Natural hazards disrupt the daily lives of people and communities. Consequently, social workers, like any other stakeholders, deal with community predicaments arising from the effects of natural hazards. The social relief distress (SRD) programme of government utilises needs-based, top-down government-driven interventions in communities affected by natural hazards, focused on what communities lack, as opposed to what communities have. This research study involved a community that experienced natural hazards, such as flooding, hail, lightning and windstorms, which destroyed property and livelihoods during the period 2014–2015. Eight experts and 12 affected community members participated in a qualitative participatory action research analysis study between 2016 and 2017. Guided by the asset-based community development (ABCD) approach, the affected community participated in a collaborative manner in the analysis of the consequences of natural hazards within the community. Data were collected through semi-structured individual interviews and focus group discussions, and analysed thematically. The findings confirmed the traumatic effects of natural hazards, such as loss of property, crops and livestock, physical injuries and even death. The main finding established that natural hazards should be managed in a collaborative way between formal experts of natural hazards and community members through ABCD principles and methods in building resilient communities.
The occurrence of natural hazards is escalating in many parts of the world (Collins
Natural hazards are unavoidable; they disrupt the daily lives of people and communities, can result in substantial loss of life and cause social upheaval (Shokane
As natural hazards affect all populations with intense disruption of the social, economic and environmental conditions necessary for the well-being of people, social workers are therefore expected to intervene ‘in systems at all levels’ (Zakour & Gillespie
The gap that this study aims to fill in the existing knowledge is that most natural community disaster intervention efforts in communities affected by natural hazards utilised a needs-based approach, which typically focused on what communities lacked as opposed to what they have. It is thus essential to incorporate asset-based community development (ABCD) interventions in natural disaster management. Asset-based community development is conceptualised by Schenck, Nel and Louw (
This study strives to provide guidelines on how to intervene in the case of a community natural hazard utilising community assets of the people affected by natural hazards. Stakeholders who are at the forefront of communities should deal with the impacts of disasters in a collaborative manner. In the context of this study, stakeholders could be social workers, ward councillors, traditional leaders or researchers who specialise in the field of community development, and who ‘are usually “doers” interested in improving their practice through innovation, change and development’ (Zuber-Skerrit & Fletcher
To plan appropriately for an asset-based community disaster intervention, an ABCD approach pioneered by Kretzmann and McKnight (
The ABCD approach guided the analysis process by assisting participants to develop an inventory of community strengths which contribute to community development and community building (Kettner, Moroney & Martin
The research methodology selected for this study was participatory action research (PAR), conducted in a qualitative nature. Participatory action research allowed community members affected by natural hazards to participate in the community analysis and planning activities in a collaborative manner (Strydom
The population of this study was purposively selected from the Naphuno community, which had been affected by natural hazards, such as flooding, hail, lightning and windstorms, that destroyed property and livelihoods during the period 2014–2015 in the Greater Tzaneen Municipality in the Limpopo province of South Africa. The selection of the population was based on the prior knowledge of the researcher as a practising social worker at the Department of Social Development through a number of social relief of distress (SRD) assessments conducted after the community experienced natural hazards. Therefore, the community members affected by natural hazards participated in a participatory analysis from 2016 to 2017, based on how they can incorporate their assets (experiences, skills and assets) in the intervention of future community disasters.
