The Importance of sustainability in the Australian hospitality industry

This essay will examine the concept of sustainable development in the hospitality industry in Australia, in order to address the following questions:

• How the concept of Sustainable Development / Sustainability is applied to the Hospitality Industry in Australia?
• Have this concept been modified according to the Brundtland definition?
•  How is the sustainability and environmental issues addressed in these organisations?
• What is the role of sustainable development in their CSR strategies and reports?
• How sustainability reports and strategies affect their core business?

The general objective of the essay is to assess the concept of “Sustainable Development” used for hospitality organisations in order to articulate a constructive criticism and provide potential directions in their corporate social responsibility (CSR) strategies. I am choosing this industry because I have some experience in the Hospitality Industry and I have seen the amount of waste they produce, I also think this is a good example to illustrate how companies can improve their systems and processes throughout sustainability practices.

Sustainability in the Hospitality Industry Overview

By definition, Hotels and resorts are establishments that are licensed to operate a public bar and provide accommodation on a room and/or suite basis, with a bath and /or shower and other facilities in most guest rooms.
According to IBIS world report the hospitality industry in Australia is dominated by six (6) international groups that control 24.3% of the national market: AAPC Limited (Accor Hotels) with a 8.1% of the market share; Mantra Group Holding I PTY, with a 4.1%; IHG Hotel Management (Australia) Pty Limited, with a 3.1% ; Thrakal Holding Group (Sofitel) with a 3.1% ; Hilton Hotels of Australia Pty with a 2.5%; and tourism asset Holding Limited with a 2.4% of the market share. In order to keep this essay within the words limit, I will examine some of the CSR strategies of the main groups to understand what is the meaning they give to sustainability and /or sustainable development in their organisations, considering they are the market leaders and represent a benchmark within the industry, in order to evaluate, compare and critique them. 

According to the 1987 Brutland report, Sustainable Development is a Holistic concept based on a simple principle, “ It is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. Sustainable Development is also explained by the Triple Bottom Line concept, created by John Elkington in the book Cannibal with Forks: “In its broadest sense, the triple bottom line captures the spectrum of values that organizations must embrace - economic, environmental and social. In practical terms, triple bottom line accounting means expanding the traditional company reporting framework to take into account not just financial outcomes but also environmental and social performance – economic prosperity, social equity and environmental protection”. 

The Dow Jones Sustainability Index (2005) website defines corporate sustainability as follows: “Corporate sustainability is a business approach that creates long-term shareholder value by embracing opportunities and managing risks deriving from economic, environmental and social developments. Corporate sustainability leaders achieve long-term shareholder value by gearing their strategies and management to harness the market’s potential for sustainability products and services while at the same time successfully reducing and avoiding sustainability costs and risks.”
Recently the hospitality industry has taken many steps towards sustainable development and it has coined the term of Sustainable Hospitality to summarize the significant and encompassing role hotels and the hotel industry will take in what has commonly become known in the corporate realm as Sustainable Development. (Herve Houdre, et al. 2008). Hotel companies are increasingly encouraging environmentally friendly practices and embracing sustainability through both developmental and operational strategies. With initiatives such as education programs, reforestation programs, eco-resorts, the implementation of energy- efficient practices, and the development of buildings that comply with government-defined standards, the “greening” of the industry is a trend that is here to stay. Over the last decade, the movement towards ecologically friendly tourism has expanded across the world; and the practices being implemented are as diverse as the different geographies. Hotel companies are being prompted by rising energy costs, government pressure, consumer expectations and the competitive landscape to increasingly make sustainability a top priority. 

According to the 2010 Ernst& Young Industry report, “Oceania, therefore Australia, keep leading as a world leader in sustainability, particularly in ecotourism. There is in increase in new conservation policies from both government and operators, particularly to address diminishing water supplies as a result of climate change and to protect native habitats, shifting from traditional ecotourism to even broader sustainable initiatives”. 

In Australia ecotourism remains strong and marketing and green initiatives appear at every level of the industry. At a national level, for instance, The Sustainable Tourism Cooperative Research Centre released its first comprehensive measure of carbon emissions for the tourism industry, The Carbon Footprint of Australian Tourism report. This report identified that transportation is by far the greatest contributor to tourism’s carbon footprint and accounts for 82.2% of tourism’s GHG emissions. (Sloan , Chen & Legrand, et al. 2009). At a private level, “the industry has developed a greater emphasis on social responsibility that is influencing business to initiate environmentally friendly designs in hotels and conference venues and to implement water, waste and energy minimization initiatives.” (Ernst & Young Industry report, 2010)

Another important belief that has become a strong focus for the Australian Market and It is a vital component of sustainable development is the Fair Trade concept. Fair Trade was originally a partnership between non-profit companies and retailers in the northern hemisphere and producers in the under-developed countries who were fighting against low market prices and their dependence on intermediaries who were taking advantage of them. It became rapidly a business model and many Alternative Trade Organizations (ATO), were created to develop the concept. Trading standards stipulate that traders have to:

· Pay a price to producers that cover the costs of sustainable production and living.
· Pay a premium that producers can invest in development, partially pay in
advance, when producers ask for it.
· Sign contracts that allow for long-term planning and sustainable production
practices.
These are probably the main Sustainable Development trends in the Hospitality Industry in the Australian context as we observe today. Following I will examine some of the CSR strategies developed by main industry operators at a national and international level.


