, and, potentially, international or regional support frameworks contribute to effective prevention, preparedness, protection, and durable solutions in this context? What obstacles recur in different national and subnational contexts and what strategies have been used to overcome them? The

226

Matthew Scott and Albert Salamanca

strategies recently adopted by Vanuatu and under consideration in Bangladesh represent innovative and promising new approaches to addressing the phenomenon, and how states and other actors go about implementing these strategies warrants particularly close consideration. Third, although some of the case studies examined more local level plans and procedures, the systematic review was only conducted at the national level. A different research agenda would closely examine plans and policies across a single country. Such a study would provide a depth of insight into the varieties of approaches local level actors take to addressing displacement. Were such a study to simultaneously include case studies from a selection of the local contexts whose plans and procedures were examined, there would be an opportunity for a deeper understanding of the role of plans and procedures in addressing displacement in the context of disasters and climate change. Fourth, the research presented in this volume has focused on only eight countries in Asia and the Pacifc. For a richer comparative approach to be possible, the same methodology, as employed in this research, could be replicated in other countries in the region. This approach would expand knowledge of domestic legal and policy approaches to addressing displacement in the context of disasters and climate change, as well as deepening understanding of the way authorities at the local level actually address the human rights implications of this phenomenon. Fifth, although Asia and the Pacifc is the region with by far the highest levels of displacement in the context of disasters and climate change, this phenomenon is global. Indeed, nearly 3.5 million people were newly displaced by suddenonset disasters in Africa in 2019 alone (IDMC 2020). In this region, there is also considerable overlap between disaster and climate-related displacement and displacement that is driven by armed confict. With a growing literature examining the relationship between climate change and armed confict, there is a clear need to understand how states in this region, as well as local authorities with responsibility for protecting people from and during displacement and for facilitating durable solutions, are responding. Sixth, there is also scope for more concentrated thematic research. For instance, planned relocation is often identifed as a disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation practice that is consistently not conducted in accordance with a human rights-based approach. Comparative research examining detailed case studies of processes of planned relocation in the region or internationally, purposively selecting cases considered to have been successful, would help to generate a body of empirical evidence, based on thick description combined with a rights-based perspective. Key questions around inclusive participation, access to information, accountability, and other elements of a rights-based approach could be explored in such an initiative. Similarly, there is a need to identify good practices relating to displacement risk in informal urban settlements. Many of the case studies in this volume have highlighted issues relating to the heightened exposure and vulnerability of people living in informal urban settlements to disaster-related displacement, and others have pointed to the phenomenon of movement into urban centres in

Conclusion 227 the aftermath of disasters. What role can upgrading informal settlements play in reducing displacement risk? How can authorities and other actors plan for and effect rights-based evacuation and the equal protection of people sheltering outside of formal evacuation centres and temporary shelters? Can the human rights cities movement7 offer a way forward in this context? Does the New Urban Agenda provide any relevant mechanisms in this regard? What do durable solutions look like for people who were already denied the enjoyment of the minimum core of rights to shelter before the disaster? These and other questions warrant considerable further exploration. Seventh, the cases that were considered in this volume all examined instances of displacement arising in the context of sudden-onset disasters, triggered by such hazards as foods, storms, earthquakes, and volcanic activity. As noted in the introduction to this volume, drought, increasing salinity, and sea level rise also contribute to displacement, but the attribution of human mobility to these kinds of hazards is more complex, as multiple factors, including economic, social, political, and others, contribute to individual decisions to move. Here again, the role of actors and legal and policy frameworks other than those focusing on DRRM might be more in focus. With patterns that may appear more closely aligned with more voluntary forms of internal and cross-border migration, what kind of legal and policy frameworks operate in this space, and to what extent do they refect international human rights-based standards and guidelines? Finally, the contributors did not set out only to identify areas where law and policy was not being implemented at the local level. However, with some exceptions, the chapters in the volume tend to highlight the elements that did not work well, rather than pointing to practices that were effective. Identifcation of common challenges relating to displacement in the context of disasters and displacement in the region is helpful to the extent that it highlights areas where further work can be done. However, a helpful corollary of this work would be an initiative that actively collates concrete, location-specifc examples of measures that refect good practice. This kind of compendium would contribute to the toolkit that local, national, and regional authorities have at their disposal when taking steps to address this growing challenge.

Notes 1 See the web page of the UN High Level Panel on Internal Displacement for further information https://www.un.org/internal-displacement-panel/content/high-level -panel. 2 See https://rwi.lu.se/2020/05/submission-to-un-high-level-panel-on-internal-displace ment/. 3 For an example, consider the Global Initiative on Disaster Risk Management, which seeks coherence between the Sustainable Development Goals, the Paris Agreement, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, and the New Urban Agenda. Available at: https://www.giz.de/en/downloads/062018_Factsheet_GIKRM_II_En g.pdf (Accessed: 29 May 2020). 4 See, for example, the discussion of the work of the National Human Rights Commission of Nepal in Chapter 9. See also recent work by the Philippines Commission on

228

Matthew Scott and Albert Salamanca

Human Rights relating to the Taal volcanic eruption. Available at: http://chr.gov.ph/ wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Human-Rights-Standards-on-Internally-Displaced-Per sons-IDPs-Affected-by-the-Taal-Volcano-Erruption.pdf (Accessed: 28 May 2020). 5 For information on the Platform on Disaster Displacement, see https://disasterdisplacement.org/. 6 For information on the Task Force on Displacement, see https://unfccc.int/wim-ex com/sub-groups/TFD. 7 For information on human rights cities, see https://rwi.lu.se/the-swedish-human-righ ts-city-project/.