Cooperation and permission by the community were obtained before conducting this study. Initially, permission was sought from the traditional authority as a requirement for entry into many rural villages. The traditional authority acts as a gatekeeper to the community when outsiders wish to gain entry and cooperate with the community. In total, 20 participants were selected for the study, comprising eight experts in community disasters, because of their closeness to the research topic and expertise in the field of community disasters, and 12 participants representing community members from households that have been directly affected by natural hazards (see
The demographic information of the respondents identified as experts in community disasters (
Category of respondents | Gender |
Age |
Language |
Justification for inclusion in the study | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
M | F | 30–40 | 40–50 | 50–60 | 60–70 | Sepedi | Xitsonga | ||
1. Ward councillor A | ✓ | - | - | ✓ | - | - | Sepedi | - | Community leaders, who are closely involved in the case of disasters, assist the community by providing them with available resources, such as financial, material and food parcels. |
2. Ward councillor B | - | ✓ | - | ✓ | - | - | ✓ | - | |
3. Religious leader | ✓ | - | - | - | ✓ | - | ✓ | - | Provide accommodation and shelter in the church for people affected by natural hazards; they also provide traditional and spiritual services for people affected by natural hazards. |
4. Traditional leader | ✓ | - | - | - | ✓ | - | ✓ | - | |
5. Municipality disaster official | - | ✓ | ✓ | - | - | - | ✓ | - | Because of their professional involvement with disaster management in the community, they work with the ward councillors to provide temporary shelter in the form of tents provided by the Greater Tzaneen Municipality. |
6. DSD social worker | ✓ | - | ✓ | - | - | - | ✓ | - | Carry out professional assessment and counselling of disasters and provided a temporary. |
7. DSD social worker | - | ✓ | ✓ | - | - | - | ✓ | - | Social Relief of Distress programme for people who had experienced natural hazards. |
8. SASSA official | - | ✓ | - | ✓ | - | - | ✓ | - | Process the SRD in terms of social assistance grants through the |
- | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
9. Community member 1 from household affected by natural hazard | ✓ | - | - | - | ✓ | - | ✓ | - | House roof blown away because of thunderstorm. |
10. Community member 2 | - | ✓ | - | ✓ | - | - | ✓ | - | Experienced flooding and house built with mud was demolished. |
11. Community member 3 | ✓ | - | - | ✓ | - | - | - | ✓ | House roof blown away because of thunderstorm. |
12. Community member 4 | - | ✓ | - | - | ✓ | - | ✓ | - | Lost a family member because of lightning. |
13. Community member 5 | - | ✓ | - | - | ✓ | ✓ | - | House roof blown away because of thunderstorm. | |
14. Community member 6 | ✓ | - | - | - | ✓ | - | ✓ | - | Family sustained injuries when house collapsed. |
15. Community member 7 | ✓ | - | - | ✓ | - | - | - | ✓ | House was destroyed by flooding. |
16. Community member 8 | - | ✓ | - | - | ✓ | ✓ | - | House was destroyed by hailstorm. | |
17. Community member 9 | - | ✓ | - | - | - | ✓ | ✓ | - | Experienced flooding and house built with mud has collapsed. |
18. Community member 10 | - | ✓ | - | ✓ | - | - | ✓ | - | House roof blown away because of thunderstorm. |
19. Community member 11 | ✓ | - | - | - | - | ✓ | ✓ | - | House roof blown away because of thunderstorm. |
20. Community member 12 | ✓ | - | - | - | ✓ | - | ✓ | - | Experienced flooding and house built with mud was demolished. |
Total | - | - | - | - | - | - | 17 | 3 | Respondents identified experts in community disasters (8). |
Community members affected by natural hazards (12). | |||||||||
DSD, Department of Social Development; SASSA, South African Social Security Agency; SRD, social relief distress; M, male; F, female.
Note: The tick signposts the demographic details of the participants, such as gender whether male or female, and the age group whether the participants falls between the age groups of 30–40, 40–50, 50–60 or 60–70 or the Language spoken by respondent whether Sepedi or Xitsonga.
Written informed consent was obtained from all the participants before the commencement of data collection. Semi-structured individual interviews were conducted with the eight experts as indicated in
Storytelling as an appreciative inquiry (AI) method was used in the FGD to allow community members to share their experiences of natural hazards in terms of fears, problems, solutions and opportunities. Solution-focused discussions enhance participants’ agency and motivation which lead to self-reliance (Mathie & Cunningham
It is worth noting that the type of community intervention-based research conducted in this study was a complex and multifaceted process that requires a long-term effort ‘consisting of a series of distinct but interconnected phases performed over time’ (eds. Rothman & Thomas
Consent was sought to record the collected data on a tape recorder and field notes in the local languages spoken in the Naphuno community (Sepedi, Northern Sotho and Xitsonga) and later transcribed into English for analysis.
