Dr Stella Neema is a Senior Lecturer at Makerere University Institute of Social Sciences,Kampala Uganda. She has expertise in Medical Anthropology and Cultural Anthropology.
Grace M Bua holds a Master’s Degree in Public Health (MPH) from Makerere University. She is currently a Community Liaison Officer, ResilientAfrica Network, a project at Makerere University School of Public Health, where she is responsible for planning and managing all community engagements RAN innovators have with RAN’s target communities across Africa to enable them develop, pilot, test and scale their resilience innovations to the actual beneficiaries at the grassroots communities.. She has expertise in Ethnography, Innovations pilot and scaling, field epidemiology, research methods, M&E, management, resilience, disaster risk management and development programming.
I hold a Master’s Degree in Public Health (MPH), currently a field coordinator for the Master of Public Health training program at the Department of Health Policy Planning & Management and an Instructional Materials Designer and trainer at Makerere University School of Public Health (MakSPH). I have expertise in field epidemiology, research methods, disaster risk management, management and development programming.
Dr. Julius Ssentongo is a Public Health Specialist working as a research fellow at Makerere University's School of Public Health. Julius holds a Masters of Public Health obtained in 2014 from Makerere University. His undergraduate training is a Bachelor’s Degree in Medicine and Surgery obtained from Makerere University in 2009. Julius has over 6 years experience in working with the public health care system and research. His current area of research focuses on resilience programming in the face of climate change and chronic conflict.
Nathan Tumuhamye is a research fellow at Makerere University School of Public Health. He holds a Bachelor’s Degree in Community Psychology and a Master’s Degree in Health Services Research. He is currently a Director Eastern Africa Resilience Innovation Lab at Makerere University School of Public Health
Lecturer Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Makerere University School of Public Health. Holds a degree in Medicine/Surgery and a Master's Degree in Public Health from Makerere University, as well as a PhD in Medical Science. Key research interests in Non Communicable Diseases as well as Disaster Management
James Fishkin holds the Janet M. Peck Chair in International Communication at Stanford University where he is Professor of Communication and Professor of Political Science (by courtesy) and Director of the Center for Deliberative Democracy
Dr. Lynn M. Atuyambe has a Ph.D. in Public Health Sciences (International Health) from Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm, Sweden. His Thesis was on adolescent health; teenage pregnancies and coping mechanisms in Uganda. He is an Associate Professor at the Makerere University School of Public Health (MakSPH) with close to 20 years of research experience especially in reproductive health. He teaches both undergraduate and postgraduate students. He supervises post graduate (MPH, HSR, MPHN, OBS/GYNAE) and Doctoral students at the College of Health Sciences. He is the coordinator for the course Advanced Qualitative Research Methods for Health Sciences. He runs the course Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health as well as Health Promotion, Health Education, Behavior Change Communication for the Post graduates at the MakSPH. Most of the research therefore has focused on health social and behaviors matters related to reproductive health. Specifically, tasks related to family planning, fertility and adolescent health and development including youth friendly services have been undertaken. Besides, he has participated in both qualitative and quantitative research projects in various capacities over the years. He is a trainer in Qualitative research methods, data collection techniques and analysis. His recent publications take a qualitative approach. He is very experienced in surveys in Uganda and the region. He has collaborated on research in Ethiopia, Ghana, Tanzania and Zambia. He has also served on evaluation teams for reproductive health programs as principal and co-investigator. Amongst baseline surveys conducted, topics have ranged from HIV/AIDS needs assessments for the community as well as persons living with AIDS (PLWAs) to HIV/AIDS evaluation programs. He has extensively worked in the domain of STI, Sexual maturation and health, Adolescent sexual and reproductive health. In HIV/AIDS specific topics have been on Adolescent reproductive health, child sexual abuse, STIs in the army in relation to migration and troop movements, Access to and patient selection for enhanced ART, AIDS District Assessment. Dr. Atuyambe’s recent publications have focused on adolescent reproductive health, Coping theories among pregnant adolescents, HIV/AIDS, ART access and fairness, Stigma and discrimination and HIV disclosure outcomes. Dr. Atuyambe has over 50 publications in peer reviewed journals http:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Atuyambe+L.
