Living through and responding to disasters: Multiple roles for Social Work

Undoubtedly, social work has a long history of responding to the needs of vulnerable populations, including those who experience natural or human-made disasters. Historically, social work has been involved in disaster relief; recovery dominated by psychosocial interventions and other models but has paid less attention to empowerment and social development in post-disaster recovery efforts. Therefore, the role of social work educators, students and practitioners in disasters has become a multifaceted terrain with multiple debates. Practitioners who believe in the social development role for social workers have argued that social workers should be involved in relief work, including using their core skills and knowledge to coordinate the often-chaotic environment of disaster relief, working in and with the community in order to increase access to government and community resources for vulnerable families. Others have argued for a dominant role for social workers in dealing with psychosomatic treatments responding to traumatic stress and counselling service providers. While healing and service provision are essential in the context of disasters, such activities do not necessarily address the politics of aid, access to services and ultimately bringing about social change. Social work scholars have documented that Social work is the profession that claims to intervene to enhance people's well-being. However, social workers have played a low-key role in environmental issues that increasingly affect people's well-being, both locally and globally (Dominelli, 2012). Similarly, Gray et al. (2013) argued that social work has been late to engage with the environmental movement. Often working with an exclusively social understanding of environment, much of the social work profession has overlooked the importance of environmental issues. There is little doubt that disaster management is an integral part of 21st century social work but unfortunately, the profession is only beginning to carve a niche to respond to disasters.

Disasters (natural and human-made) have always been with us, but social work contributions to the reconstruction and rebuilding of communities after these disasters has not been well documented, particularly for Asian societies (Tan and Rowlands, 2007; Tang and Cheung, 2007). We do not know much about social work's contribution to disasters like the 1993 Latur earthquake (India), 1999 Taiwan earthquake, 2001 Bhuj earthquake (India); 2004 Asian Tsunami, 2005 Kashmir earthquake (Pakistan), 2008 Sichuan earthquake (China); 2011 Japan tsunamigenic earthquake, and 2015 Nepal earthquakes. This does not mean that Asian social work and social work educators and practitioners have not responded to these disasters on the ground. Despite their involvement and commitment, they have not been able to write and publish about social work's role especially in the high-ranking English journals. Guat Tin Ng (2012) from the Hong Kong Polytechnic University, is an exception, and has published about social work competences and disaster relief. From the work of Ng it is clear that earthquakes in China did help to raise the profile and acceptance of social work in China with certain tasks perceived as being for social work, for example case management and bereavement counselling. Ng further explored the implications for social work education noting that disaster relief should be offered as a core course element in countries with a high risk of disasters. Indonesian social work educator Fahrudin (2012) published on the need for preparing social work students to work with disaster survivors. Nikku (2013) from the Nepal school of social work (NSSW) published on children rights in disasters. Similarly, social work educators elsewhere have argued for a more proactive role for social work in educating the students. These educators argued for the the need for a proactive role for social work educators in building disaster social work knowledge(s) in regions which are prone to disasters. From other parts of the globe social work educators appealed for the international community's attention to 2010 Haiti earthquake and advocated strongly for the need for social work students to understand economic issues and their impact and the role of social work in building resiliency in communities. Earthquakes are not just a natural crisis rather they do reflect a poverty crisis. It is not the quakes that kill people but the poorly built schools, hospitals, community halls and other essential infrastructures that cause damage and deaths. This is evident in Nepal and in China. The 2008 Sichuan earthquake destroyed over 7,000 recent but inadequately engineered schools, killing thousands of schoolchildren and as yet we do not know the actual figures for the 2015 Nepal earthquakes. Article 25 of the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that adequate, dignified buildings and housing are fundamental to human rights. This editorial argues for a more responsive (not reactive) social work and advocates for further involvement of social workers in policy work. It appeals for a more proactive role for Asian social work scholarship in social policy and disaster social work.