The market benchmark

AAPC Limited is the Australian subsidiary of French Company Accor SA. Accor is the fourth world largest Hotel and tourism group, with more than 4,100 hotels and resorts in 90 countries with a total of 500,000 rooms and 145,000 employees. In Australia, AAPC Limited has over 150 hotels and resorts covering all prime business and holiday destinations, with many new hotels to be opened over the next few years. The company offers a comprehensive choice of hotel styles and locations in Australia. Its hotels brands include the upmarket Sofitel, the business-class Novotel, The variety driven All Seasons, and the value-driven Marcure and Ibis Hotels.

In relation to their sustainability strategy, as a part of a global group, Accor Australia follows its corporate international standards developing some specific local initiatives, such as education programs for its employees or supporting some charity organisations depending on the brand and their own context. On the global Context, according to Gilles Pellison CEO of Accor Group, this organisation is involved in two key areas of corporate responsibility: Society and the Environment. Accor’s brands and businesses are increasingly integrating sustainable development concerns into their products and services, in fact Accor appear to be one of the most advanced hotel companies in Sustainable Development (SD). Their Environment strategy started in 1994 building a network of 53 environment correspondents throughout the world. Sustainable Development was officially embedded in the strategy of the company in 2002 with the appointment of a Director of Sustainable Development, member of the Management Board, the creation of a group-wide SD committee and the development of an comprehensive SD strategy. That strategy includes all aspects of the concept. A scorecard has been developed that checks Accor’s involvement throughout the world with all stakeholders: Shareholders, Customers, Employees, Suppliers, Environment and local communities. Accor’s Mercure hotels have partnered with the Carbon Reduction Institute for the first national carbon neutral offering from a major hotel chain in Australia. Emissions produced from conferences, specifically, heating, cooling, lighting, projectors, AV systems and food and beverage (cooking and refrigeration) are calculated and the Mercure Hotel then pays for these emissions to be offset. Currently the offsets being used are sourced from a waste facility that diverts the organic part of domestic waste from landfill and into compost. The decomposition of organic waste in landfill produces methane, which is 21 times more potent than CO2. (Ernst & Young Industry Report, 2009). The IBIS network has embarked on an ISO 14001 environmental accreditation process in 2004 and Novotel announced it was pursuing Green Globe environmental certification in 2007. (Sustainable Development, Accor 2009)

Accor embrace the idea that “one employee can make a difference” and one of the main aspect of their strategy is education. Consequently they have published a short document highlighting conservation tips, a comic book about environment conservation, and an environment guide for hotel managers to train their employees about all aspects of environmental protection. The company’s development criteria include biodiversity and architectural integration, and its corporate philanthropy focuses are on child sponsorship and aid to local communities.  One of Accor’s major initiatives is “Plant for the Planet: Billion Tree Campaign,” through which the company has pledged to donate 50 percent of the savings on laundry costs resulting when guests keep their bath towels for more than one night. Already tested in 52 Accor properties, the program is being rolled out in all of Accor’s 4,000 hotels. Customers are personally encouraged to take part in the program through a message posted in their bathrooms informing them that “Here, your towels plant trees”.

The research also indicated the company was one of the first ones to sign the Global Compact initiative in 2003 launched by the UN, which is a commitment to follow strict guidelines in terms of Human rights, labour, environment and anti-corruption initiatives. 2003. In an effort to show their commitment to the Global Compact, Accor provides a “management chart” that lists their shareholders, objectives and how these comply with the ten articles of the United Nations Global Compact. In 2009, Accor updated its ethical policy, and published The Accor Management Ethics Guide. The guide is organised into three interconnected sections: Management principles, respect for laws and the integrity policy, and social and environmental responsibility. Accor also has established a committee to follow the United Nations Global Reporting Initiative, which provides a framework of 90 sustainable development indicators for hotel companies to use as a guideline for CSR reporting practices.
Although the Accor hotel group does not provide a separate CSR report (information is included in their annual report), they provided a great amount of information on their web site regarding their CSR activities. The CSR section of their web site is labelled “Sustainable Development” so I can conclude that for this organisation Sustainable Development is a more holistic concept. The section contains the six major subsections of shareholders, local communities, suppliers, environment, customers, and employees. 

Mantra Group was created out of a restructuring of Stella Group, which was a subsidiary of global Voyager Holdings, and owned by private equity firm CVC Asia pacific. Stella Group has two divisions: Stella Hospitality Group was renamed Mantra Group in mid 2009.   The company had 3,100 employees for the year and operated 140 hotels and resorts across Australia and New Zealand. Mantra Group recognise its responsibility to minimise their environmental impact by “a continual development of its environmental platform. Its sustainability committee, CSR leaders and Team Members are encouraged to work locally to implement measures aimed at improving its management of energy, waste, water and biodiversity”. According to their website a number of Mantra properties have achieved AAA Green Star accreditation exploring ways to become a more sustainable accommodation provider. However no evidence of these achievements was established.

In order to get more information I contacted Miss Shani Lomas, corporate social responsibility officer at Mantra Group, who explained to me that this organization operates in a ‘strata environment’ so they can own the management of each property, letting rights rather than the buildings themselves. This is the reason why they don’t control a lot of their outputs and the body corporate; the developer or the independent unit owners hold this responsibility. Mrs. Lomas said that it is very difficult for the company to have a “blanket approach” given the diversity of their portfolio. However many of their properties have green measures and initiatives in place, but they are restricted with making any grand statements because of the inconsistency across the business. However, Mantra has opted for a localised approach, guiding their properties with information on best practice and leaving their CSR Champions and committee members to work on the ground at their own pace.
Perhaps the most interesting initiatives of the Mantra group are the ones that have been thought through anticipating for future reporting requirements such as, external auditing and benchmarking of the group’s environmental practices including the purchasing of carbon credits to offset carbon emissions; development and implementation of an environmental Management System and Green conferencing, dinning and accommodation options.