William Bazeyo is a Ugandan physician, academician and Occupational Health specialist. He is currently a professor of occupational medicine at Makerere University college of Health Sciences' School of Public Health where he is the Dean of the school.
Introduction: Despite existing policy actions on Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR), many community members in Bududa still continue to settle in high-risk areas re-zoned for nonsettlement. There seems to be an apparent information asymmetry on expectations between the community and Government. The challenge then is ‘
Methods: A qualitative study was conducted in Bududa in eastern Uganda with fourteen group discussions; comprising 12-15 randomly assigned participants of mixed socio-economic variables. Trained research assistants and moderators collected data. All discussions were audio taped, transcribed verbatim before analysis. Data were analyzed using latent content analysis by identifying codes from which sub-themes were generated and grouped into main themes on policy options for resettlement management.
Results and Discussion: We used Deliberative Polling, an innovative approach to public policy consultation and found that although the community is in agreement with most government policy options under resettlement management, they lacked an understanding of the rationale underlying these policy options leading to challenges in implementation. The community members seemed uncertain and had mistrust in government’s ability to implement the policies especially on issues of compensation for land lost.
Key Words: Policy, Deliberative Polling, Climate change, risk-reduction, landslides, Uganda
Disaster incidents are on the increase globally in frequency, intensity and duration especially in the advent of climate change/variability manifested as floods, landslides, drought and glacial runoffs among others
In Uganda, landslides are one of the devastating effects that have been faced due to climate variability. Landslides usually occur in hilly terrain and are triggered by persistent rainfall
The most devastating landslide in Uganda occurred on 1st March 2010 in Bududa District
Following the landslide, several policy recommendations and options were issued in the Uganda National Policy for Disaster Preparedness and Management (2010)
In Bududa, resettlement was applied as a long-term risk reduction solution. It involved resettlement of people away from high-risk areas
Currently, after years of implementing the policy on resettlement of people in Bududa, this policy has not yielded the required outputs. Many Bududa community members still continue to settle in high-risk areas rezoned for non-settlement and many previously relocated to Kiryandongo have returned to the same affected landslide stricken area
One of the reasons for the failure of this policy could be the ineffective consultation of the affected communities prior to the implementation of the policy. The Uganda National Policy for Disaster Preparedness and Management was developed by the government through a process of conducting consultations at all levels using local leaders at community level, through the district leaders to stakeholders at national level
In many countries, public consultation during the policy making process does not adequately involve the communities right from the initial stages
In the bottom-up approach currently being used in Uganda, the community members do not have the opportunity to carefully think through the issues, be educated upon and make an informed decision hence the community members lack the right information on issues affecting them. There is a need to bridge this gap in information asymmetry by devising better ways of public consultation.
The challenge then is
Deliberative PollingÒ(DP) in essence assesses the representative opinions of a population
The first ever successful DP in Africa was conducted in Bududa district in the Mt Elgon region on 7th-8th July 2014. In this paper we examine why there are unsuccessful efforts by the government to effectively communicate the rationale underlying the current policy on resettlement. The reasons were derived from consultation with the community using the DP approach.
Ò Deliberative Polling® is a registered trade mark of James S. Fishkin. The trade mark is for quality control and benefits the Stanford Center for Deliberative Democracy.
