Gender and Development in Post-disaster Reconstruction: Indian Experience

  • V. ThiruppugazhEmail author
Part of the Disaster Studies and Management book series (DSDM)


Between 1994 and 2013 nearly 68,000 lives were lost and 218 million people were affected worldwide due to natural disasters. The worst impacts were due to earthquakes, floods, and cyclones (CRED 2015). Major reconstruction programs were undertaken following these disasters. Depending on several factors, the objective of post-disaster reconstruction may vary from restoration of the status quo ante to dramatic developmental transformation of the affected areas. Post-disaster reconstruction is expected to “present opportunities for new and more progressive gender roles and relationships to emerge, provide opportunities to rebuild in a way that is inclusive of women and girls, provide opportunities for women to assume leadership roles, and better influence the direction of development patterns” (UNISDR 2015a). This article examines the challenges in realizing these normative goals, based on the Indian experience. It also considers how gender studies have influenced disaster-related policies. In addition, the paper attempts to identify knowledge gaps and reflect on the way forward for theory and practice.


  1. Agarwal, B. (1990). Social security and the family: Coping with seasonality and calamity in rural India. Journal of Peasant Studies, 17(3), 341–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahrens, J., & Rudolph, P. M. (2006). The importance of governance in risk reduction and disaster management. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 14(4), 207–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bari, F. (1998). Gender, disaster, and empowerment: A case study from Pakistan. In E. Enarson & B. H. Morrow (Eds.), The gendered terrain of disaster: Through women’s eyes. Miami, Florida: Laboratory for Social and Behavioral Research.Google Scholar
  4. Bolin, R., Jackson, M., & Crist, A. (1998). Gender inequality, vulnerability, and disaster: Issues in theory and research. In E. Enarson & H. Morrow (Eds.), The gendered terrain of disaster: Through women’s eyes (pp. 26–43). Miami, Florida: Laboratory for Social and Behavioral Research.Google Scholar
  5. Bolin, R., & Stanford, Lois. (1991). Shelter, housing and recovery: A comparison of U.S. disasters. Disasters, 15(1), 24–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bradshaw, S. (2004). Socio-economic impacts of natural disasters: A gender analysis. Serie Manuales (Vol. 32). Santiago, Chile: United Nations.Google Scholar
  7. Cannon, T. (2000). Vulnerability analysis and disasters. In D. J. Parker (Ed.), Floods (pp. 45–55). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Comerio, M. C. (1998). Disaster hits home: New policy for urban housing recovery. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  9. CRED (Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters). (2015). The human cost of natural disasters: A global perspective. Brussels, Belgium: Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters.Google Scholar
  10. Dreze, J., & Sen, A. (1989). Hunger and public action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Enarson, E. (1999). Violence against women in disasters: A study of domestic violence programs in the U.S. and Canada. Violence Against Women, 5(7), 742–768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Enarson, E. (2012). Gender issues in natural disasters: Talking points and research needs. In ILO InFocus Programme on Crisis Response and Reconstruction Workshop. Geneva.Google Scholar
  13. Enarson, E., & Morrow B. H. (1997). A gendered perspective: Voices of women. In W. G. Peacock, B. H. Morrow, & H. Gladwin (Eds.), Hurricane Andrew: Race, gender and the sociology of disaster (pp. 116–140). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Enarson, E., & Morrow B. H. (1998). The gendered terrain of disaster: Through women’s eyes. GT: Greenwood: Westport.Google Scholar
  15. Fordham, M. (1999). The intersection of gender and social class in disaster: Balancing resilience and vulnerability. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 17(1), 15–36.Google Scholar
  16. Fordham, M. (2003). Gender, disaster and development: The need for integration. In M. Pelling (Ed), Natural disasters and development in a globalizing world (pp. 57–74). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Fothergill, A. (1996). Gender, risk, and disaster. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 14(1), 33–56.Google Scholar
