Relief and Early Recovery: Coping with the Aftermath of the Myanmar Earthquake

Last week saw the beginning of the New Year in Myanmar. Thingyan is usually celebrated over a whole week, with the playful splashing of water — cooling in the hot weather — as well as singing, dancing and feasting. Not this year.

Myanmar is a country experiencing multiple crises, the latest of which was a devastating earthquake. The earthquake has exposed just how fragile life is for those already living on the margins, whose daily struggle is now compounded by yet another crisis. Yet the resilience of individuals and communities in the face of devastating circumstances is remarkable and a force on which to build. With the first search and rescue activities completed, we’ve moved on to immediate relief efforts and considerations of what needs to be done in coming months — and in the backdrop, we’re reflecting on the parallels with the 2015 earthquake in Nepal, where Helvetas also coordinated an emergency response.  

Accessing disaster-stricken areas

Reaching people caught up in areas of political instability is never easy. The swath of earthquake-affected territory in Myanmar covers areas under military government control, areas under rebel control, and areas that are contested. The humanitarian principle of non-discrimination dictates that anyone hurt and/or deprived of their basic needs by a disaster should receive support, regardless of their political opinions or any other characteristics.

In crisis zones marked by conflict, it is often the most vulnerable who become the hardest to reach, yet they are the ones who most need support. The challenge, of course, is how to reach them. Having been present in Myanmar since 2013 (when access throughout the country was largely unrestricted), Helvetas has had considerable prior engagement with the communities in the earthquake-affected areas and can work through trusted local partners. We could therefore quickly mobilize field staff and local partners who had been engaged in an earlier flood response project and could use their knowledge to prioritize the most vulnerable community members.

Cash aid brings immediate relief

One thing we saw in Nepal in the immediate relief effort was generous donations of food from people in other parts of Nepal, organized by relief agencies. Yet, in most cases, local markets were still functioning and food was available; it didn’t need to be brought in. Other problems were far more pressing. With unrecovered bodies starting to decay in the heat, the risk of disease was high, especially from unsafe drinking water. Survivors were acting together to do what they could and sought appropriate support.

Our first assessment in Myanmar is similar; it is the same time of year, and markets are also still functioning. People are camping out in the open and cooking on open fires, but they are not going hungry. Neither are they passive. What they say they need is safe drinking water and cash to buy essentials — perhaps certain food items, but more importantly, medicine and hygiene supplies. Access to these items is especially critical for women, given their menstrual health and hygiene needs.

We have therefore began distributing unconditional cash transfers, focusing on the 10% most vulnerable families — those who have lost key active members, whose homes are too damaged to occupy, or who were struggling to survive even before the earthquake struck. We have already reached about 1,800 households in this way, mobilizing volunteers in the community — generally young people who are literate and numerate — to confirm that the households fit our vulnerability criteria. Their involvement has not only ensured local ownership but has also fostered trust in the fairness of the process. Before beginning this work, they and all our staff members underwent an orientation training to understand the selection criteria, what is meant by a Do No Harm approach, and how to be proactive in identifying the most marginalized. As this quote from a village leader shows, this approach has been well received.

“I like your monitoring and selection process of checking individual households to see whether they were severely affected by the earthquake. It is very transparent and clear to villagers [as a basis] for making decisions on support. Otherwise, villagers might think there is bias by the village leader," said U Win Hlaing, village leader of Yone Kone village in Pyawbwe township. "This is the first organization in the village, and no one or no other organization has supported us until now since their attention is focused on the city and highly visible areas. Local authorities collected information from the village, but they have not yet come to us.”

We should stress that local conditions vary considerably depending on which organization is in control. For example, we have observed places where a government-run medical unit is functioning well, or a village administrator is taking a lead in coordination — and then quite the opposite situation is close by. Similarly, the percentage of buildings in ruins varies considerably. The situation remains fluid, with needs and capacities shifting from one location to another. On-the-ground assessments are therefore crucial in determining what is needed, household by household — all the while ensuring conflict sensitivity and a Do No Harm approach are being applied.