This paper focuses on the DP proceedings from Bududa district. Bududa district is located in Eastern Uganda, bordering Kenya to the east, Manafwa district to the south, Mbale to the West and Sironko the north. The district is mostly mountainous with an average altitude of 5,900 ft above sea level. The area has been prone to landslides that have been catastrophic . The population is mainly Lumasaba speaking
The entire design of the DP process involved both Quantitative and Qualitative methods. The Qualitative methods assessed
For this paper, the study design was a case study. According to Thomas (2011), "Case studies are analyses of persons, events, decisions, periods, projects, policies, institutions, or other systems that are studied holistically by one or more methods
Participants for this study were recruited by random selection of households and random selection of those within the households 18. The DP participants were originally selected through a three-stage sampling technique. During the first stage, 7 sub-Counties from Bududa district were randomly selected: three sub-Counties from the high-risk areas, two from moderate risk and one from low-risk areas. The sub-Counties were simple randomly selected. In the second selection stage, three parishes from each sub-County were selected using simple random sampling technique and the sample size for the district was then allocated to the 21 parishes proportionate to their population sizes. In the third and final stage, participants aged 18-75 years were randomly selected from the parishes. A list of the households, and their adult occupants in each of the selected parishes was compiled by community scouts identified in the respective parishes and guided participant selection. The selection of the sub-Counties was guided by Bududa District Disaster Management Plan 2013, which stipulates that ten sub-Counties are high risk, five are medium risk and one Sub -County; low risk of landslides. One sub-County of low risk was automatically selected and the remaining fifteen sub-Counties were subjected to a ratio of 1:2 hence two sub-Counties for moderate risk and five sub counties for high risk sub-Counties respectively.
The total sample size for this study was 208 participants. In conducting the Deliberative Poll, the random sample first completed a baseline survey in order to collect information about community perception and ranking of importance on the specific policy proposals from stakeholders. The survey respondents were then invited to participate in a DP meeting to deliberate face to face on their understanding and concerns regarding proposed policy options. Originally, the participants of the group discussions were sampled using simple random sampling at household level in the different communities for a quantitative survey. It is from the DP meeting that we purposively selected participants for the group discussions. A total of 14 group discussions of 12-15 participants each were conducted. Figure 1 shows the schematic illustration of the DP process in Bududa.
During the deliberations, participants focused on the pros and cons of the policy proposals and arrived at key questions they wished to pose in the plenary session of experts.
The guide used to moderate the discussion focused on the pros and cons of the policy proposals and arrived at key questions they wished to pose in the plenary session of experts. The guide used to moderate the discussion focused on the policy options around: resettlement management, as an option that can be taken to reduce the damage of landslides. Under resettlement management, the proposals of discussion included re-zoning high risk areas for no settlement, compensation for relocation, resettlement in newly built peri-urban centers, temporary resettlement after a disaster, building an early warning system, supporting local disaster management committees, use of sirens in the early warning system and use of text messages in the early warning system.
Fifteen research assistants were recruited and trained to facilitate group discussions. The selected research assistants had a minimum of a bachelor’s degree and prior experience in research specifically qualitative research-interview skills. They were knowledgeable in Lumasaba the local language commonly spoken in the district. They were equipped with digital audio recorders to record the group discussions. The training of moderators was jointly conducted by experts from the ResilientAfrica Network, Stanford University and a faculty member from Makerere University School of Public Health.
Data collected through the group discussions were transcribed verbatim and those in the local languages translated without altering the meaning. A content analysis approach was used as described by Graneheim and Lundman (2004)
Ethical approval was obtained from the Makerere University School of Public Health Higher Degrees, Research and Ethics Committee and approval from the Uganda National Council of Science and Technology (UNCST) [study number SS 3532]. Permission to carry out the research was further sought from Bududa District Administration. Verbal consents were obtained from the participants and a request was made to audio-record the discussions. Study objectives, benefits and risks were explained to our respondents. In addition, respondents had the opportunity to ask questions or clarification before consent for the discussion to proceed. All information obtained during the study was treated as confidential.
In this section we describe the thematic structure of our analysis, showing the main themes and sub-themes regarding policy options for resettlement management. Our key themes were relocation from high to low risk areas, relocation to relatives, compensation for resettlement and risk communication.
We conducted fourteen group discussions where participants were assigned randomly to groups comprising 12-15 participants of mixed gender (58.7% male and 41.3% female); 90% were married,57.7% primary education,10.4% had no education;86.6% were farmers, and the average number of children per woman was 6.3 as shown in Table 1.
