Researcher, International Institute of Social Studies, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Disasters. 2022 Jan;46(1):226-245. doi: 10.1111/disa.12455. Epub 2021 Oct 8.
The response to the earthquakes in Nepal on 25 April and 12 May 2015 was as overwhelming as the magnitude of the events themselves. Tensions between the humanitarian imperative and the post-conflict state-building agenda soon became evident. Many actors offered support by creatively complying with the state's approach, whereas others bypassed official channels completely. In post-conflict settings such as Nepal, the situation is especially complicated because of the contradiction between policies underscoring the importance of the state in the response and the reality of the fragility of the state, which often leads to the significant involvement of aid organisations. The post-conflict political landscape of Nepal shaped the contours of the response, as well as how actors decided to operate within them. This paper, based on empirical findings from four months of research, contributes to a better understanding of the intricacies of the post-conflict and post-disaster nexus in the context of a state-led response.
2015 年 4 月 25 日和 5 月 12 日尼泊尔地震的应对工作之艰巨，与地震本身的震级一样令人震惊。人道主义救援的迫切需求与冲突后国家重建议程之间的紧张关系很快就显现出来。许多行为体通过创造性地遵守国家的方针提供了支持，而其他行为体则完全绕过了官方渠道。在尼泊尔等冲突后环境中，情况尤其复杂，因为强调国家在应对中的重要性的政策与国家脆弱性的现实之间存在矛盾，这往往导致援助组织的大量参与。尼泊尔冲突后的政治格局塑造了应对工作的轮廓，以及行为体如何决定在其中运作。本文基于四个月的研究得出的经验发现，有助于更好地理解国家主导应对背景下冲突后和灾后关系的复杂性。
