Building Community Resilience

to
Flood Risks
in

Kaisarganj Block, Uttar Pradesh, India

Building Community Resilience
to
Flood Risks
in

Kaisarganj Block, Uttar Pradesh, India

ECHO

Malteser International

Project Holding and Technical Support

UNNATI
Organisation for Development Education

Implemented by
Sahabhagi Shikshan Kendra
Introduction

Partnerships

Main Activities

Shelter Material Support and Raising the Level of Homestead Plots

Ensuring Safe Drinking Water by Hand Pump Level Raising

Supporting Emergency Livelihood Needs Through Cash-for-Work

Disaster Preparedness

Learnings and Challenges

5
1. Introduction

Bahraich District in the state of Uttar Pradesh situated

near the southern border of Nepal is a heavy flood prone
zone. Bahraich district gets flooded when there is heavy
rain upstream in the rivers in Nepal and when there is
overflow discharge from the barrages on the Indo-Nepal
boarder. Bahraich District and Kaisarganj Block were
submerged from end of July to September 2007 due to
four consecutive floodings of the Ghaghara River in three
months.

As per government reports about 16,000 people were

affected by these floods, out of which 2,000 people were
displaced in Bahraich district. The total affected area was
3,930 hectare, out of which 3,530 hectare, approximately location map of Bahraich District
90% land was agricultural land. The floods also resulted in
36 deaths in Bahraich district. In Uttar Pradesh, although
maximum devastation was seen in early August, when
2,634 villages were affected , in the beginning of October,
886 villages were still submerged having seen several
cycles of inundation.

The Initial Assessments:

The first assessment was undertaken in early August 2007

during the floods with the objective to assess immediate
needs which could be addressed by direct relief by Malteser
International. The second assessment was undertaken at
the end of October 2007 to monitor the ongoing relief by
Malteser International as well as to assess the rehabilitation
needs to further plan a rehabilitation phase.

These assessments were undertaken by senior staff

of Unnati and SSK. The visits for the assessment were
undertaken in cooperation with the Lucknow based local
NGO, Sahbhagi Shikshan Kendra (SSK). Village level
discussions were held with men and women separately on
coping mechanisms, housing needs and options, as well
as rescue methods. Two meetings were conducted with
8 local NGOs who were partnering with SSK in Bahraich
district. Discussions were also held with Block officials and
Disaster Management Department. Consultations were Kaisarganj Block in Bahraich
also held to share experiences and work together with
other international NGOs working in the region.

houses submerged in water during flood water hand-pump submerged in water

7
During the visit to the affected areas, it was observed that the houses were severely damaged
or destroyed as they were submerged during the long-lasting flood. Most of the affected
families live in the area 4-5 km between the river and
the embankments (bund) built in the 1960s. During the
months of the flooding people survived in makeshift
shelters on top of these embankments. Support from the
government was minimal and did not reach the neediest
for reconstruction of their shelters.

People suffered heavy losses of crops and livestock. Loss

of work opportunities in agriculture resulted in severe food
shortage and shortage of cash for survival as most of the
families living in the area are from the marginalized and/
or dalit communities who depend on daily wages for their
flood Map of the Region survival.

During the flood, many hand pumps from which people

normally would fetch water were submerged and the other
water sources got soiled. In places of refuge people often
had no access to clean water and suffered from water
born diseases.

Emergency response was very slow and minimal. There

was a shortage of rescue devices, especially means of
transport, i.e. boats for people to move within the flooded
area to fetch supplies or go to find work.
flood Map of Baharaich

The main stakeholders in the region were the affected

community, particularly dalits and artisan castes like Yadavs, Keots, Godiya, Pasi, Nishad,
Lohars Muslims, Chamars, etc. Most of these community members are either marginal farmers
or agriculture labourers. Some of them are also involved in share cropping. Due to extensive
damage of the agricultural lands and crops, the vulnerability of these community members
increased. Due to loss of work, the coping capacities were low and likelihood of migration or
distress sale of whatever little assets they may have was very high. Through this project, it was

satellite Image of the Area Locating the Project Villages and Surroundings

8
envisaged that the affected community members, particularly the above mentioned socio-
economically marginalised castes, would get some income through work opportunities and
long term habitat security was to be built into the project.

The Gram panchayats were the next important

stakeholders. They lacked the capacity to effectively deal
with the situation. It was essential to strengthen them as
they are the ones to take decisions in any emergency
situations. The Gram panchayats in Bahraich district are
spread over many hamlets. Thus, the hamlet level units
were considered for developing a preparedness system
for the Gram panchayats.

Although the Block and District level administration were picture of the Bund in normal time
responsible for managing the disaster response and
coordination at the local level, the government response was
limited to early relief work and the rehabilitation responses
were not adequate. Under the Disaster Management Act,
disaster response, preparedness and management was
to be strengthened at the district level but this process
remained out of public scrutiny and not known to people.
The government plans were limited due to lack of people’s
participation and effective implementation models. It was
therefore essential that the knowledge and experiences
be shared for further strengthening of the processes
influencing ‘disaster preparedness plans’. Similar models
could be implemented using the opportunities provided picture of the bund during the floods
under the various government schemes to ensure Disaster
Risk Reduction (DRR).

Based on the above observations and discussions with different stakeholders, an intervention
strategy was developed. Further visits were made to the project area along with local partners
to consult with the affected families on the activities proposed in the intervention strategy
before formulating the final proposal.

satellite Image of the Area Marking the Annual Floods

9
Project Villages

The villages selected for the project were all on the east bank of the river and west side of the
bund (satellite images on previous page). Thus they were prone to heavy flooding during the
monsoons when the river Ghaghara overflew, eventhough some of the villages were as far
away as 5 km from river. Being close to the river also meant that the land there is very fertile
and productive. Nearest town from these villages is Kaisarganj, block headquarter in Behraich
district. It is approximately 150 km from Lucknow. The border with Nepal is approximately 90 km
from Kaisarganj. The villages selected for the project are within 5 to 7 km from Kaisarganj.

