Integration of disaster risk reduction into infrastructure reconstruction sector: policy versus practise gaps

Purpose – The literature emphasises that integration of disaster risk reduction (DRR) into planning processes is a key to reducenatural disaster losses, boost socio-economic development needs and ensure sustainability in development gains. But linking DRRto the infrastructure reconstruction sector has become a challenge in developing country settings. Therefore, the purpose of the mainresearch, of which this paper is based on, is to explore how integration of DRR into infrastructure reconstruction should be done insuch a way to contribute to socio-economic development process. As a part of this main aim, this paper focuses on exploring theexisting gap in the concept of DRR at the policy making level and the infrastructure reconstruction project level. Thus, the paperseeks to review the current policies on post-disaster reconstruction and DRR at the national and intermediate-organisational level inSri Lanka and integration of DRR concept within these policies. Not limiting to the policies, DRR processes were assessed on theirsuccess through the level of implementation of DRR strategies at the post-disaster infrastructure reconstruction projects.Design/methodology/approach - This paper is based on data collated from a case study conducted in a water supply and sanitationreconstruction project in Sri Lanka supported by expert interviews among national and intermediate-organisational level policymakers those who are involved in development of policies related to disaster management and construction activities.Findings - The results highlight the lack of individual policies on reconstruction and DRR of reconstruction at the national andintermediate-organisational level except certain sections within certain policies. It was found that integration of DRR within thesepolicies is lower than the level of importance of such integration. Further, the level of implementation of these policies in practise isaverage as it is averted by required speed and quality of reconstruction, availability of finances for reconstruction, the scale ofreconstruction projects, reliability and practicability of policies, legitimacy of policies and adequacy of authority delegated to therelevant bodies, the consistency of various policies, detail explanations on relationships with other policies, the level of awarenessabout policies by the relevant bodies, attitude of construction professionals and experience of reconstruction bodies in the field ofdisaster reconstruction.Research limitations/implications (if applicable) – The findings of this paper is not limited to one specific policy related todisaster management or construction in Sri Lanka. It represents an overall view of most of the existing policies in the field.Furthermore, the data collection was limited to the Sri Lanka context.Practical implications – The findings of this study will be useful to relevant policy makers to understand the areas needed furtherattention within the policies in terms of integration of DRR concept within them.Originality/value – This paper is unique in its findings as it discovers overall gaps in the concept of DRR within the policies andactual infrastructure reconstruction project practises