technologies, the facilitator can bring examples
from elsewhere into the discussion.
5. Decide on materials and construction. Discuss
building material options with the groups.
Discuss who is going to build the houses, and
whether this influences the choice of materials
and technologies, as those preferred builders
may have the skills for some, but not others.
The facilitator should remind the groups that
the selection of local materials and builders will
help to rebuild local livelihoods.
6. Consult the wider community. Give the group
participants the opportunity to take the house
models to the wider community; this may
result in some further changes to models and
sketches.
7. Finalise designs. Organise a final meeting
with the community groups, to deal with final
clarifications and questions. The architect
then uses the models and sketches to produce
architectural drawings. He or she should show
these to the groups, explain how the original
models and sketches were used to produce
the drawings and answer any questions. Some
further modifications to the drawings may have
to be made as a result. If the architect is able
to use computer-aided design (CAD) that would
speed up any subsequent modifications, and
could also allow for some individual design
needs to be accommodated later on. The
Auto-CAD software, in fact, can show designs
in three dimensions, which suits participation
better than two-dimensional drawings. People’s
suggestions can be entered on the house image
almost instantly, allowing them to consider a
much wider range of options, before making a
choice. Auto-CAD could therefore also replace
step 4: Modelling, though it might make step 6:
Wider Consultation more difficult.
8. Produce construction manuals. The architect,
engineer, or other qualified person, should
produce a basic construction manual for each
of the approved designs, using a language that
can be understood by residents and their local
builders. This will show and explain construction
details, with emphasis on the disaster-resistant
components, component specifications,
materials to be used and their bills of quantity.
9. Build demonstration houses. Organise the
construction of at least one house of each of the
types designed. This provides an opportunity to
pilot test the drawings and manuals and to train
builders and community members. It will also
be a final chance to give feedback and make
some last changes to drawings and manuals. It
is sometimes useful to leave the demonstration
houses only partially completed for a while to
show important construction details that could
otherwise be hidden, particularly if these are
essential to achieve disaster resistance. They
could serve another purpose whilst the larger
reconstruction programme is ongoing, e.g.
as meeting or training space, site office or
materials store, but would have to be completed
towards the end, to be fit for occupancy as a
dwelling.
Applications
True participatory design in reconstruction is
still relatively rare. More commonly, architects
will visit some of the disaster locations, but not
all communities; talk to selected people, more
often leaders or key informants, and less often
women or minorities; and observe some of the
damage done, if it is still visible. They may get
additional information from the agency funding
the reconstruction programme, and will produce
drawings on that basis. If reconstruction is to
take place through an owner-driven approach, the
architects may later come back to the communities
to explain the plans, for community members to be
able to make a selection. But there is rarely much
scope for modifications at this stage.
What follows are a few examples of true
participatory design in reconstruction of
resettlements that have a positive impact on
community participants, e.g. in mitigating future
disaster risks, increasing community cohesion
and cooperation, and in enabling them to recover
their livelihoods more quickly. There are many
more examples of successful participatory
design in normal housing or upgrading projects;
the Resources section includes some selected
references to them.
Acknowledgements
The Toolkit on PCR has been developed through
institutional collaboration between Practical Action
and the International Federation of Red Cross
and Red Crescent Societies. The collaborators
are particularly thankful to Otto Ruskulis, who
produced an early draft of this tool, and to Sophie
Ault, Nabeel Hamdi, Vasant Pullenayegem and
Aziza Usoof for their contributions and comments.
6