Baghahiya:

No of Purvas : 02
BPL Families : 39
Total Population : 1210
Male Population : 689
Female Population : 521
Location : 27°15’14.46”N
81°30’29.16”E

Kandauli:

No of Purvas : 03
BPL Families : 349
Total Population : 1045
Male Population : 569
Female Population : 476
Location : 27°18’58.79”N
81°29’40.49”E

10
Kohali:

No of Purvas : 01
BPL Families : 119
Total Population : 1239
Male Population : 658
Female Population : 581
Location : 27°18’20.82”N
81°30’3.90”E

Chulambha:

No of Purvas : 13
BPL Families : 148
Total Population : 2138
Male Population : 1148
Female Population : 990
Location : 27°16’44.76”N
81°30’35.82”E

Matarepur:

No of Purvas : 07
BPL Families : 483
Total Population : 3094
Male Population : 1747
Female Population : 1347
Location : 27°13’15.65”N
81°30’32.41”E

11
Proposed Strategy:

In response to the main findings an integrated approach was developed with community
consultation. This included the following:
Develop hamlet (purva) wise and Gram panchayat level task forces to work in coordination
on all urgent issues, especially early warning, evacuation, drinking water, sanitation and risk
reduction/ mitigation strategies like raising of homestead plots and hand pumps. This would
help develop disaster preparedness and response. The promoted task force and village groups
would be provided tools and equipments like boats, microphones, life jackets, etc. The task
forces would also be trained on risk analysis, rescue procedures and maintenance of tools and
equipment.

Identify and take up cash for work programme, which is an unskilled wage work to raise
homestead plots, raise hand pumps above the flood risk level. The raising of plots and hand
pumps are done by excavating earth from the agricultural field. It has also potential to increase
the soil fertility for paddy field as in the flooding time fertile earth will be covered in these
excavated areas. Cash for work is also used to erect the houses making banboo based wattle
and daub walling material.

Through an integrated approach the intervention will support recovery, preparedness and
mitigation of the affected and most vulnerable people in the target area.

The diagram below represents the approach-

A project proposal was then submitted to ECHO through Malteser International in Oct -Nov
2007. After several rounds of discussions and refinements, the project was approved in March
2008.

The proposal defined four main areas of work.

 Raising the levels of Homestead plots and shelter provision

 Raising the levels of Hand pumps and safeguarding drinking water
 Cash-for-work programme to be taken up for the project
 Early warning, evacuation and rescue systems

12
2. Partnerships:

One of the most interesting features of this project was the coming together of different partner
organisations and each taking responsibility for different parts of the project. Communication
and structured flow of information was therefore necessary for this project to materialise.

The project was funded by ECHO through Malteser International, which acted as the
nodal agency. Malteser International stationed a representative for the project. The major
responsibility was to support the planning and procurement process. Malteser International
was also involved in generating and collating project information in terms of MIS for direct
reporting to ECHO.

Sahabhagi Shikshan Kendra (SSK), based in Lucknow,

having its strength of capacity building of NGOs, people’s
organisations and panchayati Raj institutions took up the
responsibility of implementation of the project. SSK also
implemented the 2007 flood relief work with the support
of Malteser International in the same region. Unnati,
with its prior experience in disaster reconstruction and
preparedeness provided the technical support.

In March 2008, the project coordination meeting was held

at Lucknow in which all three partners were present. The
coordination meeting at SSK campus
project was initiated in April 2008. SSK recruited the program
staff including program manager, logistics manager,
sector facilitators for the result areas. Unnati appointed an
engineer for the project who would advise on shelter issues,
raising the level of hand pump and disaster preparedness
techniques. The cash-for-work programme was planned
for each village through community consultations.

Malteser International appointed a project coordinator who

would be in-charge of the project and whose responsibilities
would include project design, setting up of systems and
reporting both to Malteser International and ECHO. Malteser
International also provided support to develop appropriate initial discussions with people
financial and monitoring systems for transparent project
reporting.

Description of proceedings

The ground team of SSK and Unnati visited all the project villages along with the project
coordinator. Rapport building with the community was most important and was taken up
immediately. In April and May 2008, the shelter consultant from Unnati also visited the region,
identified the issues, proposed initial solutions and made demonstrations for shelter design
and hand pumps. The demonstrations showed that locally available materials like bamboo and
mud were the best for the region as they responded best during flood situations, and is also
comfortable to live in keeping in mind the harsh seasonal changes of the region. Additionally,
they were the most affordable materials for the locals who did not have the financial capacity
to invest for repairing and maintaining the shelter. Same was true for the hand pumps. People
expressed that the methods of working with the local materials like bamboo for construction
purposes had been out of practice due to repeated damage to the shelters in annually recurring
floods. Various designs using different materials and various techniques were demonstrated
for shelter construction and people made their own choices.

A feasibility study was also carried out with a disaster preparedness consultant. The study
showed that local materials and technologies were best disaster resistant housing solutions.
Also, disaster preparedness could be best addressed with local techniques and locally available
materials and equipments like local wooden boats. It was also proposed to further strengthen
people’s basic disaster survival skills by providing trainings, accessories (like life buoys, life
13
 jackets, ropes etc.) and well equipped motor boats.

As per the ECHO – Malteser International guidelines,

material procurement was to be done through strict
tendering procedure. The system for tendering and
material procurement was worked out according to these
guidelines.

Heavy rains lasted through June to August 08, making it

difficult to carry out any construction work. Looking into
severity of these floods Maltesar International supported
discussions with people regarding flood distribution of food packets for interim relief. The project
team from SSK and Unnati carried out community liaising
work by conducting panchayat level discussions and forming panchayat level committees in
each of the village panchayats. Each committee included the Pradhan (sarpanch), Shiksha
Mitra (village school teacher), village health worker, other community leaders and project
team representative.

