1 |
|
Page 2
“...our reflections and contributed to a better
understanding of our own multiple engagements. Financial support for our research in the months prior to the
earthquakes was provided by the Fulbright U.S. Student Program and the U.S. Department of Education
Fulbright Hays Program, respectively. Austin Lord s post-earthquake research in Nepal has also been
supported by a U.S. Department of State Area Studies Foreign Language & Area Studies Fellowship. Galen
Murtons research in Nepal was funded by the Social Science Research Council as well as the Department of
Geography and the Natural Hazards Center at the University of Colorado Boulder. Austin would like to
express heartfelt appreciation to his family members in Nepal, who supported us in innumerable ways
throughout this entire process, particularly Roop Sagar Moktan and Deepanjali Moktan. He especially thanks
his wife, fellow Rasuwa Relief co-founder and permanent counsel, Sneha Moktan, for her love, patience, and
support, without which none...”
|
|
2 |
|
Page 4
“...experiences with disaster
(Hidalgo & Barber 2009) or their direct engagements and
interventions within post-disaster relief and recovery
efforts (Farmer 2011; Schuller 2014; Liboiron 2015). In the
wake of the 2015 earthquakes in Nepal, many academics
considered their own complex relations with people and
place in post-earthquake Nepal—similarly reflecting on
the unstable boundaries between scholarly, humanitar-
ian, and personal engagement—while others articulated
productive critiques of the role of social scientists in the
time of disaster (K.C. & Shakya 2015; Hindman 2015). These
conversations continue, particularly in light of the difficult
and slow process of post-earthquake recovery and the like-
lihood of future seismic activity in the Himalaya region.
88 HIMALAYA Fall2017...”
|
|
3 |
|
Page 6
“...survivors from the Langtang
community shifted to a camp for Internally Displaced
Persons (iDPs) that had been established at the Phuntsok
Choeling Monastery near Swayambhunath in Kathmandu.
Austin and others made several visits to the camp to
provide relief materials and to talk with community
members. After less than 48 hours in Kathmandu, Austin,
grew frustrated with the uneven impacts and optics of the
disaster (cf. Shneiderman & Turin 2015; Nelson 2015) and
wrote the following statement on social media:
To be clear: Kathmandu is not just a pile of rubble.
Don’t believe the hype. Without dismissing the very
real needs of some people, the damage is remark-
ably, fortunately, and unexpectedly limited com-
pared with the possibilities and most importantly
with other parts of Nepal. I say this because most
current international media continues to reinforce
longstanding spatial biases: that there is Kathman-
du, Everest, and the rest of Nepal, only vaguely
referenced or understood... [yet]...”
|
|
4 |
|
Page 7
“...uncertainties faced by dis-
placed survivors. Our colleague Bob Beazley provided a
detailed report on damage in Lower Rasuwa based on his
reconnaissance trip in the days immediately following the
earthquake. Our conversations with friends and research
contacts in Rasuwa also indicated that relief efforts had
not yet reached communities in the northern reaches of
the district.
Importantly, our response was also shaped by prior knowl-
edge of the region and its people. We were well aware of
legacies of social and spatial exclusion experienced by
Tamang populations in Rasuwa who had been subject to
centuries of marginalization, corvee labor, and the codified
caste-based discrimination of the muluki ain (Holmberg
1977; Campbell 2013). The earthquake hit Tamang com-
munities across northern-Nepal particularly hard (Magar
2015),6 compounding everyday vulnerabilities, especially
in Rasuwa, where 82% of the district population identi-
fies as Tamang (Ghale 2015). The uneven impacts of the
earthquakes on...”
|
|
5 |
|
Page 8
“...collectives with direct connections to specific areas of
Nepal comprised a significant share of relief distribution
(Tamang 2015).7
And so, in the first days of May 2015, we also gathered
with a small group of volunteers to discern the shape
of current needs, gather resources, and form a plan of
action. Describing ourselves as a ‘humanitarian volun-
teer initiative’—a framing carefully worded to signal
our non-professional orientation to the disaster—we
released our first public statement via social media. Like
many others who have found themselves at the frontiers
of disaster response in the 21st century, we launched a
crowd-funding campaign to support our initial efforts.
We had become a diverse collective of nine people [see
Acknowledgments], and we called ourselves Rasuwa Relief.
Disaster & Unevenness in Rasuwa
Heading upstream along the Trishuli River with our fellow
volunteers during our first major relief mission on May
10th, we could see that the impacts of the earthquake
and the...”
|
|
6 |
|
Page 10
“...and despite the confusion.
Engagement and Praxis in the Post-Earthquake
Landscape
For two years after the earthquake, we worked as Rasuwa
Relief on a variety of different projects—ranging from
interventions focused on immediate humanitarian relief
to collaborative community-based projects committed to
long-term recovery. This kind of sustained engagement,
always challenging and often frustrating, was informed
by a lived praxis that complemented and enriched our
academic understandings of risk, social inequality, and
uneven vulnerabilities. Put differently, as our work
progressed, we learned how to refine and improve our
engagements through everyday practice—which included
recognizing our own limits. As the pattern of our engage-
ment became more elaborate, it also became increasingly
multiple, which allowed us to consider both the
post-earthquake landscape of Rasuwa and our positions
within it from a variety of perspectives.