Index

ableism 7, 158, 167; and humanitarian interventions 9; and Indonesia 7; logic of 157 accountability 189; and complaints 214; and monitoring 223 Africa 226 arbitrary displacement 31 armed confict 226 ASEAN: Committee on Disaster Management 224; Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance 224; Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights 224; Technical Working Group on Climate Change 224 Asian Cities Climate Change Resilience Network 57, 66 Asia Ministerial Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction 224 Asia Pacifc Forum of National Human Rights Institutions 224 benefciary 189, 192 bespoke legal and policy framework on displacement 19, 28, 36, 41, 43, 44, 92, 186 building back better see Sendai Framework camp 185, 190, 192 capacity 218; strengthening 112, 159, 223 chiefy system 104 civil documentation 189 climate change: as amplifer 3; consequences 3; defnition 3; and Guiding Principles 2; IPCC reports 4–5 climate change adaptation: as a driver of displacement 4; and human rights 10; and root causes of displacement 225 climate refugees 83 coherence agenda 223 Committee on the Rights of the Child 190

compensation, role of 72–73 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 142, 161 data 61, 87, 168 disaster risk reduction and management: and Guiding Principles 2, 18; and human rights 10; role of budgets and procurement policies 91, 93; role of disaggregated data 93; and SDGs 33 disasters: all of society approach 82; and development 82; and discrimination 7; and human rights-based approach 7; not natural 6; and peace 83; role of states 7; as social processes 7 discrimination 7, 19, 25; and indigenous peoples in Nepal 184, 190; and the rights of persons with disabilities in Bangladesh 142; and right to food 214; and rural dwellers 191 displacement: and agency 69; Asia Pacifc Academic Network on 222; and boats 145; and decision-making 133; as a development challenge 35; due to confict 1–2; and livestock 132, 145; meaning 122, 132; multiple see recurrent; people who do not move (‘trapped’) 8, 110, 123, 129, 150, 185; and poverty 131; protracted 156; recurrent 145, 156, 163, 194; regional drivers 5; role of bespoke laws and policies 36; systematic integration into law and policy 19, 35; and temporary return 164; UN High Level Panel on internal 222, 225 durable solutions 2, 33–34; in Bangladesh 141, 151; and consultation 215; and factors 33, 188; and the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement 33; in Indonesia 171; and Inter-Agency

230

Index

Standing Committee Framework 25, 33, 186, 216; and law and policy 186; and multiple displacement 171; in national law and policy frameworks 43; in Nepal 186; and participation 215; and the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 11, 28; in the Solomon Islands 203; and structural impediments 7, 19, 227; and tailored to local realities 35; in Vanuatu 108 early warning 69, 84, 109, 146, 159, 211 education 192, 196 evacuation 107; adopt a family program in the Philippines 90; and children 166; and civil society organisations 147; and consent 109; and elderly people 111, 147, 166; and free, prior and informed consent 24; host evacuation in Vanuatu 107, 112; independent evacuation in Indonesia 166; and mentor houses in Thailand 67; and military 147, 161, 164; and persons with disabilities 111, 147, 161; and pregnant women 166; self evacuation in Bangladesh 147; warnings not heeded 145; and women 147 evacuation centres 141, 207; classrooms, use of 86, 94; community-based 44; crowding 111, 130; gender issues 7–8, 86, 111; guidelines 112; health and sanitation issues 87; and persons with disabilities 86, 111; privacy 111, 215; as purpose-built structures 94; safety and security 111, 141, 215; through community hosting 45; water 141 evacuation plans 157 exclusion zone 22, 164 exposure 196, 223; differential 121 faith-based organisations 46, 104, 169, 207 food proofng 57; role of soft infrastructure 57 food warning system 66–67 food: and discrimination 214; right to 131, 182, 214 forced evacuation: and free, prior and informed consent 24; and the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement 27; in the Philippines 88; in Vanuatu 109 forced resettlement 73 Framework for Resilient Development in the Pacifc 10, 28 free, prior and informed consent 110, 190

