Post-Disaster Reconstruction Must Not be Rushed

Post-Disaster Reconstruction Must Not be Rushed
China Times editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
August 24, 2009

Typhoon Morakot battered the mountain and coastal regions of Pingtung, Taitung, Chiayi, and Nantou. The number of dead and injured have probably exceeded one thousand. Disaster relief has reached a stopping point. Post-disaster reconstruction will soon begin. The geological structure of the mountain ranges and climate have undergone unpredictable macro-level changes. How does one create human habitat that does not compete with the mountains and streams, that coexists with nature? That is the highest priority in post-disaster reconstruction.
The hardest-hit were the mountain regions, from Nantzhuhsien Creek up towards Hsiaoling Village, from Laonong Creek towards Paolai Village. The affected areas were mostly river terraces. These are mesa areas that have long been subject to erosion by by earth and rock. During heavy rains, these may cause landslides. Following Typhoon Morakot, these areas have become new river terraces. They constitute a new geographical environment. If a new settlement is built there, will the Hsiaoling Village tragedy reenact itself? This is the first post-disaster reconstruction issue we wish to pursue.

Statistics over the past decade reveal that the Kaoping Creek has accumulated up to 50 million tons of earth and rock per year. The Peinan Creek has accumulated 80 million tons. The earth and rock originates in the middle and upper reaches, and is related to the geological environment. Chiahsien Township, Hsiaoling Village, and Paolai Village form a triangle. Concealed beneath this triangle is a unique geological environment. To the west of Paolai Village lies a fault line. What we normally perceive as vertical cliffs and beautiful scenery, actually indicate steep inclines. It is like this from all the way from Nanzhuhsien to Laonong. The region has several unique features. One. The geological structure is highly fragmented. Two. Fault lines are everywhere. Three. The surrounding environment is fragile. Given such a fragile environment, how can one allow reconstruction in the same location?

Since Typhoon Herb struck several decades ago, we have repeatedly raised the issue of land use and land planning. But once the disaster passes, everyone goes on with business as usual. Monitoring of the relevant national lands are also shelved. Government agencies have failed to provide sound geographical data. They have failed to paint a clear picture of the surrounding environmentally sensitive regions. Land use and land planning policies clash with nature. The result is an endless succession of disasters. Therefore the promotion and implementation of national land planning must not involve mere lip service. If they do, such tragedies will repeat endlessly.

In the past, every time disaster struck, people would suggest that man cannot defy nature, and that the mountain regions cannot sustain human habitation. They should be returned to a state of nature. Farmlands should be restored to forests. Floodplain restoration also becomes a hot issue, especially when talk turns to disaster prevention. One immediately thinks of the resettlement of villager. But every time, after a month or two has passed, talk of resettling villagers is forgotten, and the issue left hanging. Aboriginal life and culture is incompatible with urban or rural living. Even if one forcibly relocates the villagers, they eventually return to the mountains. When the next storm arrives, they become environmental refugees yet again.

Since relocating the villagers is infeasible, the only thing to do is consider relocating the villages themselves. Therefore the most urgent task should be to mobilize the nation's experts in geology, water resources management, water conservation, environmental engineering, and forestry. They should survey the affected areas and conduct large-scale soil tests. They should be made charged with finding comparatively safe sites within the vicinity of the disaster areas to relocate the villages. When such rehabilitated lands have been found, the relevant government entities and local communities can conduct talks, instructing the inhabitants not to blindly develop the land but instead engage in disaster prevention and disaster mitigation. They must use private and government resources, and as quickly as possible begin disaster region planning and reconstruction.

In the meantime, the government should establish the necessary disaster warning systems. Once they receive information of impending rainstorms, they can analyze the data and understand flood and mudslide flow. Once the alert has been sounded, disaster prevention and evacuation should begin as soon as possible to minimize disaster damage.

After each disaster, under pressure from the victims and the public, the government is forced to immediately appropriate funds for rehabilitation. Any government entities that fail to spend the funds allocated to them end up earning demerits. This leads to construction projects without adequate planning. The end result is slapdash construction, or even a repetition of the same mistakes as before. As a result, disaster prevention projects can never be sustained long term.

Therefore, rehabilitation projects must be planned in advance. Apart from any necessary emergency measures, do not rush redevelopment. At least show some respect for professionalism. First carry out careful planning. Then communicate and coordinate with the public. Reach a broad consensus. Combine the resources of the government and civil society. Only then can one be prepared for unpredictable environmental disasters.