Variable
Number
Percentage (N=208)
Sex:
Male
122
58.7%
Female
86
41.3%
Marital Status:
Married
187
90.0%
Single
10
5.0%
Separate/Divorced
3
1.5%
Widowed
7
3.5%
Highest Level of Education:
None
22
10.5%
Primary
120
57.7%
O Level
58
27.9%
A Level
2
1.0%
Tertiary
6
2.9%
Occupation:
Farmer
180
86.6%
Professional/technical/managerial
6
3.0%
Entrepreneur(business owner)
7
3.5%
Merchant
2
1.0%
Teacher
4
2.0%
Student
4
2.0%
Other
4
2.0%
Average Number of Children:
6.39
The analysis identified within the three policy options for resettlement management as: (i) resettlement with support for livelihood and in the same community, (ii) Modalities of compensation; (iii) risk communication as early warning favourable to save life. These themes are described in detail in the next section of the article. Figure 2 shows the thematic structure of the research findings based on Gioia (2013)
The first main theme was resettlement from high to low-risk areas. Low-risk areas would involve being relocated from the high risk mountainous areas characterized by cliffs, steep colluvial deposits and scars due to previous landslides to low risk areas which are low lying, receive less rain to trigger landslides and relatively safer. These low risk areas mainly have trading centres and are inhabited mainly by relatives. In all the group discussions held, the issue of relocation created mixed feelings. They discussed whether relocation would be temporary or permanent. Participants seemed to weigh the risks of staying in the risky areas and the benefits of relocation.
In general relocation of people who live in hilly risky areas to lower less risky areas was acceptable. This would help them go back to check on their gardens and do some farm work. This was mostly on condition that they would access their gardens or be relocated in areas where they can do farming,''
Saving life and property outweighed clinging to their land. They reported of the many landslides in that area where many people including their relatives lost their lives as illustrated by the quote below:
“
Participants were affirmative and wanted relocation due to the situation they were in especially those who were in very high risk places such as Buwilimbi parish, Bukibokolo sub-County where they would lose their lives in case of landslides. They noted that preventive relocation would save the government in spending more money to manage disasters. Hence landslide risk significantly affects people’s willingness to resettle. People living in the riskiest areas such as Bukibokolo sub-County in Bududa had a strong willingness to resettle.
That said, most participants were in favour of relocation so long as the government was willing to support them. An assurance of compensation would facilitate their acceptance of relocation. Thus relocation was tagged to compensation of some kind.
“
The participants often highlighted that the reasons as to why people resist relocations is because in most cases, they are promised assistance but in the end they get nothing. They were not sure what the funds promised for relocations were used for. Referring to the past experience of those who were relocated in 2011 to Kiryandongo District, people suffered more and some of their land was sold.
“
The destination for resettlement was discussed extensively and this influences the willingness to be relocated. Most groups preferred to be resettled anywhere in greater Masabaland where they share the same language and culture. They were not in favour of being resettled elsewhere. Social cohesion would be fostered better and they would be able to perform their cultural rituals especially the male circumcision ''Imbalu'' which is a rite of passage to adulthood for this particular ethnic group. Hence, such opinions indicate that an individual’s sense of identity and belonging profoundly discourages people from relocating.
“
However,a few people, were specific and mentioned that the relocation should be in Bududa low lying areas such as Busanza, Manjiya and Namatyale. They alluded to the fact that Bududa has very fertile soils compared to other districts in greater Mbale.
“
Group participants had many questions related to the type of support provided by the government and how long it would last. Concerns about the ownership of their land in the high risky areas when they leave were raised. They were not sure whether they would still remain with their land after relocation.
“My question is like this, Government thinks of relocating people who are in risky areas, to remove them and take them to other places; if they take them away, who will have authority over the places they have left behind,” (Group 4)
“
A few of the participants disagreed to be relocated to trading centres because they were of the view that trading centres would be crowded and easily breed diseases such as Cholera that were typical of where they camped during the landslide disasters. Negative influences and behaviours would be acquired from the different people put together especially if there is scarcity of food and other needs.
“
Related to the above was the fear of the concentration of so many people from different areas with different behaviours and habits such as those who abuse substances like alcohol and drugs. Such would breed quarrels, conflicts and insecurity. These examples given were a reflection of what happened in the previous landslides when they were relocated to some trading centres.
