Search results

Self-recovery in post-disaster shelter is not the exception but the norm. Following earthquake, flood or storm, the majority of affected families will inevitably rebuild their homes themselves, using their own resources, but there is little support from the international community to encourage good safe building practice. While the communication of key messages about safer building has been carried out effectively in development contexts, it rarely forms a major part of humanitarian response programming. If the humanitarian shelter sector is committed to the principles of Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR), more can be done to support the process of safer reconstruction among self-rebuilders. This paper argues the case for the humanitarian community to link post-disaster shelter programming with the more developmental approach of communicating building safety to a much wider audience than just the most vulnerable beneficiaries. It proposes the shelter sector and the donor community direct more resources towards support for this process, which would augment the effectiveness and impact of a shelter response.

“Process” vs “product”: this concept was originally introduced by Ian Davis in 1978 in Shelter After Disaster. However, 40 years later, in the halls of universities, it would appear a long way from having settled in the minds of upcoming engineers and architects looking to contribute to the field of disaster management. This key understanding is a major steppingstone to those pursuing careers in the shelter and settlements sector. However, the clarity of the argument and its importance still fails to reach some humanitarians in the early stages of their career. This perspective reflects on the key arguments for and against process over product and reflects on the reasons for the lack of recognition of this concept in early stage academics in the shelter and settlements sector. It also discusses the academic practitioner divide and pathways for learning within the sector.

This perspective reflects on discussions over four years of a progression into the humanitarian shelter and settlements sector from a construction and engineering background. It discusses the author’s personal progression in understanding process over product and observations of other early stage researchers taking similar pathways. It also examines literature in the sector and the key texts which affect this progression. Furthermore, this perspective provides comments from experts in the shelter and settlements sector through a small series of informal interviews. This provides insight into their experience with upcoming architects and engineers, and key messages for early stage researchers.

This reflection found that upcoming architects and engineering students still undergo a journey of understanding over “process vs product” despite changes in the industry. These students can benefit from the understanding of shelter as a process.

The concept of process vs product is not a new one. It is arguably one of the most central arguments to the shelter and settlements sector. However, there is very little written on the learning of this concept or the effects it has on understanding the broader aspects of the sector. This reflection can provide significant value to early stage researchers who have yet to engage with this concept, and further highlight its importance of learning pathways to the sector.