In my website research Mantra appears to be one of the weakest and less developed in terms of CSR and Sustainable Development reports and strategies, I couldn’t manage to find a PDF file or a proper document that could explain in detail their plans, reports or strategies. There is a lack of information and no evidence of education programs for their employees. There is no a clear definition of sustainability or sustainable development concept although environmental sustainability is recognised as a key business priority. 

InterContinental Hotels Group plc Is a UK-based hotel group that was formed in April 2003 with the demerger of six Continents plc into a separate hotel company and a separate restaurant and pub company. Six continents Hotels was renamed InterContinental Hotels Group (IHG). In Australia IHG Hotels Management (Australia) Pty Limited had 170 employees in 2009.   IHG appear to experience a major shift toward a complete Sustainable Development strategy in the last 3 years. The basis is there to make it the industry reference in the coming years. According to Houdre, et al. 2008, the group is aiming to not just be the largest hotel company in the world but as well, become the most admired one.
Many actions toward social responsibility and environmental protections have been certified throughout the years by various divisions or hotels and coordination is now taking place. IHG created the position of Senior Vice President Global Corporate Social Responsibility position was in September 2006. In 2008, IHG’s Hotel Management Group, Americas Division, received the Cause Marketing Forum’s Gold Halo Award for Best Environmental or Wildlife Campaign for its 2007 “Chase the Extraordinary” program. This program reached more than 12 countries including Australia and incorporated employee rallies to launch new company initiatives for 2007 and beyond. The cornerstone of the program was an initiative to replace more than 250,000 incandescent light bulbs with compact fluorescent lights in guest rooms at company-managed hotels. This environmental initiative will have the impact of removing carbon dioxide emissions equivalent to that of more than 17,000 cars. The CFL lamps also are expected to save over $5 million in energy costs. A particularly innovative part of the program distributed an additional 15,000 CFLs to employees of company-managed properties for use in their homes.

Intercontinental Hotels also had a section on their web site dedicated to CSR actions. The content of these pages focused on innovation, collaboration, environment and Community. Each of these categories has at least one page of reporting dedicated to it.
In an effort to show their commitment to CSR, Intercontinental Hotels have also provide a dedicated page that outlines their efforts. One such statement that seems to capture the essence of their stance on socially responsible behavior is:

Through volunteer and education programs, diversity initiatives, environmental protection and in scores of other ways, we help the world become a better place, one community at a time. Wherever we are, we’re people taking care of people.

In addition, the information reported on their web pages, Intercontinental Hotels provided a link to a CSR report called “Corporate responsibility report”. This report is a comprehensive, 78 pages summary of their CSR activities. As an indication of their social responsible behavior, Andrew Cosslett, Chief Executive states:
We are building a culture at IHG that’s focused on driving returns for our owners and on doing the right thing. This means concentrating on areas that fulfill our business objectives and also create social benefit for the communities we work in”
“We are focused on developing better ways to design, build and run our hotels. Our approach isn't about offsetting carbon: it is about green hotel innovation that lessens our negative impacts, whilst enhancing the guests' hotel experience. This is why we introduced our online tool Green Engage in 2009 to help hotels operate in a more responsible and cost effective way. We have also introduced a CR Committee at board level to drive Green Engage and other CR initiatives from the top of the organisation.” (Intercontinental Hotel Group, 2010).
For this company Sustainable development is clearly a very holistic concept that includes not just on the environment but also on the social and economic context. In this sense the company seems to embrace more the triple bottom line concept of sustainable development than the Brutland report definition. Specific interests of this group have been noticed in areas such as; children, education, employee involvement, hotel support and supporting humanitarian efforts.

Thakral Holdings Limited owns 8 hotels on the east coast of Australia as well as commercial and residential properties. 70% of its revenue is from Hotels, which are mainly managed by AAPC Limited. In 2010 these hotels had over 2,500 rooms and included The Menzies, Sydney; Hilton on the Park in Melbourne; Sofitel, Brisbane Central; Sofitel, Goldcoast; Novotel on Collins in Melbourne; Novotel Brighton beach, Suydney, Novotel Northbeach, Sydney; and Novotel Pacific Bay resort, Sydney. 

The Group’s properties and operations are conducted under a wide variety of Occupational Health & Safety (OH&S) and Environmental Protection Acts and Regulations. According to this report “the group maintains an OH&S and Environmental Policy Charter and uses its best efforts to ensure its properties and operations comply with all applicable laws. The Group’s properties and operations hold all relevant OH&S and Environmental licences and permits and have implemented monitoring procedures to ensure that they comply with licence and permit conditions.”