During the monsoons, a vulnerability analysis was carried out in each village with the help
of the village committee. With help from the village committee and using the results of the
vulnerability analysis, families were identified for shelter support from each purva (hamlet) in
the village. Similarly, hand pump locations were also identified by the village committee.

The analysis also identified the purvas where boats were required. All the purvas where the
families were located were on the West side of the Bund. In each village a Naav Nigrani Samiti
(boat maintenance committee) and Hand Pump Nigrani Samiti (hand pump maintenance
committee) was formed during the beginning of the monsoon. Maximum representation was
given to women in these committees.

During the monsoon months, the village committees also formed task force for flood resilience.
Minimum of five representatives were selected from each panchayat. These volunteers were
young, enthusiastic, educated and willing to stay in the village during the floods. Preference
was given to those who were active during the previous floods, and knew how to swim.

Simultaneously, from end July 2008, boats and rescue materials were put into use in the floods.
This provided opportunity for local people to get trained on rescue. This strengthened the
people’s faith in the organisation and the project. It also served as a flood resistant mechanism
for the local people. People also reciprocated with enthusiasm by participating in the further
processes.

The project team was constantly in contact with the district’s disaster management cell and
informed people about the flood forecast and warnings. With help of the Primary Health Centre
(PHC) and UNICEF, chlorine tablets and bleaching powder for water purification were acquired
and distributed in the region. Basic level trainings on how to use them were also given to
the people. After the floods receded, as mentioned earlier food kits were distributed to the
affected families with financial support from Malteser International for emergency response.
This further strengthened the acceptance of the organisation among the people. Additionally,
the staff was also given training for potable water testing using WASMO’s water testing kits.

In November 2008, the hand-pump installation began. Local contractors were given priority
for the installation of hand pumps and construction of platforms for these hand pumps.
Unskilled labour work was acquired under the cash-for-work component of the project. By
end December 2008, 40 hand pumps with raised platforms were installed.

Simultaneously, in October 2008, plinth raising of homestead plots and shelter construction
began. Most of the plinth raising work was completed by December 2008. On the job training
was initiated to build bamboo mats as walling material. This helped in reviving bamboo based
wattle and daub technology. It created opportunity for cash for work program on bamboo mat
weaving and plastering the walls for local people. All activities were completed well before
project end period of February 2009.

14
3. Main Activities:

As discussed earlier, four main activities were defined in the project.

1. Development of homestead plots
2. Raising of water hand pumps for water source protection
3. Cash for work
4. Early warning, evacuation and rescue trainings

All these activities were not seen as different components, instead an integrated approach for
strengthening the community resilience towards flood risks was developed.

3.1 Level raising of Homestead plots and material support

The objective of this activity was not only to create shelter security but also to build flood
resilience by increasing the height of the homestead plots. Although the community members
had to move to safer places during the few days of flood, the project sought to ensure that when
they came back, they had a shelter for living. The overall focus was to enable the vulnerable
households on use of wattle and daub technology for construction of the houses. A technical
team would monitor the construction done by the people and provide them with technological
assistance for constructing better shelter. As labour was required for the construction of the
shelter and hand pump level raising and there was need for livelihood support, the cash-for-
work activity was targeted the local people.

Analysis of present housing conditions and proposed shelter:

People in this region live in small hut-like houses in settlements called ‘purva’. A few of these
purvas put together make a village. Most families have a small piece of land on which they
build their houses with locally available wood and grass. There is generally a little land available
for agriculture, where they produce grains for their yearly consumption and financial needs.

A quick assessment of the present housing situation in the region shows that the quality of
housing was very poor. Though there is ample material available for house construction, due
to concurrent floods and widespread poverty, the housing quality is very bad.

A typical house in the rural area is built with bamboo or wooden poles acting as columns. The
roof structure is generally made of bamboo or local wood covered by thatch. Even though
bamboo is available in abundance it is not used for the screen walls, rather thatch or local
grass along with wooden sticks are used to make wattle and daub construction. Many a times
the walls are plastered with mud, but leaving some parts of the wall exposed. In some cases
the people had also constructed the walls with cob wall construction. It was also observed that
the plinths of the houses were very low and could not protect the houses from the floods during
the monsoon. The roof did not have enough overhangs and hence during the monsoons, the
mud plaster (in case of wattle and daub construction) or mud wall (in case of cob construction)
would get washed away every year. Also, the roof made up of thatch would not withstand the
monsoon showers. Overall, the average life of the house was one or two years only.

a house with mud walls and thatch roof house with bamboo structure and thatch
15
To improve this situation, few immediate steps (outlined below) were considered:
 It was important to raise the plinth level of the house such that it does not get submerged
in the floods year after year. A minimum of 3 feet of level raising was necessary in almost all
cases, while in some the floor level of the shelter needed to be raised by up to 5 to 6 feet. In
order to protect the raised homestead plot plinth, there was a need to create a retaining wall.
Instead of using brick and cement which was costly, through various discussions another
alternative was developed. Gunny bags filled with mixture of sand and cement as retention
walling material has been in use locally and considered by people as the most appropriate and
cost effective technique. This technique was adopted in the project by contextual modification
like bamboo reinforcement placed externally. These bags were covered with mud plaster to
further protect against erosion. In places where the plinth had to be raised more, it needed
to be further protected against soil erosion in monsoon. The internal area was filled with soil
brought by people from their agricultural plots. Since the area gets flooded regularly, it was
thought that the next flood would fill up the excavated part with fertile river soil and therefore
the farming would not suffer.
 More durable housing materials were used to increase the life of the houses. Thus, Balli
(eucalyptus pole) was used as column and main structure of the roof and bamboo was used
for the understructure of the roof and for the walls.
 While it was very important to improve the roofing
such that it could resist the monsoon rains it was difficult
to find an alternative to the thatch for roofing material.
Country tiles were not being manufactured anymore in
the region and Mangalore tiles were also not available
easily or were costly. Hence, other options were explored.
Development Alternative, an organisation based in Delhi
which manufactures Micro-Concrete Roofing tiles (MCR
Tiles) in their manufacturing unit at Jhansi was contacted.
In the entire shelter programme this was the only material
sourced from outside the region.
 Materials used for construction of the shelter was
use of bamboo and thatch for roofing
selected so that it is affordable to repair the shelter or
replace the parts without requiring high skilled labour,
preferably by the people themselves.
 The local skill for building construction was very poor
in the region, skill up-gradation was integrated within the
programme. Affordablity was a significant criteria for the
choice of materials.