“
Most of the participants, being subsistence farmers, felt that in trading centres they would not have land to graze their cows and goats and to do farming. However those who supported being relocated to trading centres were putting their lives by relocating to a relatively safe area and only using the risky area to farm. Trading centres were preferred because they would be near their ancestral homes than relocation outside the greater Mbale region.
“
Although extended families are common, most participants did not favour the idea of relocating to relatives. They felt that they would temporarily stay with their relatives but not for long. They noted that the social support systems have weakened and the hospitality would be abused given the high number household members they have including their domestic animals and other property. They felt they would be a burden to their relatives.
Relocating to relatives or friends with their families is something that they were not comfortable with. Most felt they could only stay for a short time until the situation stabilizes. Anticipated family conflicts were some of the inhibiting factors in relocation to relatives and friends. Others mentioned that some of their relatives are poorer than they are and so may not be of much help. A few mentioned that since it would be for a short time to relocate to relatives and friends, they can endure that instead of losing life and property due to landslides.
“
A few reported they would be itinerant migrants whereby during the rainy season they migrate to a safe place and go back to their homes during the dry season.
“
Another theme on policy options for resettlement was compensation. In several group discussions participants seemed relatively uncertain regarding compensation by government after relocation from high to low risk areas. The land was valued highly valued and thus compensation was seen as not a feasible option. This led to negative attitude towards compensation for resettlement. They were unclear about the modalities of pay off and this resulted into a prolonged discussions. In fact, they had more questions than answers “
“
That said, they were positive that it was a good idea if the government paid for their land they left behind in the risky areas. But they were cautious and preferred to get a place to be relocated before they are compensated.
One particular issue that emerged from most groups was the inequitable compensation by government to affected persons which in a way influenced relocation negatively.
''
Thus, government commitment in compensation was considered crucial for people to accept relocation. Moreover, they articulated the perceived benefits of relocation such as being alive and safe, with less difficulties than staying in the risky areas prone to landslides. However, they noted other negative consequences on people’s lives such loosing cultural and social ties which may not be cost during compensation.
An early warning system is a response to an assessment of the risk and it involves monitoring, forecasting, warning, dissemination and communication of warning using a range of media and communication channels. Communities and other key actors should know how to respond promptly to avoid loss of life and adverse effects on livelihoods. Group participants were asked about the systems that can be instituted to warn the residents early enough before landslides strike.
In several group discussions, instituting early warning system was desired by participants. They felt it was a good measure to put in place so that people are aware when a problem is about to happen instead of being caught up by the disaster leading to loss of lives and property
“
The participants however, reported that traditionally warning systems were in place such as the traditional drum beats that were used to alert people in case of danger, community work or even for festive events as illustrated by the quote below.
“
Drawing on such experiences of community warning systems helps inform and lay the groundwork for the future early warning systems because the early warning systems are able to use both indigenous knowledge and modern knowledge. The community noted that those with their indigenous knowledge know when the risky months are; usually May, September and October when there is a lot of rains.
“
“
The bells and sirens were desired by most groups and that they could be instituted in areas that are risky. The bells and sirens were thought to be good because they were audible enough. However some participants were not sure how these early warning systems could work given that disasters such as floods or landslides happen suddenly. Moreover, they needed to understand the type of sound of the bell that would signify danger.
“
A few were skeptical about the bells and sirens as the landslide might occur at night when people are asleep and so they may not hear the alarm. Some of the houses are iron roofed and when there is a storm the sound of the siren may not be heard. Or if it is heard people may be in disarray and end up running to where the danger is. They alluded to the fact that the way landslides occur is a process; that it does not happen during the heavy downpour rather it is when the rain is slowing down that the mud slides begin to move down as a mass. So, they felt that the bells and sirens may warn when the landslide is forming and this may be too late as some people would be swallowed on the way to safety. Hence the risk communication system may not be dependable or may not be effectively communicated especially to the most vulnerable populations. In one of the landslide affected area of Nametsi they reported the landslide happened at night.
“
“
The participants wanted to know more about the early warning system that would be established in order to act responsibly. They categorically indicated that alarms with no guidance on where to run to will not save the situation in such emergencies.