Given radical changes in the climate and annual rainfall, traditional engineering methods can no longer prevent disasters. Under constant counterattacks from nature, human errors are impossible to hide. The result is the loss of countless lives and inestimable property. Learning ones' lessons is the best way to prevent future disasters, Hopefully current reconstruction efforts are not merely fleeting enthusiasms.

中時電子報 新聞
中國時報 　2009.08.24
社論－災後復建 真的不能再急就章
本報訊

莫拉克風災重創屏東、台東、嘉義、南投山區及沿海地區，死傷恐超過千人。在救災告一個段落，災難重建即將次第展開，面對破碎的山河和風雲莫測的大氣變遷，如何建立一個不與山爭地、不與河爭地，與自然共生的社會體系，已是災後復建的當務之急了。

這次受災最嚴重的莫過於山區，從楠梓仙溪往上到小林，從荖濃溪看到寶來，這些受災地區大抵都是在河階台地，本來就是土石所沖刷的台地，一遇大雨，就可能造成土石流災禍；莫拉克災害後，這些地區又成為另一個新的河階台地，等於是一個全新的地理環境，如果未來在此地又打造新的聚落，幾年後另一個類似小林村的悲劇會不會再度發生？這是我們對災後復建第一個要追問的問題。

從過去台灣十年來統計資料來看，高屏溪每年累積土石達五千萬噸、卑南溪八千萬噸，這些土石來自中上游，和背景地質環境有關，甲仙小林寶來三角區域，背後潛藏特殊地質環境，寶來一路往西都有斷層，平常看到峭壁風景漂亮，代表的其實是坡度陡峭，從楠梓仙溪到荖濃溪都如此，這其中所顯示的幾點特色：一是其地質材料非常破碎，二是斷層林立，三是周遭環境敏感。身處在這樣的脆弱環境，如何能夠允許還要在原地重建？

從賀伯風災過後的幾十年來，不論是土地利用還是國土規畫，同樣問題我們其實一直都反覆的討論過。但等到災害過後，大家就依然故我，相關的國土監測也一直是束諸高閣，政府單位不僅沒有提供好的地理環境資訊，也沒有把周遭的環境敏感區位畫出來，一個沒有與自然共生的土地利用、國土規畫政策，最終就是災難的不斷輪迴而已。因此推動並落實國土規畫，不應只是說說而已，否則悲劇終究會不斷的降臨。

過去每一次經歷災難摧殘後，一開始不少人都會主張人無法與天爭，不適合人居住的山區，應該還給大自然，退耕還林，退河還地往往成為最熱門的話題。特別是談到防災，馬上想到的就是遷村，但每回都是災難過後不到一、兩個月，遷村之說最後都不了了之。因為原住民的生活與文化無法與城鄉系統融合，即使勉強遷村，他們最後還是又回到山上老家。等到下次再碰到風災，他們又淪為環境難民。

如果實務上遷村的可行性不大，那就只有從移村的角度思考。因而當前最迫切的工作，應是動員全國各地的地質、水利、水保、環工與森林等範疇的學者與專業人員，前往各受災地區勘察，進行一次大規模的國土檢測，由他們負責在災區附近找一塊比較安全的地段，做為移村之用，這些復建之地找到之後，再由政府相關單位與當地社區民眾展開積極對話溝通，教育他們不要再盲目的開發以及防災減災之道，然後利用民間與政府資源，盡速展開災區規畫與興建的工作。

在此同時，政府亦應該加速進行相關災害預警系統建立，一旦獲悉狂風降雨即將來襲，透過模式的分析，掌握洪水與土石流資訊，一旦發警報，就應該盡速進行相關防災撤離工作，以減少災害損害程度。

每次發生災害後，在災民與輿論的壓力下，政府不得不馬上撥款進行復建，只要沒把錢花完的單位就要記過處分，造成工程沒有完整的規畫時間，最後導致粗製濫造，甚至重蹈覆轍，防災工程無法永續發展。

因此，復建工作必須規畫先行，除了必要的緊急工程之外，不要急著馬上進行重建工程，至少尊重專業，先做好縝密的規畫，再與民眾進行繁複的溝通協調，取得大致共識後，再結合政府與民間的資源投入，這樣才能面對未來不可測的環境災難。

面臨氣候變遷的劇變，雨量年年破紀錄，工程手段已無法再遏阻災難的發生，在大自然不斷的反撲下，所有人為錯誤都不可能再隱藏，而最終賠上的卻是無數的生命和財產。記取教訓是防範下一次災害最好的策略，但願這次重建，不再只是五分鐘熱度而已。