Thus, easily available local materials like bamboo,

eucalyptus poles (balli in local language) and mud, which
were also affordable, was used to construct durable shelter
keeping the cost of construction and subsequent repair
detail of joinery between roof and wall
within control. Although all these materials were used by
the people to construct their houses, they were lacking in
the skill to optimally utilise them. Hence they was a need
to enhance their skills.

Wooden poles (Balli) and bamboo poles were combined to make the structure of the shelter.
Walls were made with bamboo mat tied between two columns. The bamboo mats were
plastered with mud. Bamboo mat making for screen wall construction was not common in
the area and would require new skills, though it is a common way of construction in Assam
and other Himalayan regions, and known as Ikra construction. People were trained in making
bamboo mat for screen walls.

Selection of families:

After selecting the villages, discussions were held with the panchayats and the people to
identify the most vulnerable families. In each village, a shelter committee was formed to
carry out social processes related to shelter provision. The project team also carried out an

16
independent vulnerability analysis in these villages to
identify the families requiring shelter support. Based on
the inputs from the village shelter committee, community
meetings and consultation with the panchayat’s the
poorest of poor families were identified to be part of the
project.

Special focus was given to single women, disabled,

elderly and refugees who did not have any support. Some
families did not have land, or the land was not sufficient
for them to build shelter and do farming. In some cases,
community consultations were held to provide such community meeting for family selection
families land from the neighbour or community land . In
some cases, the owner of the farm where the family worked as labourer agreed to give his land
for the construction of the shelter. A community consensus was arrived at so that the shelter
remained with the family even after the completion of the project when the project team would
not be in the village. While selecting the families, social vulnerability was also kept in mind. All
the 60 families were identified by commuity, based on different vulnerability criteria.

Table1. Socio-economical background of families

Social Vulnerability and Shelter
Distribution Financial Vulnerability amongst the families selected
Widow/ Land Old Very
Panchayat OBC SC/ST Minority General TOTAL single less Disabled Refugee aged Poor*
Matarepur 7 4 0 0 11 1 4 2 1 4 0
Baghahiya 8 2 1 2 13 3 4 1 0 0 0
Kandauli 11 1 0 0 12 3 0 2 1 1 0
Kohali 6 6 0 12 1 1 2 4 4 0
Chulambha 7 1 1 3 12 1 0 4 1 1 1
TOTAL 39 8 8 5 60 9 9 11 7 10 1
* very poor families are defined as having more than one financial vulnerability i.e. elderly person with disabilities.

Process of Shelter Construction:

Once the families were selected, technical assessment regarding

the shelter needs was carried out by the project engineer with the
selected families. The land was surveyed for area, location, flood-
level history etc. before finalising the exact location, direction of the
shelter and level of the raised plinth.

As the families selected for the project were poorest of the poor,
some of them did not have enough land to build their house and
some others also faced problems to get the soil for plinth filling.
These issues were solved by discussing with the panchayats or
with help from relatives and neighbours. Most people cleared their
own plots so that the construction could begin. Some families
required the support of cash-for-work programme to do the work.
In case the soil could not be sourced by the owner, the project
team helped source the soil from nearby common plot with balli column with anti-termite
help of the panchayat. In some cases, the programme
supported the cost for trailer to transport the soil. Material
for construction was distributed to the individual families
on the basis of estimated Bill of Quantities (BoQ) on site.
Challan was issued for all the transactions.

The construction began with marking on the plot along

with the family. First columns were erected with balli
(eucalyptus poles) which were dipped in used engine oil
to protect them from white ants and termites. They were
embedded at least 1.5 feet below the ground to make the
construction safe. After the balli columns were erected,
structure for roof, with bamboo and balli
17
 plinth filling was done with help of gunny bags and soil as
per the assessed flood level.

Carpentry work began after the plinth was raised. Badhais

(local carpenters) were appointed as contractors for skilled
work in shelter construction. Unskilled workers were also
appointed through cash-for-work activity of the project.
The main structure of the shelter including roof structure
was constructed before the screen walls were put up.

Initially it was thought that thatch could be used for the

raising the plinth helped during floods walls and roof but as thatch was not available during the
monsoon the idea of using thatch was dropped. It was
decided to use more durable material instead. Hence,
roofing was decided to be of MCR tiles and the walls to be
made of bamboo mats. The carpenters and the labourers
had to be trained in making the mat for the screen wall.
Locals who were interested in learning new ways of using
bamboo were trained in making the bamboo mat by
project engineer. MCR tiles were the only elements used
in the shelter programme that was not procured from the
surrounding. Hence, rest of the money to purchase the
materials as well as labour went into the local economy.
houses survived during the flood
The first few houses that were constructed using different
materials withstood the floods during the project period. This rebuilt the faith of the community
on raising homestead plots as a measure for flood resilience to the housing stock. Eventhough
people had to leave due to water surrounding their houses, when they returned, they had a
shelter to live into.
Cost for shelter:

Total cost per shelter was approximately Rs. 29,548.00 including the labour costs involved.