One of the options mentioned by a few group discussions was the use of short phone messages popularly known as ‘SMS’. This option was found only feasible to a few community members that owned mobile telephone sets. While this communication system had potential to reach out to many people at the same time, a number of issues were raised that rendered it ineffective. Participants raised the problem of low literacy (ability to read and write) as most know only how to receive and make a call by pressing some familiar iconic buttons; phone ownership density where only few people especially men owned mobile phones; low network coverage as well as low battery. At night, most of the phones are switched off for charging rendering SMS unreliable for disaster response.
‘’...
‘’..
‘’
The results show that while the community is in agreement with most of the policy options proposed by the government such as relocation from high to low risk areas including trading centres and to relatives and risk communication including early warning systems, others were in disagreement with the above policy options for the reasons highlighted in the results section. Still,others were uncertain about the proposed policy options e.g compensation for resettlement. The community members also still have mistrust in the ability of the government to fulfill the promises. Moreover, the community members do not understand the
Regarding the policy on resettlement, most participants were in favour of relocation as long as the government was willing to support the affected persons through the process. This is in line with Bankoff who noted that communities that are affected by hazards tend to respond by way of helping one another, by providing shelter, food and other necessities with those who have lost their livelihood
Although in principal, mobility is often understood as a potentially beneficial strategy for vulnerable households, to cope with and reduce exposure to hazards, the exacerbated climatic shocks that have resulted from climate change have rendered resettlement as a core risk reduction strategy as is in the case of Bududa
For its success, the benefits of resettlement have to be clarified to the affected community. Much as some institutions define resettlement as a physical movement , in this community of Bududa, resettlement has not been defined well,hence the question from the community on whether resettlement was permanent or temporary. This speaks to the need for better communication about risk reduction programs. Other questions still unanswered were whether the community members would still own the land in the area where they have been resettled from.
Benefits such as the intention to lessen site-specific vulnerabilities for example in areas like Bududa that are prone to recurrent landslides must be re-laid to the community as was the case in 2008, when a landslide severely affected 85 households in a densely populated and low-income community of Cochabamba city,Bolivia
Resettlement as a coping strategy can contribute to income diversification enhancing capacity of households and communities to cope with the adverse effects of environmental and climate change stresses. It also can be a long-term adaptation strategy. The intention is that resettled people will be better off over time as a result of resettlement – according to their own assessment and external expert review
In the case study of Vietnam, the outcomes of relocation and resettlement were mixed and it was demonstrated that resettlement programs have the potential to increase resilience and security of vulnerable households
While the resettlement processes have many benefits, resettlement has also been shown to have challenges such as the increased distances thus people need more time to travel to their agricultural fields
In Bududa community the issue of the type and place of relocation/resettlement came out strongly with some communities preferring to be relocated in the trading centre. This speaks to the adequacy of the relocation site as has been documented elsewhere
In Bududa, the community members preferred to be relocated anywhere in Masabaland in greater Mbale District where they share the same language and culture. Social cohesion would be fostered better and they would be able to perform their cultural rituals especially male circumcision which is a rite of passage to adulthood. This highlights the complexities and enormous challenge in finding suitable sites for relocating disaster-affected communities.That said, with unchecked population growth in the Mt Elgon region intra resettlement may carry a short term relief which is unsustainable in the long run if the livelihood source remains signifcantly agro and eco-system based.