The readers of this journal are aware that the social work in Nepal is very nascent and this helping profession is in need of international support to be recognised as a legitimate profession (Nikku, 2010). This editorial throws further light on the challenges of social work in Nepal and how it is responding to the recent earthquake disasters in this post conflict, young republic which is struggling to write its own constitution for the sixth time. Media images of people being rescued from the mega disaster that shook Nepal on 25th April and 12th of May 2015 brought an international attention and support for thousands of stranded people, many of whom were evacuated and saved by rescue teams that came from other countries. The wounded and rescued were transported to temporary shelters, mobile clinics and local hospitals that were also damaged by the quake. Many local non-governmental and civil society groups and international agencies have appealed for immediate relief and rescue support to the communities with whom they are working with in addition to the Government of Nepal's rescue and relief efforts. Despite of all these efforts more than 8000 lives have been lost, thousands injured and over 250,000 houses, 32,000 classrooms reported completely destroyed including many of Kathmandu valley's architectural treasures. The country's gross domestic product in 2013 stood at $19.29 billion. Due to the recent quakes, the economic losses are estimated to be anywhere between $1-10 billion, with the second the most probable scenario showing damage may reach more than $10 billion, which would equal at least 50 percent of Nepal's GDP. The Insurance Information Institute noted that Nepal is one of the world's poorest nations, with little recourse when it comes to insurance. It estimates that less than $3.5 is spent per capita annually in Nepal on property and casualty insurance, versus the nearly $2,300 spent each year in the U.S. These figures suggest that Nepal will take many years to recover from the human, economic and cultural losses.

As the time of writing this editorial the relief and recovery efforts have been going on for a month. Nepal witnessed the more conventional responses to disasters such as that of the Nepal Red Cross which has shown immediate response with its wide network of volunteers but it is very short-term in nature. Organizations like Red Cross with their years of experience in disaster management and knowhow made a difference to the lives of disaster victims. Similarly, it is also clear from the Nepal's case that the international aid agencies and their practices are good for short term response: sending in relief and rescue teams, distributing medical supplies and setting up temporary shelters. This kind of assistance only treats the symptoms of an earthquake and the problems of built environment. As evident, this kind of disaster relief and management focused only meeting victims' immediate emergency disaster caused survival needs that enabled some victims to resume their activities, in some cases, independently. It was also clear that emergency focused relief work by itself was not enough as these approaches failed to answer critical questions about how to respond to the longer term needs of survivor victims. All those affected communities needed additional psychosomatic services that are culturally appropriate and financial inputs for a long term in order to rebuild their livelihoods restore family ties and community cohesion. The pressing questions then are; what are the sustainable ways to respond to such devastating disasters in Nepal being located in a seismically active zone of the Himalayan alpine belt? How do we nurture communities to build their resilience to disasters?

Examining these questions from a green social work perspective Prof. Lena Dominelli of Durham University met with the Nepal School of Social Work students and faculty a week before the April 25th earthquake on her visit to Kathmandu. She shared that using a Green Social Work Model helps to address social inequalities and to change socio-economic models of development rooted in neoliberalism and environmental degradation that impact adversely primarily on disadvantaged communities. I believe that these insights and their own self-learning have identified pathways for NSSW faculty and students in living through and responding to the disasters.

After the third day of the mega earthquake of the Nepal i.e. on 28th of April 2015, the CEO of NSSW Ms. Pradipta Kadambari called a meeting to take the stock of things and mobilize immediate relief services to the staff members and students who were affected by the disaster. The meeting was held at college with three students who could come out of their homes: Himshikar, Sujuta Lama, Raj Yonjan and with three faculty members Ms. Shivani Saria, Mr. Dil Kumar Thakuri and Ms. Pradipta Kadambari. The team assessed the situation and agreed to mobilise resources and extend immediate relief for those survivors who were located outside the Kathmandu valley as media reports were mostly focused on the capital city. Based on a pre-assessment of perceived needs of the community members, the NSSW team chose Sipapokhari VDC in Sindhupalchok District where there was a high loss of life reported.