Table 2. A rough estimation of the average cost of shelter

Sr. No Item Quantity Unit Rate Amount
(in Rs.) (in Rs.)
1 Labour to raise the plinth 36 Man days 100 3600
2 Soil Transportation 0
3 Skilled labour for under structure 1 Team 1500 1500
4 Tricycle to carry tiles 1 - 50 50
5 Bamboo and balli 1 set - 5560
6 Transportation of Bamboo & Balli 1 1800 1800
7 Bamboo for Wall 40 pieces 100 4000
8 Pan Tiles 475 pieces 11 5225
9 Ridge tiles 50 pieces 16 800
10 Transportation of tiles 1 - 2000 2000
11 Nut Bolt 5 pairs 33 33
12 Wire 3 Kg 75 225
13 Nails 5 Kg 75 375
14 Gunny bags 250 pieces 2 500
15 Cement 5 bag 210 1050
16 Used oil 1 lit 30 30
17 Labour for making bamboo screen walls 1 unit 2800 2800
Total labour cost 7900
Total material cost 17798
Total transportation cost 3850
Cost per Shelter - Grand total 29548
(460 €)

18
Existing dwelling unit

section of existing dwelling with new shelter

section of the shelter

plan of the shelter plan of the existing house with new shelter

new shelter
existing kitchen
existing room

courtyard

construction details

structure of the roof for shelter screen wall with bamboo mat Completed Shelter
19
problem of water contamination

hand pump submerged during floods

new hand pump during the floods

installation of the hand pump under construction plinth for hand pump
20
 3.2 Ensuring Safe Drinking Water by Hand
Pump Level Raising

Hand pump level raising was another important activity

of the project. The objective of this activity was to provide
safe drinking water not only during floods but throughout
the year.

Hand pumps were the main source of water for the

villagers. People relied on either government installed,
privately owned or community owned hand pump for their
level raising of HP with gunny bags
daily domestic water requirements, both for drinking or
washing purposes.

Due to the proximity to the river Ghaghara and the flat

terrain, it was observed that the ground water level in the
region was very high. Water was available at 10 to 15 feet
depth but this could not be used for drinking. Potable water
was available approximately at 80 feet depth. Water was
abundantly available but the monsoon posed the problem
of water contamination, especially during the floods. The
existing pumps were almost at the ground level, which
were submerged during the floods as the water level
another design variation for hand pump used to raise up to 5 feet or more above the ground
level. The villagers did not have access to potable water
during the floods and even after the water level receded
the hand pumps were blocked with silt and the water was
contaminated increasing the risk of an epidemic. It was
necessary to improve the situation of drinking water as
part of flood resilience strategy.

To involve the local people in the decision making and also

for the people to understand the usefulness of this activity,
a Hand Pump Nigarani Samiti (Hand-Pump caretaking
committee) of five to six members was formed with
representatives (especially women representatives) from
woman using the HP in Chulambha different purvas in each project village. These committees
would be pivotal in making decisions regarding the hand
pumps in the village. It would also be active in their maintenance and other issues related to
the hand pump.

On analysing the situation, the committee felt that there was an urgent need to raise the levels
of the hand pumps which was the main source of water for the community. The decision was
then taken to raise the levels of the existing pumps. There were three types of hand pumps,
privately owned, government hand pumps and other community owned hand pumps. The

plan explaining the raised platform design of hand pump

21
privately owned hand pumps were in the control of few individuals while most others did
not have access to them. The government owned hand pumps needed permissions from
the water-supply department. The department informed that once the repair-modification
was done to the hand pumps, it would become the liability of the organisation to ensure its
functioning and the government would not be responsible for its working. It was also observed
that many of these hand pumps were very old and may get damaged during the level raising.
Discussions with other organisations that had modified the hand pumps in the past showed
that this option was not viable. It was then thought that the community owned hand pumps
could be taken up for level raising. However on further analysis, it was observed that they
were of very inferior quality, since the local administrative body or community themselves had
installed them with very limited monetary resources available to them. Hence the water quality
from the pump even in normal times was questionable.

Community consultations led to the decision that the new hand pumps would be installed on
a raised plinth that was above the highest flood levels observed in the past. After exploring
different options, locally available hand pump was selected. In addition to being a ‘power-pump’
that fetched more water with less effort, the selected pump had a few technical advantages
(besides the raised level) over the existing pumps. The pump used double filtering with
perforated extra casing pipe which was filled with gravel, in addition to the nylon filter wrapped
around the pipe. The PVC used for the pipe was of higher quality than that was normally used
for hand pumps in the region. It also had better detailing due to the double pipes at the joint
near the pump handle. Hence, the contaminated water did not seep into the pipe from the top.
The pump used, locally available components, hence its details of joinery could be understood
and repaired locally. Additionally the pump was manufactured in a nearby town of Barabanki,
making it easier to approach the manufacturer directly in case of repair or replacement.

Several platform designs for accessing the raised pump were considered. Two main designs
were further worked out involving local masons. One used the similar technique of plinth
raising used for the shelter. This was economical, easy to make and repair. The second design
with provision of steps from all the four sides was developed with the help of a designer.
After examining both the options, the community came up with third option, which was a
combination of the above two mentioned designs. It used a bricks base with cement plastered
plinth and used the area of the platform more efficiently. Hence the cost was controlled. The
construction of the platform was also executed under the cash-for-work activity of the project.
The table below shows the number of hand pumps installed along with the main user group of
the pump in each project village.

Table 3. Distribution of Hand Pumps in different villages showing main beneficiary group.
Panchayat OBC SC/ST Minority General TOTAL
Matarepur 8 0 0 0 8
Baghahiya 8 2 0 1 11
Kandauli 6 3 0 0 9
Kohali 5 1 1 2 9
Chulambha 2 0 1 0 3
TOTAL 29 6 2 3 40

As shown in the table, the location of the hand pumps was decided such that they were
accessible to the poorest and socially vulnerable groups. The number of hand pumps varied
as per the population and density in a particular village and purva.

Cost of Hand Pump

Initially, three models were decided for the base platform of the hand pump. First model used
the same materials as the shelter, with gunny bags protected soil plinth costing Rs. 17,630/-
Another model with brick walls and steps on all sides would cost Rs. 29,330/-. Both these
budgets were inclusive of transport cost and installation charges. Cost for the model finally
selected for construction was least at Rs. 16,502/-. The cost break-up of the final design is
shown below.