Throughout Australia, the Group’s properties and operations have implemented OH&S and Environmental Risk Management Systems designed to minimise OH&S risks and Environmental pollution and impairment. This program aims to ensure that employees within the Group are fully capable of meeting their OH&S and Environmental responsibilities. All properties and operations undergo a regular OH&S and Environmental survey and audit. These are conducted internally by senior management and/or annually by the Group’s independent risk consultants. Property development projects are carried out in accordance with relevant State Government legislation including development approval and the associated environmental planning requirements. It is the Group’s policy that major breaches of OH&S and Environmental Protection Acts and Regulations are immediately reported to senior management and directors.
This company does not have much information on their website and apparently they have a similar approach to sustainability than the Mantra group which is a more localised style, guiding their properties with information on best practice and leaving their staff and committee members to work on the ground at their own pace. Their environmental strategy is contained in their OH&S and environment report; this clearly means that they see sustainability as a legal obligation to comply rather than as an integral part of the core business.

Hilton Hotels Corporation is developing a strategy for introducing three of its brands into Australia. Implementation of the Hilton Garden Inn, Hampton by Hilton and doubletree by Hilton Brands will lead expansion of the group into Australia, which is considered on of the Hilton’s priority markets. There are several other buildings under construction or in development across the country. In 2006, Hilton rejoined with London based Hilton International. In April 2009, a new Hilton Hotel was opened at Southbank, Melbourne, in close proximity to a major new convention centre, which opened mid year.
Hilton Hotels Corporation announced in June 2008 its short and long term goals and objectives towards building sustainability into the core fabric of its businesses worldwide. Christopher J. Nassetta, President & CEO, outlined targets for improvement in the company’s sustainability performance systemwide for the next five years. By 2014, goals for the Hilton Family of Hotels are are follows:

· Reduce energy consumption from direct operations by 20 percent;
· Reduce CO2 emissions by 20 percent;
· Reduce output of waste by 20 percent; and
· Reduce water consumption by 10 percent.
Their Environment policies are based on a tagline: Reduce - Reuse – Recycle. The company was the first in the industry to be awarded the EnergyStar award in US, for its involvement in reducing electrical energy consumption –fluorescent bulbs in all areas-, water conservation – towel program-, recycling. It encourages its employees to be involved in various community services. Hilton International (now bought by Hilton Corp) has started a program called We Care, which is addressing mostly environmental issues and community service. They have included it in their balance scorecard system. Hilton Hotels has developed an interesting program to help improve relationship between people: Be Hospitable.
According to our research Hilton Corporation is relatively new to the sustainability concept and has not yet embraced a holistic approach to Sustainable development. They communicate mostly on Corporate Social responsibility (CSR) and environment concerns. According to Hilton Worldwide, “sustainability means continuous improvement and action. Our objective is to lead our industry with products and programs that not only deliver great guest experiences, but protect the world we live in.” In this case we could state that Hilton approach to sustainability is in line with the Burtland report definition of sustainable development and it is just related with environmental issues.

Conclusions

This research shows that in general the hospitality industry have become increasingly active in implementing sustainability practices. Some hotel companies such as Accor and IHG are more progressive in their definition of sustainable development including social, economic and environmental aspects in their core business. Therefore their definition of ‘sustainable development’ is more in line with the triple bottom line concept created by Elkington. On the other hand some organizations such as Mantra or Thakaral take this concept as a moral responsibility or just to comply with some legal obligations, their approach is more aligned with the Burtland report and it is focus mostly on environmental issues. Hilton is a different case and their approach is more likely to be related with the Dow Jones Sustainability index definition of sustainable development, as a part of the core business to create economic value and provide a better experience for their guests. In any case most of the companies share the view that sustainable development and sustainability represents an opportunity for the industry to become more efficient in the use of their resources.

According to the Ernst& Young industry report “the emergence of mandatory greenhouse gas and energy reporting across Australia and New Zealand and the development of emissions trading schemes is likely to continue to raise the profile of sustainability and climate change issues for the hospitality industry in the Oceania region. Government regulation is likely to impact the supply of new developments through minimum energy efficiency standards while greater disclosure will influence existing developments and operating practices”. In this context sustainability programs can provide a competitive advantage. However, everything indicates that over time, green practices will become a compulsory requirement to doing business in the hospitality industry, particularly as the cost of nonrenewable energy continues to increase. Thus, those companies with business models that rotate around green practices will have the strongest opportunity of achieving a “sustainable” competitive advantage.

References

• · IBIS world Report H5711. Hotels and Resorts in Australia. Accessed by RMIT catalogue website.
• · Philip Sloan, Joseph S. Chen, Willy Legrand (2009). Sustainability in the Hospitality Industry: principles of Sustainable operations.
• · Global Hospitality Insights. Hospitality Going Green. Ernst & Young report, 2010.
• · Sustainability Toolkit – Hospitality. NSW Business Chamber (2009). Australian Government. Department of Environment, Water, heritage and the Arts.
• · David Kirk (1995) Environmental Management in Hotels, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Vol. 7 Iss: 6, pp.3 – 8
• · Sustainable Tourism CRC - www.crctourism.com.au
• www.crctourism.com.au/WMS/Upload/Resources/bookshop/10072%20Carbon_Footprint_SUM.pdf
• · Accor Group, Sustainable Development - http://www.accor.com/en/sustainable-development.html
• · Mantra group, Corporate Social responsibility http://www.mantragroup.com.au/AboutUs/CorporateSocialResponsibility.aspx
• · Intercontinental Hotels Group http://www.ihgplc.com/index.asp?pageid=740
• · Green Movement grows in Global Hospitality Industry: report http://www.greenbiz.com/news/2008/12/17/green-movement-grows-global-hospitality-industry-report
• · Dow Jones Sustainability Index (2005), available at:
• www.sustainability-indexes.com/html/ indexes/overview.html
• · "Water efficiency". "In your business" >>"How to save water" >> choose the Hotels, clubs, restaurants and pubs link to find fact sheets and other resources. www.sydneywater.com.au
• · "What a waste" by David Baker - www.foodwise.com.au
• · Herve Houdre, (2006), Sustainable Hospitality: Sustainable development in the Hotel Industry. http://willarddc.com/sd/docs/willardwhitepaperproof.pdf

Earthquake in Chile, Interim Report

Participatory Research and Planning Proposal:

The earthquake as an opportunity to build capacities and develop a community in the central southern region of Chile

Introduction

On February 27, 2010, an earthquake registering 8.8 on the Richter scale struck the central southern regions of Chile. The earthquake triggered a tsunami, which devastated several coastal towns and severely damaged two major cities.

