CASE STUDY 2: Loc Tri

Loc Tri Commune, located in the Phu Loc District in the southeast of Thua Thien Hue Province, was the second case-study site of this research (Figure 4.10). This commune has a total area of 6,259.8 hectares, of which 4,963.5 hectares is

agricultural land, 1,520.02 hectares is non-agricultural land, and 95.95 hectares is unused land¹³. The economic structure of this commune is based on agriculture, forestry and fishery, handicraft, and tourism service, as reported by a commune staff. The commune has eight villages, of which six are agriculture-based and two are fishery-based. Up to 2016, the commune has 1,748 households with 8,498 people. The poor households¹⁴ account for 15.33% (268 households), and the near poor ones cover 11.15% (195 households)¹².

13 Sourced at the Official Website of the Commune People’s Committee at https://loctri.thuathienhue.gov.vn/?gd=7&cn=81&cd=3, accessed Dec 2016.

14 Ranked by the national poverty line for 2011-2015, as mentioned in Footnote 1.

124

Figure 4.10: Location of Loc Tri in the southeast of Thua Thien Hue Province, Central Vietnam

This commune, next to the Cau Hai Lagoon, is one of the areas of this province most vulnerable to climate change and natural disasters. Climate change

projections in this area are associated with the irregular occurrence of climate events, different from the past and unpredictable for local people in terms of occurrence time, frequency and intensity. For instance, typhoons usually occurred from August to November in the past but now are throughout the year. Natural disasters have posed negative effects on local housing and livelihoods, mainly fishery, and resulted in considerable housing damage and economic loss in recent years.

According to household interviews, people here have a long tradition of coping with natural disasters, and thus, take disaster preparedness seriously. In eight out of ten houses surveyed, there are always some items available for reinforcing the house when a storm is forecast, such as wooden bars for putting on roof covers, tough fishing nets to cover the roof, or iron cables to anchor the roof structure to the ground (Figure 4.11). People here were not surprised when Xangsane (2006)

125

came, as several similar storms had visited this area before. However, due to economic constraints, they preferred the use of the immediate measures

mentioned above in response to natural disasters, because it was much cheaper and locally available. As mentioned by one household:

My family has to buy these iron cables and nets to consolidate the house when storms come. They cost not much money but can help avoid

unexpected damages.

(HI 8)

Figure 4.11: Available wooden bars (left) and fishing nets (right) used to strengthen the roof and walls of local houses when storms come

The housing of low-income people in this commune is still vulnerable to storms and typhoons followed by floods and storm surges. Thanks to the long history of coping with disasters, local actors here can identify the main hazards to housing and be prepared for the worsening trend of the future climate caused by climate change and global warming. Most of them believe that typhoons are likely to increase in a near future. They also believe that local housing in their area is incapable of coping with such typhoons if safety-related measures are not used.

As noted by one local authority staff:

People in this commune have realized the potential threats of storms, particularly with sea waves, because many big storms have occurred in the past. Their housing construction, despite being without building permits, has addressed some structural elements to stabilize the building.

(FGD 3)

126

Typhoons and sea waves created by strong winds are considered as the biggest hazards to local houses in this commune (Figure 4.12). Strong winds generated from storms intensify sea waves, which subsequently press destructive pressure on local houses when they approach the land. According to local respondents, the impact of sea waves during storms and typhoons is much more dangerous than the impact from strong winds, because very strong sea waves can easily destroy the house’s walls. About 85% of local houses here belong to the type of nhà cấp 4, which was mentioned in the last section (Hoa Hiep Bac):

The most hazardous threat is from sea waves. They are high and very strong in the storms, cross the sea dike and make walls and houses collapse easily. All houses in this area must build strong beds made of concrete to protect the house’s walls.