Data analysis was conducted in a qualitative manner using Braun and Clarke’s (
To ensure rigour and trustworthiness of the study, Guba’s model as described by Krefting (
According to the ethical requirements of the study prescribed by the University of Johannesburg, Faculty of Humanities, Department of Social Work, procedures were set out for obtaining consent and maintaining confidentiality prior to facilitating this research study (ethical clearance number: 909605905).
The participants’ responses contributed to generative themes, which concluded that community members experience problems with natural hazards as a social issue, and that they needed to do community planning and intervention. Planning is, therefore, essential for ‘providing a structure to understand the factors that drive the need for an intervention’ (Weyers
Four themes emerged from the data and provided a comprehensive picture of the problems and needs of people who experienced natural hazards. After the discussion of the four themes, on solutions and opportunities are provided on how the problem of natural hazards could be addressed at the community level.
During data analysis, the problems caused by natural hazards emerged as the first theme. Most of the participants expressed views concerning the problems caused by natural hazards. The participants revealed that natural hazards caused loss of property, material possessions, sustainable livelihood initiatives, such as subsistence farming, and bodily injuries. The following excerpts represent participants’ views in this regard:
‘Natural disasters are common in Naphuno and they destroy our household properties.’ (Participant 1, Community member from household affected by natural disasters, 17 August 2016)
‘The natural disasters mostly affect household’s properties such as furniture and electrical appliances.’ (Participant 9, experienced flooding as the house built with mud has collapsed, 15 June 2016)
‘Our food and groceries get wet when it is raining, and, thus, we lack food after heavy rains when our houses are flooded.’ (Participant 12, experienced flooding and the house built with mud was demolished, 17 August 2016)
The findings revealed the effects of natural hazards and the losses experienced by the survivors (research participants). In addition to the loss of property, such as houses, furniture and equipment, the losses suffered by survivors of natural hazards included crops and livestock, physical injuries and even death. The following comments confirm that participants had experienced these losses:
‘The heavy rain also affects our crops and sometimes destroys our livestock.’ (Group Discussion)
‘The thunderstorm blew away our roof and our houses: it specifically affects the corrugated iron roof – also known as “masenke” in Sepedi.’ (Group Discussion)
‘Our houses collapsed during natural disasters caused by heavy rain and windstorms.’ (Group Discussion).
‘The lightning does not only destroy property; it also strikes people and kills them.’ (Participant 15, lost a family member because of lightning, 15 June 2016)
‘Mostly, the disaster strikes during the night when everyone is asleep: this hinders us from receiving emergency assistance urgently as everyone is asleep.’ (Participant 17, experienced flooding as the house built with mud has collapsed; 15 June 2016)
Most participants experienced losses during natural hazards. The problems caused by natural hazards, as indicated above, are consistent with the findings of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) (
Feelings of distress and hopelessness emerged as a sub-theme from the views expressed by the participants concerning the problems caused by natural hazards. The following concerns were expressed:
‘The roof of my house was blown away by the heavy windstorm. I am unable to put a roof on my house again after it was demolished.’ (Participant 10, house roof was blown away by thunderstorm, 17 August 2015)
‘We have lost our dignity and pride because of the problem of natural disasters.’ (Group Discussion).
