Tan

Most approaches to disaster management focus on rescue and physical rehabilitation. The key to effective recovery from disaster must necessarily include the social-emotional support which links the physical safety and survival needs to social-emotional coping and communal ties that provide the meaning for one's existence. The vital connections with significant others and the community, the relational aspects of life, are crucial to total recovery. It is the cultural and contextual aspects of community grieving and recovery that facilitate the rebuilding of lives together. The community development perspective provides the framework for social recovery in disaster management.

This article is based on a keynote speaker address entitled, "Disaster Management from a Strengths and Community Perspective" for the 3rd Annual International Lecture Series at Dominican University, Graduate School of Social Work, River Forest, Illinois, November 20, 2008.

Keywords: disaster management, strengths perspective, community, social work model

Most approaches to disaster management focus on rescue and physical rehabilitation (Perrow, 2007; Ronald, Kettl, & Kunreuther, 2006). Effective recovery from disaster must necessarily include the social-emotional support that provides the meaning for one's existence. The vital connections with significant others and the community are crucial to total recovery (FEMA, 2005; Sphere Project, 2006; Yodmani, 2001).

As the disaster management process moves from physical safety to social recovery, there is a need to accentuate the strengths and adopt a more holistic community approach. This approach includes developing not only the state's, but also civil society's capacities in the work that occurs during the pre, present, and post phases of disaster. The model for social recovery after disaster is the key focus of this article. Disaster prevention and mitigation, as well as the mobilization and response, recovery, reconstruction, and rehabilitation are vital processes that must take into consideration the local capacities and resources (Yodmani, 2001). This type of disaster recovery depends on the types of hazards and disasters encountered.

There are different types of hazards and disasters which could be categorized under natural and man-made events (Yodmani, 2001). A third category would be the hybrid of the two - natural hazards compounded by human mistakes, often with disastrous consequences. Generally, natural hazards are linked closely with environmental concerns, such as earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, cyclones, tornadoes, floods, drought, forest fires, desertification, and deforestation. The physical characteristics of these hazards could be readily studied in terms of geographic distribution, impact, response, and mitigation. Included in the natural events are also biological pandemics, such as flu and outbreaks of viruses and germs (Tan, 2004; WHO, 2004).

Human events include conflict and war, nuclear and chemical disasters, transport disasters such as air, train, and ship crashes or accidents. Anthropogenic events may follow a pattern of recovery, but are often more quickly associated with anger and resentment. While it is difficult to blame nature for environmental disasters, man-made disasters are often more difficult to accept as they create strong feelings for retaliation and restitution.

There is also the mixed category of disaster - one that starts with a natural event but has a human factor which aggravates the crisis, such as the case of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans. The hurricane broke the artificial dikes, which resulted in widespread flooding. There is a greater ambivalence in such situations and it is easier to blame the 'government', or other man-made systems, rather than nature.

Disaster management is the active process of preparing for, ameliorating the impact, and reducing the risk of disasters. This involves both the emergency management in a disaster as well as the rebuilding thereafter. Indeed, it is vital to maintain safety of the citizens and physical reconstruction of communities in order to ensure that the concrete needs of the people are being addressed. Meeting these physical needs helps to rebuild the lives and enhance the well being of the renewed community.

Disaster management has evolved as a multidimensional and interdisciplinary science that includes the fields of public health, administration, geography, engineering, computer science, psychology, and social work. Effective disaster management involves the integration of emergency plans at all levels of government, non-government, and community involvement (Ronald, Kettl, & Kunreuther, 2006). The focus of social work in disaster management is also at the various levels of intervention: individual, family, community, or society. Social work practice could take the form of casework, group and community work, or social policy and planning. The responsibility of disaster management lies with the government, as well as with civil society, and social workers are found in both these sectors of society.

History and Culture as Community Asset

The Indonesian island of Simeulue, near the earthquake's epicentre, is right in the line of the 2004 Asian tsunami yet it had few casualties and fatalities.

The stories passed down through the generations and the report of the island's folklore recounted a tsunami in 1907 where many islanders fled to the hills after the initial quake just before the tsunami struck.

The majority of the island's 70,000 people heeded the folklore and escaped the waves that followed the earthquake. Experts believe that a receding ocean could give people some five minutes warning to evacuate to safety.

See: National Geographic (2007) and Woods (2005).

