Progression through emergency and temporary shelter, transitional housing and permanent housing: A longitudinal case study from the 2018 Lombok earthquake, Indonesia

Increasing quality while reducing the time and costs of progressing disaster-affected populations from emergency shelter to permanent housing is key for improving post-disaster resilience. However, targets set around quality and time are often overly optimistic; the process is complex and factors affecting the progression of shelter and housing through the initial weeks and months following a disaster are diverse and not well documented. To identify which contributors are key to recovery efforts and at what stages in the process they can help or hinder, we need to study post-disaster environments over time. This longitudinal study of the shelter and housing evolution over the first eight months following the August 2018 Lombok earthquake helps to provide some insight. We argue that unrealistic expectations over timelines and standards were set. We consider the humanitarian response through aid and grants, the role of individual actors, and wealth and location of those affected. Hampering overall recovery efforts were a lack of transitional housing policy, an overly complex grant process for permanent housing construction, and a failure to declare a national disaster in a politicised environment. Conversely, shelter vulnerability reduction (people moving into more secure shelter then housing) at household level was marginally affected by wealth, proximity to a regency centre, being in an urban location or receiving additional shelter aid in the first few months, but less influential four months following the disaster. Most households self-recovered, with those recovering fastest being the most proactive and adaptable, who were supported by an effective village leader.