‘We felt humiliated after we lost our belongings.’ (Group Discussion)
‘I get hurt more when people think there is something wrong when my house was blown away by wind-storm.’ (Participant 11, house roof was blown away by thunderstorm)
‘I hate it when everyone is talking about me … and feeling sorry for me.’ (Participant 17, experienced flooding as the house built with mud has collapsed, 17 August 2015)
‘I don’t like it when people feel sorry for me.’ (Participant 13, family members sustained injuries when the house collapsed on them, 17 August 2015)
‘It took years to build our houses and the natural disaster destroyed it in a flash.’ (Group Discussion)
‘I feel hopeless. How will I recover again?’ (Participant 15, lost a family member because of lightning, interviewed 15 June 2016)
The findings revealed emotional responses from participants that left them in a state of distress, hopelessness, self-pity and setback. The findings on feelings of distress and theme of hopelessness were confirmed in previous research by Dominelli (
It was observed that participants who expressed feelings of sadness and hopelessness required further counselling. Thus, three research participants were referred to local social workers for counselling services, which had been arranged beforehand, during the planning of the data collection process, with social workers in the local community. The negative experiences and views of the research participants resulting from problems caused by natural hazards prompted the researcher to question how the research participants cope with the effects of natural hazards.
Data analysis of the transcripts of the FGDs revealed their dissatisfaction with the disaster intervention strategies available in their community after a natural hazard. Initially, the participants indicated the type of disaster intervention received from government by expressing the following sentiments:
‘After our houses collapsed because of heavy rain, we then notified the ward councillor who reported the disaster to the disaster management in Greater Tzaneen Municipality.’ (FGD, community members affected by natural disasters, 15 October 2016)
‘The social workers visited our homes to assess the situation after the disaster.’ (FGD, community members 1-12, 15 October 2016)
‘They take very long to help us. Since the government officials came and visited our place to see the damage caused by the disaster, they never came back to assist us.’ (Group Discussion)
‘We are not involved in community disaster interventions. The people who are supposed to assist us do not ask us what we need. They think we only need food parcels.’ (Group Discussion)
The findings of the study confirmed that social workers visit the participants to assess the impact of a natural hazard. The social workers’ home visits to the participants are characterised by screening and assessment to determine the possibility of an SRD grant. The findings confirmed the current disaster interventions’ focus on providing material assistance and reconstructing properties damaged by the natural hazard. Although government focused primarily on the physical recovery of communities, community members had negative experiences of this. The findings are furthermore supported by Huang and Wong (
Furthermore, the community intervention following disasters within the Naphuno community was identified as an intervention requirement for properly intervening in natural hazards. The findings also revealed that in the future, community disaster interventions should include the people’s own skills which they consider as community assets, which could be contributed after a community had experienced a natural hazard. The community acknowledged that although they had lost material possessions, they still possessed inherent skills and assets that can be utilised to rebuild their life following a disaster. For clarification, the gifts of the ‘head’ are things that a person knows something about and would enjoy sharing with others; gifts of the ‘hands’ are manual skills and gifts of the ‘heart’ are things that a person cares about (Kretzmann & McKnight 1977). The skills which emerged from the community members included skills, such as community-building, communication, enterprise, teaching, artistic skills, etc. (Mathie & Cuningham
Community skills and assets of the affected community members that can be utilised in disaster management.