Social work is concerned with human wellbeing. The values of social work emphasize social justice and the sharing of resources with humans placed in great need after events such as disasters. Social work knowledge, such as crisis intervention theory and social process, informs the practice of disaster management. The understanding of social conditions and community organization, as well as social policy and planning, are directly relevant to working with disasters.

The strengths approach (Saleebey, 2006) provides a positive perspective to disaster intervention. The strengths perspective in social work considers the individual, family, and community understanding of social situations and conditions. It also emphasizes the capacities and potentials of the client, family, and community, and assumes that they are the experts of their own situation and can best decide what they want and need. The strengths approach provides a comprehensive and multi-dimensional assessment and intervention (Saleebey, 2006). A vital starting place is the assessment of the strengths at all of these levels that will assist the community in coping with distress and enhance living.

Strength and resilience are highly correlated concepts (Priestley & Hemingway, 2006; Herman, 1992). Resilience is the resourcefulness of people, families, and communities, along with their ability to 'bounce back'. Different people or communities are affected in various ways. Resilience is dependent on the "protective factors" they have, such as attitudes, skills, and assets. History and culture may also play a protective role in dealing with crisis and disasters, as can be seen in how islanders of Simeulue escaped the tsunami (see inset).

Although many dimensions of life, such as housing, schooling, health, and transportation are affected by disaster, the psychosocial aspects, such as family, kin, and neighborly relations, are most important. It is essential to believe that people, families, and communities are capable of doing, and will do, what is right. This approach empowers the community as it enables local participation, active choices, and control of their own destinies.

It is the premise of the strengths perspective that assessments must not stay problem-focused but should emphasize personal and community strengths (Saleebey, 2006). It seeks to discover uniqueness and indigenous ways of coping and intervenes in a culturally appropriate way. The strengths perspective identifies positive assets in terms of individual and community coping abilities, and thus the involvement of family and community members is central in intervention.

The collaborative approach of strengths perspective includes working within the reality of the situation, while searching for possibilities and potentials, as well as doing what is meaningful for the citizens through engagement and dialogue throughout all the phases of disaster management. This approach includes a holistic integration of both spiritual and contextual resources. Often the cultural and spiritual traditions provide meaning and strength to deal with disaster situations.

Key concepts of membership and inclusion contribute to a community's strengths. Connections with people and resources, collaboration with others, and the empowerment of the community are vital to the healing process that occurs. A sense of wholeness develops in the community as these connections are made. McKnight and his colleagues have been key proponents for examining, developing, and utilizing the assets of the community (McKnight, Turner, & Kretzmann, 1999). Community assets include physical, individual, organizational, and societal assets. The physical assets include land, building, communication, transportation structures, and business complexes. The individual assets are the local residents, their skills, experiences, capabilities, and their willingness to contribute (Kretzmann & McKnight, 2005). Community assets are the different organizations such as voluntary associations, social cultural groups, and faith-based organizations. The societal institutions are public institutions, schools, courts, hospitals, as well as political structures of the country (Kretzmann & McKnight, 2005).

Putnam's (2000) concept of social capital encompasses both the bonding and the bridging capital. The ability of the community to bond and support one another, individually and as groups, builds the bonding capital. The relationship of the community with other communities and resources provides bridging capital (Dynes, 2002; Putnam & Feldstein, 2003). This model requires a deep respect for the people and community's capacity to adopt sensitive and culturally appropriate interventions. Community members' views and actions are valued and solicited through public meetings, surveys, consultations, task forces, and committees. Community action provides the impetus for social change and community development (Sphere Project, 2006).

Networking and participation are the essence of both community development and disaster management as they provide the bonding and bridging capital necessary for action. Social capital is the means for developing and mobilizing the resources of the community (McKnight, Turner, & Kretzmann, 1999; Putnam & Feldstein, 2003). While bonding capital focuses on the latent assets or strengths of the community and harnessing them for action, the bridging capital aggregates resources and assets in other communities (Putnam, 2000). The active collaboration of various resources, such as Emergency Management and Public Health Agencies, Community Councils and Non Government Organizations, working together with the community demonstrates the use of bridging capital (Miskel, 2006).

The proposed model for disaster management is based on the strengths perspective and involves working with the community as the focus of intervention.