22
Table 4. A rough estimation of the cost of hand pump installation including plinth construction
Sr. Name of the item Quantity Unit Rate Amount
No
1 Bricks 2000 number 3 6000
2 Thick Sand 35 cft 34 1190
3 Sand 75 cft 10 750
4 Cement 8 bags 210 1680
5 Gitti (aggregates) 5 cft 40 200
6 Steel rod 2 kg 41 82
7 Hand pump set 1 Set 3100 3100
8 Plumber charge 1 on contract 700 700
9 Masonry labour work 1 on contract 1000 1000
10 CFW 12 man days 100 1200
11 Transport cost 1 - 600 600
Total labour cost 2900
Total material cost 13002
Total transportation cost 600
Grand total 16502

initial meeting for cash-for-work

excavating earth for plinth filling women working under cash-for-work

23
 3.3 Supporting Emergency Livelihood Needs
through Cash-for-Work

The cash-for-work approach in the project was seen

as an integral part of the project for accomplishing the
construction work. This activity focused on the livelihood
issue and also helped, strengthen the community’s skills
in the areas of masonry construction and bamboo crafts.

Most of the people in this region are marginal farmers or

landless labourers. With very little land they barely manage
learning bamboo mat weaving
to produce enough for themselves. Wage labour is the
only opportunity to supplement their income. During and
after the floods, the biggest problem is that there is no labour work available for days together.
As the crops are destroyed and due to the non availability of daily labour work, the families
face severe hardship. It was important to create a livelihood option that could be a source of
income. The construction work for the project provided such an opportunity for the locals.

Under this Scheme, total 6010 labour days were required for the entire project. This was divided
amongst five villages of project area as per prevailing wages under similar government under
cash-for-work component. Total Rs. 6,34,915 were disbursed under this component amongst
villagers as the labour employment. digging and filling of earth at housing plots as well as hand
pump raising sites, preparation of under-roof and bamboo mats for screen walls, and hand
plastering of floors and walls with mud and construction of hand pump platforms.

Process:

The wage computation of cash for work programme was made after studying the schedule
of rates under National Rural Employment Gurantee Act (NREGA). People’s point of view was
considered to fix the daily wage. Finally the wage rate was fixed at Rs.100/- for one person per
family. It is a daily wage and not against piece rate. People take responsibility that full work is
done by all.

Several meetings were held with the village panchayats

for implementing cash-for-work scheme. It was decided
that this activity would provide work opportunities to as
many people as possible in the villages regardless of
them being selected for shelter construction. Surveys
were carried out in the villages for listing out the families
that would need financial support. It was important to
find out that if they were selected, would they really be
interested in working, as some of them might not prefer to
do construction labour.
labour for shelter construction
It was estimated that approximately 6000 man days of
work was required for the shelter construction and raising the levels of the hand pumps. It was
estimated that the work would be distributed equally; hence 1200 days or 60 people/ families
would be given opportunity to work for the project.

In one of the village meetings the employment opportunity available within the project was
announced. To be part of the cash-for-work activity, the selected people were required to fill
an application form and agree to the rules of the scheme decided by the project team along
with village panchayats.

The rules are as described below -

- Employment would be provided to one person from the family. Women would be given
priority for employment.
- Payments would be done on a weekly basis, usually on monday.
24
- The person working for the scheme would be insured for life.
- First aid kit would always be available on the site.
- Drinking water and shed would also be available on the site.
While selecting the people for cash-for-work, priority was given to the poorest of poor families.
Whenever possible, the woman of the family was selected. Job cards were made for the
selected people which guaranteed twenty days of work.

As shown earlier, 6010 labour days were utilised at the end of the project.

Issues and Solutions:

During the course of the project it was realised that in the smaller villages lesser construction
work was required. Hence, the quantity of work was reduced in the smaller villages, while in
the bigger villages, the quantity of work was increased. Hence, within the project, few labour
days were shifted from the smaller villages to the larger villages.

When more work was required in the village, new job-cards had to be prepared. It was decided
that people from the families that were not included in the first phase would be given priority.
Since people from the neediest families were already selected, this did not work in some
cases. As some of the others who were not included in the first phase were from better-
off families and did not want to do labour work, they still took this opportunity to get their
job card and then gave it away to their relatives or others. It was then decided that such a
practice would not be allowed and the people had to return the job cards to whom it was
issued. This was also necessary as the workers were insured. If it was found that the card was
given against monetary benefits (like a commission), it was decided that the card would be
cancelled immediately.

people checking the wooden boat people trying life jackets and buoys
25
3.4 Disaster Preparedness

Disaster preparedness requires community capacity to build resilience to risks so that the
impact is reduced and people recover and buildback as quickly as possible. This is linked to
reducing structural vulnerability in tems of housing, water etc. and building capacity for early
warning and efficient evacuation at the time of disaster. It not only develops local systems to
deal with disasters but also builds community confidence for resilience.

Present situation and needs:

As initial analysis and community consultations suggested that neither the government nor
the people were prepared for the annually recurring floods. It was therefore a must to develop
flood resilience amongst the people, village panchayats and the block administrationn in line
with the vulnerability and risk assessment done with the people.

The region did not have any early warning systems. From their experience and informal news
the people would prepare themselves for the floods. Usually they would rush and climb on
the bund situated towards the west side of these villages (see the map of region). They would
spend a few days on the bund till the water level receded. Though there would be very few
casualties, there was heavy loss of assets, especially domestic animals. Sometimes the village
panchayats had access to boats but there were no trained persons to operate the oars. The
boats were usually operated with long bamboo. This method was not efficient. Controlling the
boat in whirlpools and navigating in the right direction was an issue. Some people managed
to swim and reach safer places but rescuing others or carrying cattle and household articles
to safer places was very difficult.

Also, snake and scorpion bites, and injuries during the floods were some of the other issues
that the villagers had to deal with without having proper medical facilities or knowledge of first
aid. Keeping all these in mind, a comprehensive disaster preparedness program was devised
along with the community.