Policy makers need to be aware that unsuitable new sites can lead to lost livelihoods, lost sense of community and social capital, cultural alienation, poverty, and people abandoning the new sites and returning to the location of their original community
In the case of Bududa district in Uganda, following the March 2010 catastrophic landslide, residents were temporarily resettled in IDP camps that led to challenges of poor sanitation, overcrowding and environmental degradation
According to Putro (2012), following a large scale mudflow that happened in Sidaorja, Indonesia in 2006, the villagers’ decision-making process on where to resettle was guided by job patterns: 1) workers tended to choose locations near the city center; 2) farmers preferred to move as a group, maintaining their social network with other community members; and 3) traders, self-employed workers, and others lost their jobs and were forced to live in severe hardship because of the relocation
An assurance of compensation is one of the ways that would facilitate community acceptance of relocation. In Bududa, the state agencies have never come out to clearly communicate the compensation terms for relocation of the affected victims. Compensation has been noted to be a major factor in relocation plans by the International Finance Corporation (IFC)
IFC recommends that the compensation provided should be equal to or above what is required by law and in agreement with host communities on the methodology for calculating compensation. Although compensating for the loss of social capital can be challenging, IFC considers it a key aspect of compensation. Where possible, compensation is provided in forms other than cash so that long-term goals and livelihood improvements can be achieved
Another issue that policy makers had to be aware of during this policy implementation in Bududa was the fact that resettlement could lead to some social disruptions such as men losing their social status and or political positions in cases where populations had to be dispersed
Added to this, most victims, having lost most of their assets in the landslide are literally left with nothing and therefore cannot be in a position to support them to relocate. They will need to be provided with some relief items- beddings, soap, cooking oil, sugar
It has also been noted that resettlement is more likely to be successful when communities fully participate in well-planned adequately financed programmes that include elements such as land-for-land compensation, livelihood generation, food security. In other words there is increased chance of success when resettlement is conceived as a sustainable development programme that includes Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR)
As we note that resettlement must be part of a holistic risk reduction plan, in highly vulnerable communities, there is need for effective early warning systems that can generate and disseminate timely and meaningful warning information to enable individuals, communities and organizations threatened by a hazard to prepare and to act appropriately and in sufficient time to reduce the possibility of harm or loss
Interestingly, majority of the participants did not trust use of text messaging for early warning because they did not think the mobile phone system was sufficiently reliable. In fact, majority of the members in the group discussions resisted it because of the various reasons as mentioned in the results section. However, use of Short Messaging Service (SMS) for early warning can be a potentially feasible option when the challenges associated with its use are overcome.
It was noted that sirens as an early warning system technology was desired by the people and it means that this acceptability can be leveraged to initiate and scale up the Early Warning Systems (EWS). It is important for the implementing agencies to adhere to standards of cultural sensitivity, acceptability and suitability of the EWS in order to assure sustainability in building EWS. Choosing a warning communication technology is dependent on considering who the recipients are, their location, their activity, the systems they rely on to receive local news and information, any special needs they may have and how they understand and respond to warnings
Rogers and Tsirkunov (2010) noted that one critical step is the willingness to act on a warning and take appropriate individual and collective measures to protect lives and poverty
The credibility of this study lies in the fact that we used group discussions and a stratified random sampling strategy. It is rare for qualitative work to be conducted with random samples and almost unprecedented for qualitative work to be done where the number of group discussions together is enough to add up to a credible representative sample of the population. We ought to note, however, that while participants from the group discussions were obtained from the 3 zones (low, medium and high risk zones to landslides), participants were heterogeneously composed. Therefore, it was not possible to conduct analysis by the 3 zones. Non-the-less this form composition generated rich and diverse discussion about policy options for resettlement management.
From the consultations using the deliberative poll method with the community, it can be generally agreed that resettlement is a highly complex issue. Policy makers have to be aware that resettlement and economic displacement of people can have significant adverse impacts on their future life, social fabric and livelihoods. If consultations are not adequately conducted, success determining issues are swept under the carpet. Ineffective consultations can leave the affected community feeling aggravated,hence do not adhere to the “agreed” position because some facts are only known to the technical people at the district level and policy makers in the District.
We recommend that for disaster risk reduction policies, in order to increase community acceptability and successful implementation of the proposed policies there is a need to increase community engagement during the policy formulation process. Deliberative polling presents a new and inclusive community consultation process of obtaining community perspectives for successful policy implementation.
The supplementary raw and analyzed data that support the findings of this study are available in figshare with the identifier data DOI: 10.6084/m9.figshare.5501326 https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.5501326
The authors declare that no conflicts of interest exist.
This work was supported by the United States Agency for International Development under Makerere University School of Public Health's Resilient Africa Network (RAN) project. The contents of this work are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of USAID. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Grace Mongo Bua (gracebuamongo@gmail.com; gbua@ranlab.org; gracefridaypreston@gmail.com)