AFTER THE TSUNAMI – HARNESSING AUSTRALIAN EXPERTISE FOR RECOVERY
Canberra, 31 March 2005

Follow-up group reports and case studies
Group 2: Sustainable reconstruction

The objectives of sustainable reconstruction in the tsunami-affected region involve people, places, and production. This involves re-establishing livelihoods for those communities in and around the areas impacted. Although the hazard, in this case the tsunami, has had major local consequences for coastal communities, it is important to recognize that the ‘built infrastructure’ is part of a bigger system, comprising natural systems (physical and ecological) and social and cultural infrastructures. It is also important to recognize that this system is subject to considerable natural variability, variations in climate (including global climate change) and periodic extreme events (hazards), such as flooding, storm surges and earthquakes/volcanoes.

A sustainable future involves building (or rebuilding) the resilience of the system. It needs to be recognized that many of the affected coasts within the Indian Ocean had a low resilience prior to this event. For example, corals reefs had been impacted by coral bleaching, and mangroves had been cleared. In addition the societies had a low resilience particularly as a result of poverty.

Directly related to reconstruction of built infrastructure, rebuilding needs to consider building codes, and building practices. Before communities, towns, villages, etc are reconstructed where they were before, it will be very important to consider whether there should be zones within which particular building codes need to be observed, ‘surge’ zones within which there is no building, setbacks or other guidelines. It is unlikely to be practical, or advisable, to completely relocate communities further inland; these are coastal communities whose prime livelihoods come from fishing, or other natural resource based activities along the coast. However, there is a pressing need to reconsider whether particular infrastructure is appropriately sited. If particular creek or river crossings were poorly located previously, and might be subject to other hazards, such as inundation during floods or surges, then this is the time to relocate bridges and realign sectors of roads or other infrastructure. Should Banda Aceh be rebuilt as it used to look, or should the seaward most line of infrastructure be ‘setback’ to ensure that there is some ‘freeboard’ in the event of possible future hazards other than repeat of such a large tsunami? There are a range of potential impacts, some which may be exacerbated by anticipated global environmental change, and vulnerability of coastal communities to future hazards can be reduced by considering these issues now, and increasing the coastal communities adaptive capacity.

Integrated coastal zone management is based on considerations across sectors. The coastal zone needs to be rebuilt taking these many issues into consideration. For example, it was probably the case that some of the prawn aquaculture developments were not sustainable (there has been much clearing of mangrove for short-term shrimp farm production throughout the region but much has collapsed after a few years of intensive exploitation). There must be research to ensure that agriculture, aquaculture and silviculture are as sustainable as possible; encouraging these activities in optimal locations and discouraging them in sub-optimal locations.

Education plays an important role in these future developments, and capacity building within the local community especially in integrated coastal zone management must be a priority. Education in risk awareness and hazard assessment is also very important.

Knowledge and capacity

Australia leads the world in tropical coastal and marine science and management. Australian scientists and natural resource managers bring much expertise in fields that will be directly relevant to the coasts of our Indian Ocean neighbours. Australia also brings expertise in emergency response and short-term rehabilitation.

Gaps in knowledge

On the other hand, our knowledge of many of the coasts of the Indian Ocean is poor, and the availability of data is fragmented. For example, good hazard management could be based on integrated GIS (Geographical Information Systems) data sets of the area of concern. Overlaying digital maps of social data (population characteristics) over natural resource data (soils, vegetation, shallow water biodiversity) offers powerful potential. However, the detailed data are not available for many parts of the Australian coastline, and are either totally non-existent for coastal areas of the Indian Ocean, or are based on incomplete data (e.g. population census data for Aceh are probably unreliable so derived GIS data propagate those uncertainties). This is an area where significant advances can be made with new sophisticated technologies now available.

In terms of the immediate rebuilding there would appear to be gaps in our knowledge. It is not clear, for example, to what extend it is known what built infrastructure remains and what condition it is in. These data probably have been collected as part of assessments of the areas affected. Presumably re-assessments following this week’s earthquake will also need to be undertaken. It is not clear how widely available this information will be. Knowledge about remaining social and natural infrastructure is by and large not available.

Opportunities for Australia to make a positive contribution

Three areas in which it was felt that Australia had particular strengths to contribute are: our scientific experience of similar tropical coastlines, integrated coastal zone management, and building codes and practice. Australia has extensive coral reefs and mangrove-fringed shorelines, and many of the scientists who have expertise relevant to these shorelines have existing links with research teams in the Indian Ocean countries. Similarly, Australia has well-developed natural resource management strategies involving multiple use in these habitats. Nevertheless, it is important to emphasise that in contrast with the Great Barrier Reef, there is actually very little known about the biodiversity, ecology, dynamics and sustainable use of coastal habitats along those shorelines affected by the tsunami. It is timely to also recognize that there are still many parts of the Australian coast for which there are also very few data and which have been very little studied.

It is not clear at present which niches are most appropriate for Australian R&D, nor was it felt that either the Australian or Indonesian governments (nor other groups or agencies in those countires) had a good overview of the range of expertise available amongst the Australian academic, research, technical or business communities. In the short term, it would be useful to identify a geographical region or particular sectors that should be the focus of Australian effort. Examples that arose from discussions today include focusing on Aceh, North and West Sumatra, and concentrating on education and health sectors.

Australia is also well positioned to make a much longer term commitment to capacity building in the region. Projects such as the assessment that we understand is being undertaken by ACIAR, an 18-month assessment of the impact on, and resilience of, a range of natural resources in the affected region, will be important because sustainable development needs to be based on such longer-term evaluations and ongoing research. Such research, and disaster preparedness and reduction initiatives can benefit from a regional co-operation. It was also recognized that existing linkages and partnerships between Australian and Indonesian groups could be strengthened with further development of university-university links and agency-institution linkages. Experience from re-building, for example the recovery of Darwin after Cyclone Tracey, has demonstrated that Australia can develop suitable building codes, and surge zoning, and can contribution to the development of such initiatives in Sumatra.

Finally, but certainly not least, sustainable development must be based on re-establishing both the natural systems and social infrastructure, and it will be very important to ensure that the local communities are involved in the decision making from the initial stages. It should be recognized that as communities struggle to regain their livelihoods after this tragic event, they will need to exploit those natural resources that remain. There is a real danger that these will be over-exploited because of a real need to support the communities. Sustainable use of coastal resources will need to involve recognizing areas which are set aside for conservation (no-fishing zones for example). These can only work if there has been sufficient involvement and education of the local community and they have made the decision about which areas they consider should be conserved (with scientific input).