The disaster preparedness activity had three main components.

• Strengthen community response mechanisms/capacity for early warning and evacuation
• Equip the community volunteers with rescue materials and equipments
• Train people to use those equipments for better preparedness

Developing systems and government mechanisms:

The village panchayats would be the first to respond in a flood situation but they lacked any
equipments or orientation. The main issue was the lack of a warning system and coordination
with block level administration to establish communication for warning against flood. After
discussing the issue with the village panchayats and the block administration, an early warning
system was established through telephone line. Thus, the villages would be informed of the

wooden and motorised boats distributed for disaster preparedness programme

26
 1 2

Training in Flood
Resilience

1. using life jackets

2. rawing boats and rescue
operations during floods
3. using life buoys to save
the drawning person
4. first aid training and
saving the lives

4 3

Motor Boat Training

5. theory of and
information on
motorised boats
6. driving lessons on
river Ghaghara for
trainees

5 6

Rescue operations during the project tenure: putting the

training to real life situations in floods of monsoon, 2008

7. bringing people to the bund from villages

8. saving live-stocks with help of life jackets- using techniques
explained during the training for flood resilience
9. helping old aged people to reach to safety

8 9
27
possible floods much in advance. This would give them time to safely reach the bund and also
save their assets.

Providing equipments and materials for flood resilience:

The main need of the village panchayats was to have access to boats and life saving equipments
like life-jackets and life-buoys. The panchayats did not have resources to acquire the boats and
equipments. On analysing the past floods, it was realised that the water level was generally
low, and that wooden boats with oars would be best suitable for rescue operations as it
can operate in up to 2 or 3 feet deep water, and could be controlled efficiently with basic
trainings. Also, it was cheaper to acquire as well as operate them as it did not require any fuel.
Maintenance would not require sophisticated technical knowledge and could be done by the
carpenters after providing them some basic training. Each panchayat was supplied with six
wooden boats with oars. Each boat had three life jackets and two life buoys. Ten sets of life
buoys and life jackets were kept separately for emergency distribution. Since the smaller unit
of a village was a purva, it was discussed with the village panchayats that the boats would be
distributed in different purvas, thus making it always available to the people in the hour of the
need.

In addition to the wooden boats, one motorised boat was provided to each village. At the
same time, block level administration did not have any motorised boats. It was also realised
that Kohali village (selected for the project) was a small village having just two purvas and was
situated very close to Kandauli village as well as the bund. Hence it was decided that it can share
the boats with Kandauli village. Similarly, Matarepur village is located very close to Baghahiya
village, hence both these villages could share one motorised boat. It was also observed that
although Godahiya No 4 village was not included in the project for shelter construction and
hand pumps level raising, it was quite prone to flooding and suffered a lot of damage during
the last floods. Thus it needed mechanised boats as well. The motorised boats were therefore
distributed to Kandauli, Chulambha, Baghahiya and Godahiya No. 4. villages. As there was no
flood resistance mechanism at the block level it was also thought necessary to provide one
motorised boat to the block administration. The motorised boat would help them reach out to
other villages and more people could be saved. The table below shows the boat distribution
amongst the different panchayats and block administration.

Table 5. Allotment of wooden and mechanical boats

Sr. Wooden Boat
N0. Allotted to Motorised Boat (No.) (No.)
1 Baghahiya Panchayat 1 6
2 Kandauli Panchayat 1 6
3 Godahiya No.4 Panchayat 1 -
4 Chulambha Panchayat 1 6
5 Kohali Panchayat Shared with Kandauli 6
6 Matarepur Panchayat Shared with Baghahiya 6
5 Kaisarganj Block Admin 1 -
TOTAL 5 30

Costing for boats

Providing boats for rescue and evacuation during the floods was one of the main activities
within the disaster preparedness component of the project. Five mechanised boats were
bought from Kolkata with a cost of Rs. 3,13,875 per boat, including taxes. Table 6 shows the
costing for the wooden boats.

Table 6. Costing for wooden boats.

Wooden Boat Bitumen Coating Transportation Total Cost per No. Of Total Cost for Boats
Price and Finish of Boat boat Boats – all inclusive
5000 1200 1000 7200 30 216000

Trainings for flood rescue and first aid:

28
It was important to train the people for flood resilience so that they could save not only their
own life but also help save other’s lives, as well as assets, cattle etc. Efforts were therefore
made to identify the local techniques and equipments for flood resilience. Through games
(with children) and street plays, lot of information regarding the flood situations and how the
villagers dealt with it was gathered. Local volunteers suggested that in some situations the
local knowledge would work but a formal training would be required to strengthen their skills.
Training was required in better swimming techniques, using life jackets and life buoys, and first
aid. To have better control over the wooden boats during the floods, peoples’ skills for rowing
these boats had to be upgraded. It was also realised that since the motorised boats were new
to them, they would require special training on the same.

A training institution by the name ‘Monters, Nuka Talim Kendra’ from Vadodara was identified
and contacted for the training in flood resilience. A three day training programme, in coordination
with them was organised in December 2008. Few young and enthusiastic individuals who
were going to remain in the villages were identified from each village. The training programme
included different aspects of flood resilience such as operating the boats, swimming and
rescuing. First aid training was also provided by a Red Cross trained instructor.

In the boat training, different skills for rowing the boat, turning the boat, stopping the boat
immediately and rowing in a whirlpool were covered. The training also included how to use the
life jacket and how to save oneself and others with the life buoy. The villagers were also trained
to swim efficiently by avoiding obstacles that were common in flood situations. The training
also covered rescue operations for others, including people, cattle, and other assets. The first
aid training included saving life of the flood affected person, carrying the injured and disabled
in water, through boat or on road, and simple techniques of making stretchers. Special first aid
training was also given for snake and scorpion bites that are very common during the floods.