(HI 9)

Figure 4.12: Storm and sea waves are the main hazards to local houses that made people use the wooden bars and fishing nets (shown in the Figure 4.11) for their house reinforcement

Typhoon Xangsane in 2006 seriously destroyed local houses of this commune, in which nearly 100 houses were totally destroyed and over 300 houses were

damaged, as reported by a local authority staff. After Typhoon Xangsane in 2006, DWF supported the reconstruction of 15 houses, known as the donor-built houses, and people rebuilt about 40 houses, known as the self-built houses. The donor-built houses were designed in accordance with the ten technical principles of storm-resistant construction provided by DWF since 2000 (Figure 4.13).

127

Figure 4.13: Ten principles of storm-resistant construction provided by DWF (Source:

http://www.dwf.org/, accessed Dec 2016)

These technical principles shaped the structure of donor-built houses provided by DWF after Typhoon Xangsane (2006) in this commune, while the building form, functional arrangement, and spatial layout of such donor-built houses were defined in consultation with beneficiary households and local builders, as stated by the interviewed DWF staff. Housing construction methods associated with the ten storm-resistant principles above are discussed in comparison with the structure of self-built houses in the next section.

The Difference between Donor-built and Self-built Post-disaster Housing It was found that there are not many differences between self-built and donor-built post-disaster housing in Loc Tri. There are two common housing types, nhà ống (tube house) and nhà ba gian (three compartment house), that are followed by both self-built and donor-built housing construction (Figure 4.14). While the nhà ba gian is the reflection of Hue traditional houses, the nhà ống is representative of urbanization. According to housing-ranking criteria given by the national

government, these two types of housing belong to the nhà cấp 4 category. Similar to the first case study, the concept of nhà cấp 4 is also misunderstood by local people, as they often consider nhà cấp 4 to be a temporary and insecure structure.

The first difference between self-built and donor-built houses is seen in the roof structure. The donor-built houses contain more structural elements in the roof than do the self-built ones, such as the addition of concrete frames at the middle of the house and on the gable walls. This makes the roof of donor-built houses more stable than that of self-built ones, and considerably improves the whole structure’s solidity. According to household interviews, the main reason for using fewer

128

elements in the roof structure is the limited awareness of house owners. Most self-built households supposed that such elements would cost more money and that the stability of the house was not very dependent on their presence.

Self-built Donor-built

Three Compartment Housing (nhà ba gian)Tube Housing (nhà ống)

Figure 4.14: The difference between self-built and donor-built houses

129

The second difference between donor-built and self-built post-disaster housing is the practice of community consultation and the involvement of architects and engineers in the design process. While community consultation and professionals’

engagement were seen in the design process of donor-built housing, they were not found for the self-built housing. Households whose houses were destroyed by previous typhoons but were not selected as project beneficiaries had to find various ways to rebuild their houses on their own without technical assistance for safety purposes. Some households, due to extreme economic difficulties and having no external assistance, continued to live in critically unsafe houses with some temporary repairs (e.g. replaced blown-off roof coverings or repaired damaged doors and windows). These indicate the higher level of risk posed to self-built in comparison with the donor-built housing. However, regarding local adoption, all five donor-built households interviewed were happy with their post-typhoon houses built by the NGO DWF.

Summary

The Loc Tri Commune is located near the sea, where tropical storms associated with increased sea waves are the strongest impacts on local housing, as

emphasised by local respondents. In this commune, household families have experience in coping with these hazards, but still not sufficiently, due to lacking financial resources and technical guidance on how to increase house resilience.

Similar to the Hoa Hiep Bac Ward (the Case Study 1), this commune sees the presence of both donor-built and self-built housing reconstruction after previous typhoons, namely Typhoon Xangsane in 2006. The design and structure of the donor-built and self-built houses after this typhoon is quite alike, thanks to the understanding of the involved architects about the local context when designing the donor-built houses. However, there is a difference between these two reconstruction approaches in terms of technical stability against storm wind, where the donor-built houses are stronger and have more storm-resistant components in their structure compared to the self-built ones.