ABSTRACT
There is a strong belief that contemporary technology is superior and would serve as panacea for vulnerability reduction in the areas with ‘poor’ vernacular constructions, but there is also a convincing belief that traditional knowledge accumulated over time is best suited for reconstruction. However, the suitability of the introduced technology in disaster-affected areas depends not only on its disaster-resistant qualities but also upon several factors such as social and economic context, availability of material and other resources, local skills and aesthetic sensibilities. Traditional construction practices and delivery mechanisms often embody local knowledge accumulated over time through successive trials and errors. Therefore these cannot be rejected outright when deciding on the appropriate technology for reconstruction. The challenge is how to integrate positive elements of these practices into the proposed solutions. The true measure of the success of the technology introduced during reconstruction can be gauged by the extent to which it becomes part of the sustainable local building culture of the region long after the reconstruction process is over and all the external support is withdrawn. Longitudinal studies on post-disaster reconstruction in Latur, Gujarat and Kashmir following the 1993, 2001 and 2005 earthquakes bring to light many of these issues.