After two months of the catastrophe, the future of many towns and costal villages is still uncertain. Many of them are poor communities inhabited by people with low educational and income levels, and it is estimated that the reconstruction process will take many years and financial resources.

According to Quarantelli (1998), there are four main post disaster stages for recovery. First, the mitigation and preparedness activities to reduce the level of risk that population might be exposed to because of their socio economic, political and physical vulnerabilities; second the immediate aftermath of disasters, which often focuses on impact, losses and relief assistance; third the rehabilitation of infrastructure and services to return to some sort of normality; and finally, long term reconstruction activities.

Considering this context and aware that the emergency activities are already in place and running, I think that the fourth stage of the reconstruction process will be crucial to develop not just a better planning and infrastructure for the houses and towns, but to also build social capital and capacities within the population, and that is the reason why I think that using a participatory planning approach could be a good opportunity to improve the quality of life of these communities.

Therefore I want to focus my proposal research on the last stage of post disaster recovery process, to design a community participatory research and planning program using ecological and sustainable development principles for one of these rural communities in Chile. Specifically I want to develop a theoretical framework capable to empower the community and establish the bases to rebuild some of these towns in a more sustainable, safe and resilient way. Ultimately, my aim is to develop a model that could be applied on a similar context or/and in other communities affected by catastrophic events.

Research and Planning Vision:

I I want to design project that could be used to help build a sustainable community, and to engage and prepare the stakeholders to assume leadership and responsibility for revitalizing their own economies and improving their quality of life.

Design and structure of the research and planning program

Firstly, to clarify, this is a proposal to undertake a project. In the case that the community stakeholders accept this proposal, the actual fieldwork has to be carried out by the people from the affected community with the assistance of a multidisciplinary team of professionals (including myself) and/or NGO. Thus, in this report I will try to provide a guidance document to explain what, why, when and how, in my opinion, this process should be implemented. We also have to acknowledge that this is a post-emergency situation and so we need to act as quickly as possible, taking into consideration all the parts involved in the process. The idea of this proposal is to complement the current government emergency plan and to combine the participatory research and planning processes in order to achieve tangible results in a relatively short time frame (1- 2 years) in a given area.

Consequently I will divide my project in two main stages: Research and Planning.

The research process or stage 1, will include a rationale statement of what, why, when and how I suggest to research a given community. Following, the planning stage, or stage 2, will include a proposal of tools and techniques to use by the community and/or NGO to carry out the implementation process.

In this specific assignment (Task 2) I will focus in stage 1, to justify my research proposal and answer the why and how questions of the project. Next, I will enounce the principles and components of stage 2, to give a clear idea of the project structure.

My Mission:

· To propose a theoretical model of participatory planning program based on ecological and sustainable principles.

· To explore educational programs to create jobs, considering the community background, needs and skills.

· To explore city development strategies (cooperative businesses solutions)

Why do we need to research first?

A disaster, such an earthquake, often leaves in its wake a number of tangible loses as a result of the often, massive destruction that it has wrought. Broadly, such loses include:

· Loss of lives. Death tolls may vary depending on the magnitude of the disaster in each town.

· Loss or damages to buildings. Houses, hospitals, schools, markets, offices, etc.

· Loss of or damage to infrastructure: electricity, telecommunications, roads, water supply and sewerage systems, ports, airports, etc.

· Economic losses: Crops, land livestock, fisheries, factories, workshops, warehouses, storage facilities, etc.

· Cultural losses: Cultural and historic buildings and sites, places of worship.

· Psychological losses: i.e. trauma and other emotional or mental stress, physical injuries, etc.

· Social losses: Disruptions in social services, law and order issues, adverse effects on family, and /or community moral, etc.

(Environmental Planning Collaborative, Ahmedabad, India and TGC International, LLC Washington, DC, 2005)

Therefore research is necessary in order to understand the type and scale of losses and damages brought about by the disaster, and is critical to determining the kind and level of inputs required for reconstruction. It is also important to understand the culture and the politics behind the community and encourage focus on specific local conditions (specific threats and risks, most vulnerable groups, sources of vulnerability, local perceptions of risks, and local resources and capacities). A research will also help to assess what resources, skills and capacities are already available in the community, which would be helpful to delegate responsibilities in the reconstruction process.

Stage 1: The Research

Research Goals

· Identification of the felt needs of the people

· Bringing forth consensus

· Empowerment of local disadvantaged groups

· Integration of local knowledge systems and sustainable principles into project design

· Establish a two‐way learning process between the project and local people

The argument: What sort of research method should be used?