funding 13, 34, 42, 75, 86, 93, 111, 128, 212, 223 gender: in Bangladesh 150; -based violence 22, 30, 86, 104, 111, 182; in Cambodia 126, 129; and disaster 7, 82–83; -equal approach 10; heteronormativity 9; in Indonesia 166; intersectionality 7; non-normative genders and sexualities 9; notion of masculinity 8; performativity 9; in the Philippines 86, 91; in the Solomon Islands 207; in Vanuatu 107, 110 governance: fragmentation 74; multi-level 157 Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement 18, 109, 208, 123, 133; armed confict 19–21; in the context of disasters and climate change 21–22; in the context of Indonesian policy on internal displacement 160; history 1, 20; overview 18 Haiyan, Typhoon 33, 74, 80; community action plan 67; and corruption 35; early warning 84; evacuation 84; evacuation shelters 68, 86; gender issues 86; and issues in bunkhouses 33; livelihood issues 33; post-disaster 87–89; and protracted displacement 33; role of local government units 33, 35; sexual violence 33; storm surge 85 Hat Yai 57; compulsory land acquisition 72–73; evacuation shelters 68; fooding 57, 63–64; food warning system 66–67; as a model approach 73–74; physical infrastructure 64–65; soft infrastructure 66; volunteer warning and mentor house 67–69; vulnerable groups 69 health: right to 131 housing: policy 225; right to 130 housing, land and property rights 141, 186, 216 human rights-based approach 1, 3, 7, 11–12, 18, 22–47, 58, 91, 123, 157; Bangladesh context 37, 140; and displacement policies 37–38; governance 23; limitations 45; minimum core obligation of rights 32, 46; vs. needs-based approach 138; non-discrimination and equality 25; procedural 24; socially-grounded 157; substantive 24–25

Index human rights cities movement 227 hydropower 184, 193, 197 IASC Guidelines for Integrating GenderBased Violence Interventions in Humanitarian Action (2015) 32, 113, 141 implementation issues 2, 113, 138, 156, 166, 170, 196, 203, 223, 225 indigenous knowledge 82 indigenous peoples 9, 184,; and discrimination 190 informal settlements 12, 46, 229; in the Solomon Islands 202, 212; in Thailand 59; in Vanuatu 114; and Vanuatu national law and policy 42 information: access to 190; collection 157, 168; see also data Inter-Agency Standing Committee’s (IASC) Operational Guidelines on the Protection of Persons in Situations of Natural Disasters (2011) 32 internally displaced persons: defnition 18 intersectionality 7 labour 185 land 190, 193; compulsory land acquisition 72–73; lack of ownership of 144, 146; title 72, 195, 212, 216 landslide 193 leaving no one behind 8 livelihoods 183, 192, 216 local government (authority) 144; and decentralisation 157, 162; and emergency preparedness and response 157 local level 140; and politics 157 MEND Guide 31 mentor house 67–70 military: and disaster response 90; and evacuation 147, 161, 164 National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) 181, 184, 185, 223 National Policy on Climate Change and Disaster-Induced Displacement (Vanuatu) 106 National Strategy on the Management of Disaster- and Climate-Induced Internal displacement (Bangladesh) 139; and human rights-based approach 140 no-build zone 193 non-state actors, role of 59, 169

231

Paris Agreement: and displacement 10 participation: and persons with disabilities 159 persons with disabilities 3, 7, 11, 13, 17, 24–25, 30, 33, 38, 40, 45–46, 48, 53, 61, 63, 86, 89, 92–93, 103, 105, 107, 110, 138–153, 156–173; in Bangladesh 138–153; children 144; in Indonesia 38, 156–173; participation of 159; rights of 161; and right to shelter 159 planned relocation: and Cambodia 39; and further research 226; human rights impacts 39; and Indonesia 164; and Nepal 194; and the Solomon Islands 40, 203; Solomon Islands 39 Platform on Disaster Displacement 224 political capabilities 9–10 political ecology 5; approach to disaster study 6 positive obligation 215 power 190, 192 reasonable accommodation 168 recognition justice: and disaster 9–10; and displacement 10; and human rights 10 reconstruction 187; and free, prior and informed consent 190 relief 131, 182, 214; and Haiyan 86 relocation 194, 209, 215 remote see rural resettlement 194; forced 73; and free, prior and informed consent 190 resilience: community 74; Philippine context 79 risk 217; redistribution 73–74 risk and vulnerability assessment 144 riskscape 4–5 root causes 190, 223 rural 190; and discrimination 191 safety hill 122 search and rescue 162 Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 105; and Building Back Better 188, 225; and displacement 10, 27; and Guiding Principles 10, 27; and SDGs 27 shelter 216; and persons with disabilities 159; right to 182, 191; temporary 190–191, 193 Sinabung, Mt 163 social networks 197

232

Index

Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons 224 Sphere Standards 24, 40 Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) 205 Standing Orders on Disaster 140 strategic mobility 122 sustainable development 135, 198, 225 Task Force on Displacement 224 training 113, 159, 218 transitional shelters 83–84; see also evacuation centres transparency 189–190 universal design 168

Universal Periodic Review 224 urban: displacement risk 47; movement towards 46, 64, 83, 114, 149, 181, 186, 202, 205; New Urban Agenda 227; planning (development) 2, 34, 44, 61, 225 Verchick, R. 121, 157 violence see gender-based violence vulnerable 139, 190, 192, 196, 223; differential 121, 132; groups 110, 159; and pre-identifcation 141; social 160 Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage 224 water: transboundary management of 146