The training concluded with a mock drill / real life situation at the water stream near the
bund where all the participants enthusiastically took part along with other villagers. They
demonstrated their skills in boat rowing, saving life and livestock, as well as assets, first aid,
etc.

In February 2009, another training was organised with help of motor boat manufacturing
company ‘Sensea Marine Services’, Kolkata, for the driving and maintenance of motorised
boats,. The training included theoretical explanations on the working of the boats, practical
training for driving and maintaining the boat, using life jackets, life buoys, ropes, anchor etc.
The on site training also included checking the boats, understanding different aspects of the
boat’s functioning and installing the engine.

This training was attended by selected trainees from the village panchayats and block
administration. Since the boats would remain with the panchayats, the head of the panchayat,
known as the ‘Pradhan’ also participated in the training.

29
4. Learnings and Challenges:

This project aimed to demonstrate community based disaster risk reduction practices. The
project was able to establish that with community level awareness building, training and
various local material support could develop their disaster preparedness. While the project
has targeted the vulnerable families to develop a sense of shelter security by raising the
homestead plots and hand pumps, it has covered the entire community of five panchayats for
preparedness to respond to flood risks.

1. People’s Knowledge and Practices Provide Best Options

The houses of the poor people used to get damaged recurrently by annual floods of river
Ghaghra. They do not afford to invest in housing year after year. It was learnt from the
community that if the homestead plots are raised above the flood risk level the houses will not
be damaged. It will develop a sense of permanency and people will slowly and incrementally
invest on housing. It need to be emphasized that Bamboo as a walling material in the form of
wattle and daub which used to be practiced earlier has been gradually out of practice as people
stopped investing in houses. The project could revitalize the traditional walling technology by
closely working with the people.

In the flooding years there is a paucity of thatch for roofing as the rice fields are damaged due
to denudation of the agriculture fields. Local people prefer corrugated tin sheets as the roofing
material. The project introduced Micro Concrete Roofing (MRC) tile prepared by a mason guild
promoted by Development Alternatives, an NGO in nearby cities. This roofing material was
introduced as there is immense scope to introduce production of MCR tiles locally, thereby
creating an alternate source of livelihood. Although this idea was demonstrated, it did not
materialize into any production unit in the region. This can be taken up as a future initiative not
only for safe housing but also for alternate livelihood option.

The scope of the project is dependent upon the extent of people participation. When the
homestead plots were raised, people could feel their internal resilience to flood risks. This has
increased their sense of ownership and participation in the entire process of the project. The
project has brought out multiple options on use of technology and materials from people’s
own experience. It was empowering for all the people that they were making their own choices
rather than some external ‘expert’ making those choices for them. To cite another example,
it was a commonly suggested solutions to raise the level of entire settlement to address the
flood risks. However, the villagers felt that it will require large mass of earth to be excavated
from outside which will be costly and may not be feasible looking into the geographical terrain.
People opted for raising the homestead plot only. Even such small amount of earth was difficult
to acquire at times. In the hindsight, such a people’s decision to raise homestead plot instead
of the entire settlement helped in maintaining the natural scope without disturbing the flood
current. An artificial obstruction may have potential to create many adverse effects which the
people’s wisdom and practices have averted.

It was not possible to acquire a large plot from where the earth could be dug up for a sizeable
number of homestead plots. Small area of individual agriculture plot was identified for soil
excavation. People find it beneficial as agriculre field would be filled up again with silt during
the next monsoon floods adding to the fertility of the land. Hence there was no long term
negative impact of the activity on the land and environment.

2. Simple Activities Have Better Chance of Mainstreaming

Incorporating the cash-for-work activity in the project helped demonstrate how the local
governing body, Panchayat could utilize various government schemes like NREGA for building
useful assets for the village that would help build disaster resilience, in addition to providing
just employment to the people.

Raising the level of the hand pumps was another successful activity which is now being
undertaken by the government for the already existing government installed hand pumps in
the region. Before erecting the high level hand pumps the water needs to be tested to examine
possible contamination. The project has tested the quality of water of the hand pumps. The
project has also made efforts to train the local people on testing of water. Simple water kits were

30
procured with the help of a reputed government organisation working in Gujarat (WASMO).
The water testing by local people could not be fully achieved due to short time frame of the
project which can be further taken up.

While designing the project it was also consciously decided to keep the material costs as low
as possible such that more money could be put into labour intensive activities, thus boosting
the local economy. It was made possible, as people defined the different factors of the project
and found solutions themselves which increased the labour component.

3. Need For Further Exploration

Sanitation is another issue in housing that could not be addressed in this project. What kind of
system should be used in such areas that are prone to heavy floods needs to be explored. While
plastic tank as septic tank was considered as one of the options, that does not contaminate
the ground water but it costs high and also requires frequent cleaning. The issue of toilets in
the region is very important and needs to be taken up as a priority. It can be resolved only
through constant experimentation.

4. Community Based DRR Need to Recognise Capacity Buidling of Both the

Community and Administration
As for the disaster preparedness, it was realized that the materials or facilities provided should
have a use in daily activities as well. Local boats were a good example in this case. Motorised
boats were more expensive and require costly maintenance while local wooden boats were
cheaper and easy to use. In terms of utility, wooden boats fared better and could also be used
for transportation of people and goods regularly. The mechanized motor boats, could be best
used if put at the Block and district level in command of the government disaster response.
It can serve a larger population and increase the capacity of the administration for efficient
response. The issue of increasing capacity of community and local administration need to be
viewed together for better response mechanisms.

5. Make the Coordination Simple by capacitating Local Partners

This project required long distance coordination between UNNATI in Gujarat and partner
organisations in Uttar Pradesh. In order to reduce such long distance coordination, perhaps
there is a need to develop SSK as a state resource center for disaster risk reduction.

Overall, it was a small scale intervention for the annually recurring floods, which marks the
beginning of developing community resilience for floods in the region. Long term disaster
response should be planned for the region. SSK is planning to get involved with disaster
preparedness programmes along with the support of Malteser International and Unnati.

31