The conventional approach to research has been characterized by control by outside experts, scientists and development specialists who have set project agendas and carried out research without any or only minor input from local community members (Chambers, 1994). The process is relatively static. The information is gathered from a community and then processed and analysed by experts with little or no feedback to the community. Consequently, many projects have failed due to inappropriate project goals, community apathy and a lack of understanding of local social and ecological systems (Landon and Langill, 1998). In recent years, new approaches to research have been developed which involve community members in gathering information in a participatory manner. Participatory Research (PR) represents a family of methodological approaches increasingly accepted and utilized to involve local people in research projects taking place in their own communities. These methodologies include Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA), Participatory Reflection and Action Research (PRA), Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA), Participatory Learning and Action (PLA), Participatory Action Research (PAR) and Farming System Research (FSR), among others. The Common theme to all these approaches is the full participation of people in the process of learning about their needs and opportunities, and in the action required to address them. PR is characterized by a cyclical, ongoing process of research, reflection, learning and action, which seeks to include local people in designing the research, gathering information, analysing data and taking action. A key objective of PR is to empower community members by utilizing local knowledge and practices and by giving local people the opportunity to learn skills and share in the research process. It is meant to move away from dependence on scientific information provided by outside professionals to local knowledge and skills. It is also intended to contribute directly to positive changes in the specific circumstances of the participants, as well as increase the chances that the co-management program will succeed through local involvement (Landon and Langill, 1998). There are a variety of ways that people can 'participate', depending upon the particular context of the research, the capacities of those involved and the willingness to let community people participate. Participation can range from consultation or information sharing (where local people are kept informed about research activities but do not influence the research process) to self-mobilization (where the researcher acts only in a guidance capacity and local people take the initiative in project design and implementation). Participatory approaches can also bring together different disciplines, such as agriculture, health and community development, to enable an integrated vision of livelihoods and welfare. They offer opportunities for mobilising local people for joint action. The ultimate goal of this research method is that the research outcomes will contribute to the sustainable, positive change towards the equality of people in disadvantage. (Chambers, 2007) Accordingly with the type of project I want to develop which needs to combine research and planning to create solutions in a relatively short period of time due the emergency context, I will suggest using a participatory reflection (learning) and action research method (PRA/ PLA). This type of research aims at participation of the researched people to the research process, thereby filling some of the power gaps between the researchers and the researched people. In this method, therefore, the researched people are active research participants rather than passive object of the research. It is a collaborative method to test new ideas and implement action for change. It involves direct participation in a dynamic research process, while monitoring and evaluating the effects of the researcher's actions with the aim of improving practice (Dick, 2002; Checkland & Holwell, 1998; Hult & Lennung, 1980). At its core, action research is a way to increase understanding of how change in one's actions or practices can mutually benefit a community of practitioners (McNiff, 2002). "Essentially participatory reflection and action research (PRA) is research which involves all relevant parties in actively examining together current action (which they experience as problematic) in order to change and improve it. They do this by critically reflecting on the historical, political, cultural, economic, geographic and other contexts, which make sense of it. Participatory action research is not just research, which is hoped that will be followed by action. It is action, which is researched, changed and re-researched, within the research process by participants. Nor is it simply an exotic variant of consultation. Instead, it aims to be active co-research, by and for those to be helped. Nor can it be used by one group of people to get another group of people to do what is thought best for them - whether that is to implement a central policy or an organisational or service change. Instead it tries to be a genuinely democratic or non-coercive process whereby those to be helped, determine the purposes and outcomes of their own inquiry." Wadsworth, Y. (1998) What is participatory Action Research? PRA is effective, according to its practitioners, because of some fundamental reversals involving shifts of orientation, activity and relationships away from past professional practices. These include: from closed to open; from measuring to comparing; from individual to group; from verbal to visual; from higher to lower; from reserve and frustration to rapport and fun. In an attempt to summarise the key points from a compilation of over ten in-depth case studies from four continents on PRA-type approaches to participation, James Blackburn, said:

“Participation is more a set of principles than an ideology, an ethic more than a model... deep down, participation is about learning to respect and listen to the opinions, feelings, and knowledge of those we have in the past ‘targeted’; being transparent regarding our intentions to intervene in their lives...being careful to decentralise and delegate, allowing the less powerful to manage greater resources and assume more responsibility; sharing our knowledge and expertise... in short, it is about opening up, taking risks and showing trust. Such changes do not come easy to those weighted down with the baggage of long years of formal education and hierarchical cultures”.

PRA principles

The principles of PRA, as summarised by Chambers, are:

· Handing over the stick (or pen or chalk): facilitating investigation, analysis, presentation and learning by local people themselves, so they generate and own the outcomes and also learn.

· Self-critical awareness: facilitators continuously and critically examine their own behaviour.

· Personal responsibility: taking responsibility for what is done rather than relying, for instance, on the authority of manuals or on rigid rules.

· Sharing: which involves the wide range of techniques now available, from chatting across the fence to photocopies and e-mail.

Critical Analysis on Participatory research

The function of Participatory research is to generate new knowledge, which can be used, in the context of the development process, to achieve a desirable outcome. Broadly speaking this specific proposal aims to increase people’s wellbeing and in doing so to eradicate poverty. But we have to recognize that the groundwork research face a range of opportunities and constraints and be aware that this kind of research is not always successful. According to Neiland, Bennet and Townsley et al (2005), they are as follows:

Opportunities:

· Rural people often have in depth knowledge about the production systems and the circumstances in which they operate which might be used as a basis to identify researchable constraints to development.

