Fragilecologies

Tag: disaster

  • “Haiti Cherie says Haiti is my Beloved Land. Oh, I never knew that I have to leave it to understand…” Mickey Glantz. January 14, 2010

    I was introduced to the song “Haiti Cherie” on a Harry Belafonte album released in 1957, the year I graduated high school and then entered university as a beanie-wearing freshman. The song, the whole album in fact, turned out to soothe the ruffled feathers of a naive young boy starting the rest of his life away from the security of the family nest. belafonte

    The deadly devastating earthquake of January 12, 2010, brought to mind Belafonte’s various songs of the Caribbean and especially Haiti Cherie. I have long been interested in Haiti though I have never visited the country. Its history has been in some instances interesting and in other instances sad. In the early 1800s (1802 actually) the black leader (later, King) Christophe overthrew French rule on Haiti’s half of the island of Hispanolachristophe-easton-102

    (Yesterday, in his infinite stupidity, Reverend Pat Robertson referred to this independence from France as “Haiti having made a pact with the devil 200 years ago” and that was the reason for the earthquake).

    When I was growing up, Haiti was plagued by the rule of Papa Doc Duvalier and his army of thugs—the Tonton Macoute—that kept the people under control through unfathomable horror tactics. Duvalier’s son, Baby Doc, followed his father’s rule and also relied on the support and protection of the Tonton Macoute, but the island’s economy was already in shambles. All demographics about the country were abysmal.
    papadocbabydoc

    They ruled with an iron fist and fear of voodoo
    They ruled with an iron fist and fear of voodoo

    I learned early on that Haiti was the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere. I also learned that in the 1960s it was receiving the most U.S. aid per capita in the Western Hemisphere, most likely because of its proximity to Castro’s communist Cuba. I have to assume that a lot of that assistance went to the military and to corrupt government officials. Then, Haiti was poor, undernourished, mostly illiterate, and the poor were living in such squalor and amid degradation that it would’ve been generous to call their habitats slums or shantytowns. But, somehow, the poor of Haiti managed to survive.

    I also recall hearing about Haitian immigrants seeking refuge in America on overloaded boats and small crafts, even inner tubes, on the hopes of getting to the Florida coast, much as their Cuban neighbors had done. The difference is that the Haitians were sent back home, allegedly because they were not political refugees as the Cubans claimed but because they were labeled as economic refugees. Cubans could stay; Haitians had to go.

    Haitian boat refugees seeking a better life in America
    Haitian boat refugees seeking a better life in America

    Fast forward to the stories now unraveling about the deaths, suffering and devastation of the people on one of the poorest nations on the earth. Countries and groups that were before unconcerned about the poverty of Haitians are now pouring out their hearts, souls and funds to somehow help the people of Haiti in their moment of need. It is likely the wrong time for me to bring up the fact that all governments knew of Haiti’s poverty—of women feeding kids salt-flavored clay wafers to fill their bellies with anything that could ward off hunger pains, of Haiti’s chronic hunger, of Haiti’s treatable water-borne illnesses, of Haiti’s squalor in its settlements, that the productive land surface of the country has vanished, that the Haitian population is illiterate by half and unemployed by three-fourths.

    What we are witnessing in this global reaction to Haiti’s earthquake is a human response to a cataclysmic event: Sympathy, empathy in some cases, a desire to help Haitians in any way in their moment of dire need. All of the ingredients for a crisis had been visible for all to see.

    msf: doctors without borders, Haiti
    msf: doctors without borders, Haiti

    Many non-governmental organizations and aid agencies have been for years engaged in trying to bring Haitians a better life. However, the big money, either from governments bilaterally or international aid agencies multilaterally, was not enough to even scratch the surface of Haiti’s numerous problems or was provided in uncoordinated ways that did not help the country become self sustaining. Haiti was neglected in the past, and if other complex humanitarian crises are any indicator of what is to follow in a year or two or three, Haiti will be neglected in the future.

    Is there a concentrated effort equivalent to what went into the “Manhattan Project” that could be sparked by the current sad plight of the Haitian people that could help the Country surpass a tipping point that would enable it to provide a good, productive and healthy life for its citizens? There must be. Why can’t rich countries tandem with one of the poorest to bring its standard of living up? Why is it so easy to find money for a war or money for a disaster but not for attempts to improve the vulnerability of the lives and livelihoods of the poor?
    The optimist in me says it can be done if the will of governments exists to do it. The cynic in me suggests that the dark side of human nature —greed, corruption, self-interest —will likely rule the day. Maybe the upcoming younger generation of policy makers can show my generation why and how the dark side must be changed or contained.

    The bottom line is as follows: Who has responsibility for the well-being of people living in countries in the Fourth World?

    Donations to assist organizations working in Haiti’s relief efforts can be made through the Clinton Foundation. http://www.clintonfoundation.org/haitiearthquake/clintonfoundation

  • “No Disaster Recommendations without Ramifications”:

    MICKEY GLANTZ

    SUNDAY, 24 MAY 2009

    Every assessment of a disaster, where natural or human-caused, has begins and ends with a list of recommendations or lessons learned. I have done that in my reports as well for almost four decades. The recommendations or lessons are about “how to get it right the next time there is a similar disaster?” That is always the hope. That is always the dream.

    Many of those recommendations or lessons learned are right on target in terms of requirements needed to reduce the adverse impacts of the hazards of concern. They are the result of serious scrutiny of hazards, their impacts and societal responses to them. They are the findings through serious discussion, brainstorming and plain common sense of what went right, what went wrong, and what wasn’t considered. For Katrina, for example, America’s most costly and most embarrassing so called natural disaster, one can find thousands of lessons learned from various levels of government from local to global, industries and businesses. That is the good news. However, it is, all too often, the good news in theory only. I say in theory because of a gut feeling have: that most recommendations are not acted upon. Phrased a different way, the disaster lessons we have been calling ‘lessons learned” are really not learned but only identified. When they are addressed they can legitimately be called lessons learned. Otherwise, they should be called “lessons identified”.

    The problem in all this is that when recommendations and lessons have been identified, many observers in all walks of life tend to think that the recommendations and lessons are being enacted in order to avoid similar hazard-related disasters in the future. Given the reality of an issue-attention cycle of the American public that lasts but a couple of years (as identified by Anthony Downs in the early 1970s), for example, the public turns to focus on other pressing issues, no longer focusing on the previous disaster and its recommendations. How then can we get decision makers to take recommendations or lessons more seriously? How can we get them to realize that not following up on the lessons can have considerable costs?

    It is essential to break the vicious cycle of disaster—lessons & recommendations— disaster — same lessons, etc. Many of the same lessons appear decade after decade. Our children and our children’s children will end up reading the same sets of disaster-related recommendations and lessons that our predecessors and we have been identifying. We can end the vicious cycle in the name of progress. It is a simple next step to take.

    My recommendation:

    Recommendations (and lessons learned) should no longer be presented without comment on what the consequences might be if the recommendations (and lessons) are not addressed. This way, decision makers can explicitly be made aware that there is also a likely cost for inaction when the next natural hazard turns into a national disaster. Succinctly stated, “NO RECOMMENDATIONS SHOULD BE OFFERED WITHOUT ALSO NOTING THEIR RAMIFICATIONS.”

    The ramification (if the recommendation is not acted upon):

    Business as usual (BAU) with regard to identifying lessons and making recommendations in post-disaster assessments will mean that policy makers in the future will continue to receive lists of lessons that had already been identified over previous decades and, as a result, their societies will continue to remain at risk to the impacts of hazards for which risks could have been reduced, had recommendations been pursued and identified lessons applied.