In May and June of 2015, Rasuwa Relief’s work targeted
gaps exposed...”
|
|
7 |
|
Page 12
“...tell their own
stories of life in Langtang before and after the avalanche
(Langtang Memory Project 2016). We understand these
projects as part of a larger commitment to polyvocality in
the wake of disaster—providing space for at-risk commu-
nities to describe their own conditions of vulnerability
and narrate their own process of recovery (Schuller 2014;
Liboiron 2015; Gergan 2016).
Through Rasuwa Relief, we also undertook a social media
campaign that we hoped would provide insight into the
situation ‘on the ground’ in Rasuwa and promote greater
understanding of the social and political complexities of
the earthquake aftermath. With these efforts, we tried to
focus attention on the socially constructed dimensions of
Figure 8. In March 2016, Amchi
Tenjing Bista administers
care to an elderly woman with
chronic health problems in the
village of Gatlang. These mobile
health camps allowed a team of
amchi (practitioners of Tibetan
medicine/Sowa Rigpa) to treat
over 1,000 patients in Upper
Rasuwa...”
|
|
8 |
|
Page 13
“...this work, we sought to critique
and counter the kind of official representations of disaster
that “are dominant to the point of ubiquity” (Liboiron
2015:147) and that reproduce the uneven delineation of
certain ‘acceptable’ risks in Nepal. While constructing
these critical narratives, we tried to limit the effect and
affect of our own mediations and focused on promoting
the voice and agency of earthquake-affected Nepalis over
our own.
However, while this approach was inflected by the ethics
of social science, it was neither completely objective nor
apolitical. In fact, and especially with respect to Rasuwa,
we acted specifically and intentionally to make certain
people, places, practices, processes, and pasts more visible
than others—to draw attention to certain needs still
unmet, like pervasive struggles with mental health, and
to explicate the complex process of reconstruction (and
its politics) to a broader international audience. These
attempts to promote informed and critical awareness...”
|
|
9 |
|
Page 14
“...to be co-present at a difficult moment; to act in terms of an
ethic of care.
Importantly, we are not alone in seeking to understand
the possibilities of multiple engagement in the wake of
the 2015 earthquakes in Nepal (cf. March 2015; Craig 2015;
Shakya 2015; Shneiderman 2015). An increasing number of
scholars have contributed to this effort in the context of
other disasters (Oliver-Smith 1986; Farmer 2011; Schuller
2014; Liboiron 2015) and critical dialogue about the posi-
tions and values of social scientists in the wake of disaster
continues in Nepal (i.e. K.C. & Shakya 2015; Hindman 2015;
McGranahan 2015). In recent years, several workshops and
events focused on patterns of engagement in post-earth-
quake Nepal have been held at academic conferences (for
example, the ‘Nepal Earthquake Summit’ at Dartmouth
College, February 2016) and new solidarities focused
on knowledge-sharing and collaboration are emerging
(such as the recently established ‘Nepal Geographers
Association,’ April 2017)...”
|
|
10 |
|
Page 15
“...Department of
Anthropology at Cornell University. His research in Nepal
focuses on the social, economic, and environmental
effects of infrastructure development, the formation of
infrastructural publics and imaginaries, and perceptions
of risk and uncertainty. His current project analyzes the
reconfiguration of imagined futures and economies of
anticipation in the wake of the 2015 earthquakes. Austin
holds a Master of Environmental Science from Yale
University and a B.A. in Economics from Dartmouth College.
A portfolio of his visual work focused on Nepal can be found
at .
Galen Murton is an Assistant Professor in the Department
of Integrated Science and Technology at James Madison
University with teaching responsibilities in the Geographic
Sciences Program. He completed his PhD in the Department
of Geography at the University of Colorado Boulder (2017).
His dissertation examined the social and geopolitical
impacts of infrastructure projects in High Asia with a focus
on road...”
|
|
11 |
|
Page 16
“...4. At the time of the earthquake, both authors were U.S.
Fulbright Scholars in Nepal, conducting research on
infrastructure development, mobility and social change.
For more information on our scholarly contributions see
Lord (2014; 2016), Murton (2015; 2017), or Murton, Lord &
Beazley (2016).
5. More than 300 people lost their lives in the Langtang
Valley on April 25th, including 175 Langtangpa.
Unfortunately, more than two years after the earthquake,
some of the bodies have not yet been recovered from the
Langtang avalanche zone.
6. For example, Tamang communities make up only
5.8% of Nepal’s population yet an estimated 34% of total
earthquake casualties were Tamang (Magar 2015). See also
Thapa (2015).
7. At this point in the ‘Emergency Phase,’ most large NGOs
were still establishing logistical supply chains (with the
exception of a few with air assets) and mobilizations by
the Nepalese state (with the exception of the Nepal Army,
which focused on search and rescue and evacuation
operations)...”
|
|