· Involving local people in the research process itself might also increase the relevance applicability and delivery of research findings to address development problems.

· Involving local people would change the nature of research in terms of developing relatively simple, rapid and widely generalisable field techniques, which did not rely on high levels of capacity or expertise or funding, and which might help to communicate and share relevant information between stakeholders and researchers, and facilitate the research and development process.

Constraints:

· Not all circumstances or situations allow rural people to participate effectively in research (and related development) processes, for example some communities are heterogeneous or highly mobile or disjointed.

· Sometimes the governance context may severely limit the extent to which 'participation' can be translated into meaningful outcomes, for example, rural communities may have very little voice in decision-making concerning natural resource exploitation and management, despite having helped to contribute to new knowledge in particular areas;

· It is difficult and problematic to design and implement effective participatory research projects; they require new ways of working which are often at odds with research practices pursued by conventional research institutions and funding organizations

· Often the process of engaging rural communities in the research process is perceived, particularly by researchers and specialists, to compromise the scientific rigour of the research process; depending on what is being researched this perception may be more or less justified

Stage 2: Participatory Planning

Participatory Planning goals:

· To design a model of participatory planning program based on ecological and sustainable principles.

· Explore educational programs to create jobs, considering the community background, needs and skills.

· Explore city development strategies (cooperative businesses solutions)

Why Participatory Planning?

Participation can lead to increased social cohesion and in the quality of life. According to the UN Habitat “participation in planning can empower communities and build social capital, lead to better design of urban projects and allow for participants’ concerns to be incorporated within planning strategies.” (UN Habitat, Global report on Human Settlements, 2009)

The purpose of participatory planning is to create a platform for learning rather than plunging directly into problem solving. The process is expected to enhance

· The empowerment of local disadvantaged groups

· Integration of local knowledge systems into project design

· Two‐way learning process between the project and local people

· Political commitment and support

· Accountability in local governance

Planning Guide Principles

1- Build Back Better

Catastrophe can be a catalyst for positive change. History has demonstrated that catastrophes have given some cities a blank slate to rebuild according to a more sustainable plan.

Natural disasters can offer this kind of opportunity. However, in the panic and desperation following a natural disaster, there is pressure to act rather than to reflect. Following a major natural disaster, timing is a big issue. The affected communities may well feel they cannot take time for planning, because the pressure for housing and restarting local businesses is so great. In these situations, creating easy access to sustainable building strategies, concepts and tools can enable disaster-affected communities to “build back better” without serious delay.

2- Engage and Train Local Communities

This is probably the most important principle for reconstruction teams to keep in mind. Engaging the local community as well as the implementation phase of reconstruction is the best way to ensure that all restoration and revitalization activities are led by and embraced by members of the local population in the long-term. And using local technologies and employing the local labor force is the most practical and cost-effective strategy for rebuilding. It helps to restart the local economy and creates jobs, education and training opportunities for disaster victims (particularly women and children) seeking to restart their lives. One of the important goals of international reconstruction teams focused on sustainable solutions is to “design themselves out of the process”.

3- Focus on Permanent, not Temporary Solutions

Unless a plan for transitional and permanent community restoration is developed at the outset, it can be difficult to mobilize resources for sustainable solutions later on. There are many recent examples of disaster survivors forced to live indefinitely in hastily erected relief camps, trailer parks and shantytowns. Such temporary shelters are a poor investment; and these sites are natural breeding grounds for crime and infectious diseases. Architects Alliance and other members of the working group provided specific examples of the dangers of temporary housing. Based on their own work, they suggested strategies for developing transitional or permanent housing and other sustainable facilities that respond practically and sensitively to the long-term needs of local communities.

4- Respect Local Sustainability Practices (Permaculture)

In developing countries, local communities have developed their own, very basic energy and resource conservation practices because they have no choice. Such practices as building “healthy houses” out of yellow soil or keeping food cool in a hole in the ground are part of the culture and collective knowledge of specific regions. Local sustainability practices should be respected in reconstruction planning.

5- Address Ecosystem, Socio/cultural and Infrastructure Needs (Permaculture)

A sustainable approach to post-disaster reconstruction must address not only the needs of the built environment, but also ecosystem, socio/cultural and infrastructure requirements. Adopting this holistic framework ensures that the restoration along one dimension does not have a negative impact on other aspects of the long-term health and well being of the region. Maintaining the delicate balance between natural and socio/economic goals will also ensure that communities co-ordinate available resources and maintain fair and equitable opportunities for all stakeholders in the reconstruction process.

6- Use an Integrated Design Process

Many different kinds of expertise are required to develop and implement a sustainable reconstruction plan. An Integrated Design Process (IDP) brings together experts in a variety of disciplines (including engineering, design, construction and finance) with future users. These stakeholders form a collaborative team to identify issues and objectives for the process. It is essential that all members of the team are involved through- out the process to agree on goals, provide input into concept design and development, oversee implementation and evaluate results. This closed loop process examines every stage in the life of the facility or community environment to be developed in other words, the complete lifecycle of the project.