  18. Fothergill, A. (1998). The neglect of gender in disaster work: An overview of the literature. In E. Enarson & B. H. Morrow (Eds.), The gendered terrain of disaster: Through women’s eyes (pp. 11–25). Miami, Florida: Laboratory For Social and Behavioral Research.Google Scholar
  19. George, A. (2008). Interview by Author. Nagapattinam, Tamil Nadu, March 4.Google Scholar
  20. GFDRR, “Damage, Losses and Needs Assessment- Tools and Methodology”, GFDRR. Accessed October 12, 2016.
  21. Government of Bihar. Kosi Calamity: Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Policy. Department of Planning & Development, n.d.Google Scholar
  22. Government of Gujarat. (2001). Gujarat Earthquake Reconstruction and Rehabilitation Policy. Gandhinagar: GSDMA.Google Scholar
  23. Government of Maharashtra. (2009). Maharashtra Emergency Earthquake Rehabilitation Program. Accessed March 23, 2009.
  24. Government of Maharashtra. (1994). Earthquake Rehabilitation Policy of Government of Maharashtra.Google Scholar
  25. Government of Tamil Nadu, Revenue Department. (2008). Tiding over Tsunami.Google Scholar
  26. Government of Uttarakhand. “Resilient Housing and Public Buildings”, PMU, Government of Uttarakhand. Accessed October 29, 2016.
  27. Hidellage, V., & Usoof, A. (2010). Scaling-up people-centred reconstruction: Lessons from Sri Lanka’s post-tsunami owner-driven programme. In M. Lyons, T. Schilderman, & C. Boano (Eds.), Building back better: Delivering people-centred housing reconstruction at scale (pp. 77–112). Warwickshire: Practical Action Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
  28. Jorgensen, A. (2008). Interview by Author. July 4.Google Scholar
  29. KPMG [KPMG Advisory Services Private Ltd]. (2007). Final report on benefit monitoring evaluation of Gujarat earthquake emergency reconstruction program. Gandhinagar: Gujarat State Disaster Management Authority.Google Scholar
  30. Laska, S., Morrow, B. H., Willinger, B., & Mock, N. (2008). Gender and disasters: Theoretical considerations. In B. Willinger (Eds.), Katrina and the women of New Orleans (pp. 11–21). New Orleans: Newcomb College Centre for Research on Women.Google Scholar
  31. Morrow, B. H., & Enarson E. (1996). Hurricane Andrew through women’s eyes: Issues and planning recommendations. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 14(1), 5–22.Google Scholar
  32. Moser, C. O. N. (1993). Gender planning and development: Theory, practice & training. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  33. Parkinson, D. (2011). Gender and disaster: Literature review. Wangaratta, Australia: Women’s Health Goulburn North East Inc.Google Scholar
  34. Platt, R. H. (1999). Disasters and democracy: The politics of extreme natural events (1st ed.). Washington, D.C.: Island Press.Google Scholar
  35. Raj, S. J. (2008). Interview by Author. Nagarcoil, Tamil Nadu. March 3.Google Scholar
  36. Skinner, E. (2011). Gender and climate change overview report. Institute of Development Studies.Google Scholar
  37. Srinivasan, B. (2007). Earthquakes and gendered access to water. In Negotiating complexities: A collection of feminist essays (pp. 121–139). New Delhi: Promilla & Co., in association with Bibliophile South Asia.Google Scholar
  38. Swain, M. (2007). Disaster management and gender issues. In Gender perspective in disaster management (pp. 3–7). New Delhi: Serials Publications.Google Scholar
  39. Teotia, R. (2007). Interview by Author. Gandhinagar, Gujarat. December 11.Google Scholar
  40. Thiruppugazh, V. (2016). Positioning stakeholders within owner-driven post disaster reconstruction approaches: Gujarat, India following the 2001 earthquake. In P. Daly and R. M. Feener (Eds.), Rebuilding Asia following natural disasters: Approaches to reconstruction in the Asia Pacific Region (pp. 160–180). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  41. UNISDR. (2015a). Issue brief: Mobilizing women’s leadership in disaster risk reduction; high level multi-stakeholder partnership dialogue. In UN world conference on disaster risk reduction. Sendai, Japan.Google Scholar
  42. UNISDR. (2015b). Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction 2015–2030. Geneva: UNISDR.Google Scholar
  43. Wisner, B., & Luce, H. R. (1993). Disaster vulnerability: Scale, power and daily life. GeoJournal, 30(2), 127–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ChanakyaduriIndia

Personalised recommendations