Using interview survey results of around nine years after the 2015 Nepal earthquake and around seven years after the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami , this paper compares the medium term post-recovery outcomes of in-situ housing reconstruction that is often perceived more favorable in terms of swift recovery of livelihoods, community ties, culture, and tradition. In Nepal, slower regional development in rural, mountainous areas led to minimal population influx, preserving traditional livelihoods and community structures. In contrast, Banda Aceh, which experienced rapid post-tsunami urbanization, saw significant population turnover. Newcomers without tsunami experience moved into coastal areas. They are often engaged in non-land-dependent occupations but are attracted by low property price with high accessibility. These newcomers are augmenting disaster risks with increasing both tsunami hazard exposure and socio-economic vulnerability in the long term. With mobilizing the twenty-year recovery benefits, we should enhance both structural and non-structural disaster risk reduction measures essential to minimize the future disaster loss. In contrast, in rural areas like Nepal, in-situ housing reconstruction has played a positive role maintaining the harmonization of human and nature. However, underdevelopment issue persists unchanged and challenges for maintaining reconstructed housing stocks can be a future problem. Recovery strategies must carefully examine the optimal balance of benefits and risks associated with choices among in-situ housing reconstruction and relocation while adapting to local contexts reflecting the region's urbanization landscape and development needs.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 8 citations exist upstream.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.