Skills of head | Skills of hand | Skills of heart |
---|---|---|
|
Weather forecasting: the ability to predict the weather utilising indigenous knowledge. Basketry: being able to weave baskets. Plant production: to be able to produce plants, more with respect to farming. Pottery: making vases from clay. Textile making: the ability of sewing clothes or designing fabrics. Metallurgy-making: the ability to make things from iron and steel. Wood carving: the ability to make wooden sculptures. Cutting wood. Building houses. Typing. Writing. Sewing: the ability to sew clothes. Knitting: the ability to knit using wool. Touching: being able to touch and feel using hands. Driving: the ability to drive a car/vehicle. Ploughing. Painting: of houses using paint. Making art: the ability to draw. Gardening. Brick-making. Bricklaying Carpentry: being able to do woodwork, such as building of cupboards. Sweeping of floors. Cleaning: cleaning of a house. Weaving: the weaving of baskets. |
Kind-heartedness. Loving: being devoted towards the development of the community. Having a sense of humour: being able to make people laugh even when they are in distress. Conflict resolution: the ability to resolve conflicts. Peacemaking: someone who does not like conflict and always ensures that there is peace between people. Willingness to collaborate: having a heart that is not selfish, but able to work with others. Caring for children: able to take care of small children. |
The findings regarding community skills and assets can be utilised in disaster interventions. The findings are consonant with the declaration by Rahmato (
The issue of how to manage natural hazards in the future emerged as a theme. The findings indicate that participants should observe warning signs to mitigate the impacts of natural hazards. In corroboration, the participants expressed the following views:
‘In the future, disaster intervention partnerships need to be forged with community members.’ (Group Discussion)
‘The extreme weather events that we are currently experiencing act as a warning sign for bad things that are about to happen … In this case, we should always be prepared for any natural disasters.’ (Group Discussion)
‘We are always prepared for any natural disasters by observing early warning signs, such as weather forecasting. However, due to climate change, it is very difficult to prepare for the weather these days.’ (Group Discussion)
‘We should develop emergency warning signs that our forefathers used and our local knowledge to mitigate the impacts of natural disasters.’ (Group Discussion)
There are many solutions identified in the study with the participants, such as forging partnerships with participants, warning signs predicting bad things to happen and preparation through early warning signs, and emergency warning signs should be utilised to proactively respond to impending disasters. In addition, most of the participants reported that the early and emergency disaster warnings relying on traditional belief systems of weather bulletins should be developed and strengthened. Moreover, this theme’s findings are in agreement with Gwimbi’s (
Community solutions for disaster management and dealing with natural hazards emerged as a fourth theme, comprising sub-themes such as collaboration with government, preparedness and after-care services.
The participants acknowledged that collaboration with government is the first solution recommended for any disaster intervention, but emphasised that they should be involved with government to manage the natural hazards. To elaborate, the following sentiments were expressed:
‘It is everyone’s responsibility to solve the problem of natural disasters, including the government.’ (FGD, community members 1-12, 15 October 2016)
‘We should work together with government to manage disasters.’ (FGD, participant’s 9-20, 15 October 2016)
However, the participants further expressed the following sentiments:
‘A community collaboration should be integrated to guide the future disaster interventions.’ (Group Discussion)
The above findings imply that natural hazards should be addressed at a community level. The participants recommended that in order to address the problems caused by disasters, they need to be involved in decision-making. The participants indicated that their experience of disasters made them conscious of and helped them to recognise their disaster-related problems and how to solve them. However, they indicated that they were not involved in government decision-making once a disaster had occurred. The findings expressed by participants concurred with Strydom (
The second solution, or opportunity identified, was about the lack of preparedness and after-care services. An example was cited regarding an incident in which a participant and members of his household were injured when their house collapsed on them. During the FGD, it was elaborated that after discharge from hospital, no intervention or social support was provided to them. The participants expressed the following sentiments:
‘I am not satisfied with the type of the intervention I have received. I am still struggling to put a roof over my head since the disaster. We still sleep with my children in a house where the temporary roof is covered by the tent provided by the municipality when we experienced a disaster last year.’ (Participant 12, experienced flooding and the house built with mud was demolished, 17 August 2016)
‘The people affected by a natural disaster, if they are admitted to a hospital because of injuries sustained during a natural disaster; when they are discharged from hospital, an after-care service in terms of support and counselling should be provided.’ (Group Discussion)
The participants further expressed the following sentiments:
‘We should be able to utilise our own assets to cope by being there and supporting each other as we do when there is a funeral or “mokete” [wedding celebration or party]. In our community, we also support each other through “sebatakgomo”, (stokvel) which aids when there is a disaster or a celebration.’ (Group Discussion)