Key steps in this cycle are:

· Assess the damage (PRA)

· Determine the scope and scale of work to be done (PRA)

· Prioritize the needs Identify key players (PRA)

· Develop opportunities for local community involvement (PP)

· Assess and enumerating available resources (PP)

· Conduct a feasibility study on what can be done (PP)

· Decide on the best plan (PP)

· Conceptualize the plan (PP)

· Implement the plan (PP)

· Monitor the process and evaluate results (PP)

Adopting an Integrated Design Process is particularly critical to post-disaster reconstruction because the challenges are monumental, the interests of the stakeholders are extremely varied and the resources are very limited. The primary goals of the process are to:

a) Build a sustainable community that improves upon the infrastructure and built environment that were destroyed and mitigates the impact of future disasters.

b) Engage the local community in the process, so that they assume ownership and leadership for all phases of the reconstruction initiative and can replicate the Integrated Design Process for themselves on subsequent reconstruction projects.

7- Aim to Restore Local Economies Quickly

A top priority for a reconstruction teams is get disaster survivors back to work and to restore the normal rhythm of daily life. “Get the local hospital and the local bakery up and running as quickly as possible...seek to regenerate local craft industries”. To do this, it is critical to understand the basic infrastructure and economics of food and shelter in the disaster-stricken area. Often, the local population has lost their tools or means of production, so supplies of simple tools and equipment could help people to retrain and to restart their lives.

8- Facilitate a Local Response to the Disaster

It is important to facilitate a local response to a natural disaster, rather than importing sophisticated solutions that are not sustainable by the local population in the long term. “Local technology usually evolves to deal with local issues”. The best way to support local reconstruction initiatives is to:

a) Study the architecture and materials used historically in the region.

b) Propose solutions that integrate advanced technology, or micro infrastructure with local materials.

c) Train local teams to implement the plan, to take ownership for local reconstruction projects and to maintain systems and equipment in the long-term.

9- Keep the Implementation Plan Simple

“Think local and low cost”. A simple plan involving the local community and local resources, and a design concept that honours culture and sustainability practices of the region has a better chance of success. Establishing micro infrastructure, contributing “deskilled”, high-performance equipment and training local community members to maintain that equipment are ways of ensuring that the solutions can be maintained without continuous involvement of the international post-disaster team. This principle also creates jobs and supports the reestablishment of local economies.

10- Communicate best practices and ensure access to clear information for all stakeholders

Clear and open communications enable all stakeholders to become engaged with the reconstruction process in a fair and equitable way. Making sure that disaster-affected communities have timely access to sustainable reconstruction principles and best practices will increase their chances of building sustainable communities and contribute to community engagement and the quality of life for the local population as it works towards restoration and revitalization.

References:

Fisher, Fred. 2007 ,“Building Bridges through Participatory Planning”, UN Habitat

Alpaslan Ozerdem and Richard Bowd. 2010, “Participatory Research Methodologies: Development and Post Disaster/ Conflict Reconstruction”. Ashgate Publishing Limited. Accessed from RMIT on line library books.

Indo- US Financial Institutions reform and Expansion Project- debt Market Component FIRE (D), note 29, May 2002, “Initiative fro Planned and Participatory Reconstruction”.

R

Chambers, Robert 2007 From PRA to PLA and Pluralism: Practice and Theory. Institute of Development Studies, Working paper 286.

Chambers, Robert. 2005. Ideas for Development. Earthscan: UK. Cooke, Bill and Uma Kothari (eds.) 2001. Participation: The New Tyranny? London: Zed Books.

Rambaldi, Giacomo, Robert Chambers, Mike McCall and Jefferson Fox. 2006. Practical ethics for PGIS practitioners, facilitators, technology intermediaries and researchers. Participatory Learning and Action 54, 106-13.

Nakagawa Yuko and Rajib Shaw, 2004. “Social Capital: A Missing Link to Disaster Recovery”, United Nations Center for Regional Development (UNCRD), International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters. Vol. 22, No. 1, pp 5-34

Sheng Ying, 2009, Post Earthquake reconstruction: Towards a Much more Participatory Planning, Theoretical and empirical researches in Urban Management.

Douglas Ahlers and Rebecca Hummel. Lessons from Katrina, December 2007. The Broadmoor Project, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. John F Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, “How a community can spearhead successful disaster recovery”

Environmental Planning Collaborative, Ahmedabad, India and TCG International, LLC Washington, DC, 2004, “Participatory planning guide for post disaster reconstruction”

Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, 2005, “Long Term Community recovery Planning Process ( A self help Guide)”

Natural resources Systems Programme. NRSP, Neiland, Bennet & Townsley, 2005,“Participatory research approaches - What have we learned?” The experience of the DFID Renewable Natural resources Research Strategy (RNRRS) Programme 1995 – 2005 http://www.nrsp.org/index.aspx

Links and websites:

· International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED). Participatory learning and Action: “Community - Based adaptation to Climate Change”, http://www.planotes.org

· International Institute of Sustainable Development (IISD). Participatory Action and Learning Research: “Community Based adaptation to climate change” www.iisd.org/communities

· Governance and Social Development Resource Centre

http://www.gsdrc.org/

· Urban Habitat. “A New Model: Participatory Planning for Sustainable Community Development” http://www.urbanhabitat.org/node/920

· Yoland Wadsworth (1998), What is Participatory Action research?,

http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/ari/p-ywadsworth98.html

· A Guide for Field Projects on adaptive strategies: participatory Approach to research. http://www.iisd.org/casl/caslguide/participatoryapproach.htm

· The International Development Research Centre: Research and Participatory research: http://www.idrc.ca/es/ev-93172-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html

· Overview of the Methodology of Action research http://www.web.net/~robrien/papers/arfinal.html

· Developing And Sustaining Community Based Participatory Research

http://www.cbprcurriculum.info/