Rising from disaster to be world reference in recovery Syamsidik  ;   Deputy of the Tsunami and Disaster Mitigation Research Center (TDMRC) and a lecturer at the civil engineering department of Syiah Kuala University in Banda Aceh; The Center has facilitated numerous international training programs on disaster-related knowledge and management

JAKARTA POST,  24 Desember 2014

                                                                                                                       

Ten years ago, we witnessed the overwhelming calamity from the Indian Ocean tsunami that destroyed most western coasts of Aceh and Nias Island. The same tsunami delivered its deadly impacts to at least 20 other nations around the Indian Ocean basin. This year, most survivors and their relatives will mark the day that separated them from their loved ones. Aceh has now fully recovered from the tsunami, at least physically. Most visitors can hardly identify the ruins of the tsunami here. Only some remains can still tell the impacts of the tsunami on the capital, such as those displayed in the Aceh Tsunami Museum or some preserved “tsunami heritages” around Banda Aceh. Yet much work remains for all disaster responders to bring the lessons learned from this catastrophic event to enhance world resilience toward disasters. A sustainable recovery process is indeed still a challenge — and Aceh’s recovery could be a global reference for a similar process following other giant catastrophes. The first phase of the recovery under the Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Agency for Aceh and Nias (BRR Aceh-Nias) was conducted in a rather swift phase. In the first year (2005-2006), BRR managed to construct thousands of new houses for the survivors. Some even said that in terms of the physical aspects the affected regions have been built better than their conditions before the tsunami. Here, the concept of “build back better” in rebuilding Aceh was achieved. To anticipate future tsunamis, some emergency infrastructures have also been introduced in the regions. In Banda Aceh alone, six escape buildings were built (including the tsunami museum) and some evacuation roads were constructed. But how effective were these efforts? During the 10 years since 2004, there were two occasions that could attest to the results. They were the twin April 11, 2012 earthquakes and another earthquake around central Aceh on July 2, 2013. On April 11, 2012 two major earthquakes of 8.6 and 8.2 on the Richter scale occurred within about a one hour interval on that day, driving a massive evacuation in most coastal cities in Aceh. People fled as far as possible from coastal zones and few used the evacuation buildings. Unfortunately, six siren towers in the capital did not work properly due to the shutting down of electricity just a minute after the earthquake and due to untrained staff to operate the towers manually. The provincial Disaster Management Agency (BPBA) managed to sound only one of the sirens one hour after the first earthquake which was considered too late for the near-shore tsunami characterized for this region. Scientists estimate that should a tsunamigenic earthquake occur around the subduction zone in Sumatra’s offshore, it would take less than 30 minutes for the tsunami waves to arrive at most coastal areas of Aceh’s mainland. At some small islands near the potential tsunami sources, the tsunami arrival time is estimated even much shorter, between seven and 10 minutes. For such challenges, the April 11, 2012 earthquakes revealed that most of the cities were not ready to operate their emergency facilities. Since 2012, several improvements to the emergency procedures were made. The Emergency Operation Command Center (Pusdalops) at the BPBA has been activated and strengthened. Every month until now, the system is tested and the staff is drilled should another emergency situation arise. Another earthquake of a 6.2 magnitude on July 2, 2013 around central Aceh destroyed thousands of houses and killed 42 people while thousands fled to shelters. Interestingly the local agency moved their resources and put their operation at the central point of the emergency command line. It took some time for the agency to really understand their duties and to realize they should become the commander in the emergency. In most disaster emergency situations, the Indonesia Military (TNI) immediately takes the lead in evacuating victims and to prevent the conditions from becoming worse. Therefore strengthening the institutional capacity at the civilian-led disaster agency is one of the important tasks. Several emergency infrastructures are being constructed, including a number of evacuation buildings and siren towers. Learning from past experiences it is ineffective to construct evacuation buildings without considering local knowledge or local values. Instead of constructing such buildings only for evacuation purposes, the buildings should to be integrated into the community’s daily routines. Since most people in Aceh are Muslim, why not construct evacuation buildings to function as mosques, for an example? In Banda Aceh, four out of six evacuation buildings were built with totally different designs. Only one of them functions on a daily basis — our tsunami research center. The other three buildings are not used by the local community most of the time. They look different and awkward in terms of design and use. Probably, this was why almost no one used these buildings for the evacuation triggered by the earthquakes on April 11, 2012. The same mistakes should not be repeated. Standardizing the buildings in terms of structural strength is understandable. However, standardizing the buildings in terms of design and its function without acknowledging local knowledge and local values will lead to the same failures that we found in the 2012 earthquake. Based on recent research on the 10-year tsunami recovery, four aspects within the government — tsunami risk understanding, disaster data openness and accessibility and integration of the tsunami risk map into spatial planning and policies —have produced solid achievements. . Yet, one of the most concerning points in disaster management in Aceh is inter-organizational coordination. Gaps in disaster management and activities still exist. One of them is increasing community participation in disaster risk reduction. Most people don’t think it is important to update their ability to anticipate future disasters. Several activities involving local communities were attended by a very limited number of people despite widespread notices. However, the interest from young people especially at schools is promising. The children’s interest to learn about disasters is remarkable. Some local exhibitions we conducted in Aceh to promote disaster risk reduction attracted many young people who raised many questions about disasters. They also spent considerable time observing disaster education materials and media — in contrast to the adults. People are rebuilding their lives in Aceh. As an illustration (see picture), the graph shows the population growth in three tsunami zones in Banda Aceh where the population has grown to almost the same number as before the tsunami. The graph differentiates the worst affected areas from the less affected, apart from the zone unaffected by the disaster. Some of the residents in each affected area had migrated from different locations. However, some are also 2004 survivors, showing that people tend to return to even the worst stricken areas for several reasons. Among them are emotional connections to their land, affordable rents and accessibility to work places (mostly to fishermen). Population growth in the affected areas should be controlled and managed properly to avoid sprawling settlements, because increase in population also means increased tsunami risk. Deserting the area totally is not a realistic option. Nonetheless, risky areas should be strictly limited and the increasing risks should be prevented from becoming an uncontrollable situation. Lowering the risks has been conducted by increasing residents’ awareness and providing more emergency infrastructures. Aceh was a place where the tsunami demolished most lives in its coastal region. But now, it is where people can share ways to change one’s history, from a victim to become a survivor and now to become a knowledge-hub for disaster management. Thousands of the world’s scientists have visited Aceh and much knowledge has been formed and disseminated. Aceh has successfully turned itself to become one of the world references in disaster management. ●