Immediately after this decision was made planning for resource mobilisations began. The team started contacting like-minded people and agencies to help them in their relief efforts. Using internet and mobile communication facilities the faculty members of NSSW who were staying outside Kathmandu made several connections for help. The core team of NSSW also contacted international, regional and local social work organisations like the International Association of Schools of Social Work, (IASSW), International Federation of Social Workers (IFSW), The Asian and Pacific Association for Social Work Education (APASWE), the International Consortium for Social Development Asia Pacific (ICSD-AP), Japanese Association of Schools of Social Work (JASSW) Association of Schools of Social Work in Africa (ASSWA) and other schools of social work in the region. The immediate response came from many social work colleagues including Prof. Dominelli and Prof. Nadkarni of the IASSW, Prof. Pawar of the ICSD AP, Dr. Fentiny and Prof. Akimoto from APASWE and Dr. Rory and Dr. Kimura from IFSW and many colleagues from South Africa, Canada, South Korea, Malaysia and Japan. Dr. Karandikar of the College of Social Work, The Ohio State University and Dr. Gezinski, University of Utah College of Social Work both of them helped to start an on line crowdfund raising for NSSW efforts. It is very clear that the global solidarity has played a key role in NSSW's immediate efforts on the ground. In addition, the NSSW team found time to write, document and supply reliable summaries to these bodies with a request to support their initiatives. Despite social work's focus on disasters there exists a lack of literature on how departments/schools of social work, that typically are not providers of direct social services, respond when large-scale disasters occur (like the case of Nepal) in the area in which they are located. Also, how to do they link with their counterpart schools in other places and what strategies are being used to work with survivors and communities?

By mobilising immediate internal resources and self-care methods, the small NSSW team made the crucial first step in disaster social work. Very soon, the school became a hub for providing information related to disaster management, a place for shelter to community members and a place for local police to plan and discuss relief activities. After two weeks the school also started serving as the reference institution for foreign agencies who deployed their medical and other psychosocial teams who were well intentioned and trained but had problems in terms of local cultural sensitivities, language and communication skills. The students of NSSW volunteered and in some cases were hired by these organisations. By now, it is clear that collectively the social work educators and students were able to perceive the opportunities, for needs to be met including their need for self-care while extending their help to others survivors. They have shown a deep conviction that;

‘disasters often create a political and economic atmosphere wherein extensive changes can be made more rapidly than under normal circumstances… The collective will to take action is an advantage that should not be wasted’ (UNDRO, 1992, 202).

As a young school of social work, NSSW successfully demonstrated the use of collective will despite of the lack of resources or skills. NSSW also have started the relief and support activities with 913 families in the Sipapokhari Village Development Committee of Sindupalchok District. However, the team soon realised that the need for help is huge and not all requests for help can be handled by them alone. In this process, it became difficult to locate funding to organize and support disaster-devastated families in this district. It became clear quickly that relief alone was not enough as there are politics involved in the distribution of relief. There was, and is, a need for empowering these communities to involve them in disaster policy formulation and post-disaster implementation of plans so as to build on their strengths, promote resilience and gain access to technical and financial resources to come out of the disaster.

Like many other countries in the region social work education in Nepal is influenced by traditional human behaviour theories, group and community organisation methods despite the lack of coherence in the curriculum delivery. At the time of writing this editorial, after the six weeks of disaster work the NSSW faculty and students have started discussing the need for a greater focus and content on understanding community dynamics, needs assessment skills, policy advocacy and the group work skills that are necessary to build robust grassroots organizations. This reflection on the mega earthquake of Nepal marks a beginning for disaster social work led by the social work educators and students. The work of NSSW shows that these educators seized the opportunities and challenges offered to them, they were able to contribute by turning challenges into opportunities, and made a difference to the lives of people with whom they worked with.

Newburn (1993, 95) wrote how social workers offering help in the aftermath of the Hillsborough disaster (occurred on 15 April 1989 at the 1988–89 FA Cup semi-final match between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest at Hillsborough Stadium, Sheffield, England) struggled with a negative public image,

‘… social workers are faced with a situation in which there is a need for them to work proactively, to offer help, and yet many of those they approach will assume that their purpose is not to help but to investigate and, if necessary, to remove children’.

In order for traumatised people to benefit from help available after a disaster, they need to be able to respect and trust those offering that help. Nepalese social work educators and students initially have experienced similar challenges in gaining the trust of the community members. Unlike many other workers who came, distributed resources and went, the students and faculty of NSSW have stayed with the community, shared the resources, and spent a lot of time listening to the community members. This is what they have learnt during their initial semester while discussing about the settlement house movement in the UK and US. The team is currently discussing and exploring ways to continue their work with the communities after the first phase of relief and psychosocial work that is now completed. They are looking at long-term response with the Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS) India in six different Village Development Committees (VDCs) in the three most affected districts. We wish NSSW and its partners all the success in their endeavours and look forward to reading their insights in order to learn from them and to further build disaster social work knowledge and scholarship together.