Community members indicated their experiences of loss (property and household belongings) following extreme natural hazards, and people were injured and had to seek medical attention. The findings further revealed the greatest ‘need’ for support services beyond material assistance, such as after-care services, to contribute to the management of natural hazards in their own community. This implied that they should not be isolated clients who are only dependent on social services but should be provided with emotional support such as counselling services. Participation could involve developing preparedness and intervention plans for the community, involving people affected by natural hazards. Furthermore, an after-care service in terms of support and counselling should be provided. The participants’ views mentioned above are confirmed by Huang and Wong (
The analysis of the problems experienced in Naphuno highlighted the gaps in the general needs-based approach utilised in the management of disasters and emphasised the desired approach in disaster management, namely, the ABCD approach, based on assets. The problem analysis was problem-focused because of the nature of disasters and was conducted to support the community to gain an in-depth understanding of the problems resulting from natural hazards. The researchers acknowledge that the focus on needs served as a limitation of the overall analysis, as this study was not focused on the needs-based approach. Nevertheless, the focus on needs was necessary and had to be done to involve the community members of Naphuno in the analysis of their needs and problems. The findings presented an analysis of concerns expressed by community members with respect to natural hazards. The needs identification was done with the involvement and cooperation of the community members affected by natural hazards. Doing so was essential for determining the needs of the community. The collaborative way in which the analysis of problems of Naphuno community was done revealed how community members think their disaster planning, interventions and preparedness should be addressed. The findings of the FGD exposed an integrated community disaster intervention plan, which was devised systematically by the research participants in order to identify intervention plans that could be integrated in disaster intervention in communities affected by a natural hazards. The plan was based on their views about the problems caused by natural hazards, available disaster interventions and what should be done once people had experienced natural hazards. The main concern cited was the problem of being affected by natural hazards, and that the community members of Naphuno were not involved in the intervention process and decision-making about interventions.
The findings concluded that government should involve communities in managing natural hazards. African countries tend to expect assistance in terms of natural hazards from outside and primarily in relation to the improvement of infrastructure, health and livelihoods. The findings of this research confirmed that the community members felt disempowered to manage natural hazards on their own, and as a result, they are dependent on external sources for help when a natural hazard strikes. These challenges require increased international cooperation and the provision of adequate support to African countries to allow for the implementation of the present Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (2015:24). The generative themes that arose from the responses in the group discussions lead to the conclusion that community members experienced problems related to natural hazards as a social issue, which required community intervention. Consequently, community members acknowledged the need for guidance and support in developing community disaster plans and guidelines for rural communities affected by natural hazards.
In analysing the community problems related to natural hazards, the community members of Naphuno established that a participatory community disaster plan should be a community-driven process, should value and appreciate the contributions of all the participants and encourage community leadership and participation. Furthermore, community development approaches, such as ABCD, should be properly integrated and implemented in the planning and development of solutions for natural hazard management endeavours for the community. Mathie and Cunningham (
This study has raised consciousness about the way community members could possibly contribute to rebuilding their communities by incorporating asset-based approaches after experiencing natural hazards. The findings established that proper community strategies are needed to mitigate the problems caused by natural hazards. These strategies should incorporate all stakeholders; thus, after analysing the concerns of the community in a participatory manner, it is recommended that an action committee or an enquiry group should be established to plan for the effective management of a community disaster plan – one which is facilitated by community social workers. With sufficient knowledge and support on the management of natural hazards, the community’s involvement and participation in decision-making would be paramount. An ABCD approach is pivotal for the management of community disasters in collaboration with other stakeholders, significantly, combining community problems and assets to mobilise community members’ assets to build a resilient community through ABCD approaches.
This study was part of a Doctoral study entitled: ‘Development of a Participatory Community Development Practice Model for Rural Communities Affected by Natural Disasters’.
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
All authors contributed equally to this work.
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analysed in this study.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliated agency of the authors.