Dimensions	Individual	Community	Society
Assessment	Individual safety and social-psychological condition	Physical and social situation in community	Impact on society
Rescue	Removal from danger, safety of individuals	Mobilization for community rescue	Inter-organizational and structural provisions & coordination
Recovery	Interpersonal support	Family and network support	Organizational and institutional support
Preparedness	Readiness and understanding of individuals	Community structure and network in place	Societal resources and protocols for emergencies

The framework for analysis, as seen in Table 1, is provided by the disaster management process. The stages for disaster management can be identified as assessment, rescue, recovery, and preparedness. The various levels of intervention in disaster management are that of the individual, community, and societal level (Sphere Project, 2006).

Engagement and assessment

One of the first responses in crisis situations is to remove imminent dangers and threats. Safety concerns can be systemic and are primarily at the different levels: individual, community and societal. Disaster assessment by the first responders or assessment teams involves rapid survey of the severity of the situation at ground zero, as well as the community resources to cope with the situation (Tan & Rowlands, 2008). This task is best done by 'insiders'; 'outsiders' would do well to consult members within the community.

Assessing the community may include taking into consideration both the resources available and those needed for rescue and recovery. This assessment is, ideally, done in partnership with knowledgeable people from the local community. The accurate mapping of needs and services is achieved through observations and dialogues with residents, interest groups, and service providers. Community asset mapping is an assessment of the resources available in the community. The Community Asset (ABCD) Map given below is adapted from Kretzmann and McKnight (2008). Individual, community, and societal resources, as shown in Figure 1, are systematically identified and mapped.

Figure 1: Community Asset (ABCD) Map

Tan

The mapping of community assets through assessment involves the identification of assets in terms of resources, skills, networks, and community agencies, along with characteristics that can be used to support resilience (Kretzmann & McKnight, 2005). In terms of community resources, a quick survey of relevant service providers in the area is needed. Assessment provides relevant data, as well as information on the procedures for identifying community members still at risk, handling and distribution of emergency supplies and services, housing, agriculture, climate and weather, and available warning and surveillance systems. One of the keys in assessment is that the inherent strengths and resiliency are understood (Saleebey, 2006) so that rescue, development, assistance, recovery, and preparedness can be targeted initially at specific urgent needs and subsequently effective actions.

Rescue

The rescue phase is actually the crisis management of the disaster situation. In crisis there is often drama associated at the individual, family, community, and societal levels. Crisis management generally includes a strong focus on public relations to recover any damage to public image, as well as to assure the public and the community stakeholders that assistance and rescue are underway (Tan, 2004). Effective mass communication that can provide accurate information and convey clear instructions regarding necessary procedures is vital. The skill to manage an emergency communications system for any international disaster or humanitarian emergency is useful. Rescue and support workers may need to learn field communications, and experienced communications professionals also have to apply technical expertise so as to improve humanitarian assistance (Tan & Rowlands, 2006).

Management of crisis thus involves quick planning, decision making, and information management. There is also need for program supervision, monitoring and control, personnel, and leadership for the rescue phase. The active and ongoing collaboration among 'bridged networks' that involves community leaders, public safety, and health resources facilitates the best rescue and recovery outcomes (Dynes, 2002; Perrow, 2007).

Focus on community recovery

The community approach to recovery essentially involves the mobilization of resources for response, rescue, and preparedness. The model presented includes four principles for recovery:

Mobilization of Community Resource for Disaster Management

Family, neighbors and friends are often the first in rescue and subsequent recovery. The video clip shows neighbors helping with search and rescue efforts immediately after the Sichuan earthquake in China

Tan

With some resources such as equipment and training the first responders could be effective in saving lives and comforting the wounded and bereaved. The development of social capital and capacity building for community is vital in disaster management.

1.Unique local resources and strengths and an understanding of the individual and community differences need to be recognized and identified in the recovery process.

2.Flexibility is key in the intervention and approach to social recovery.

3.The local community should be involved in managing the process as much as possible utilizing an empowerment approach in decision making and service delivery.

4.Collaboration and effective coordination are essential throughout the recovery process.

Individuals and communities often go through identifiable phases of recovery. Every individual and community go through distress, relief, disillusionment, resentment, reconstruction, and reframing, although not always in the same order (Herman, 1992). The first stage of the disaster is one of distress and disorganization - this happens when the crisis event or disaster strikes and panic and confusion occur. Distress is followed by a sense of relief when rescue and safety occurs, and an engendered 'heroism', sometimes described as a euphoric 'honeymoon', takes place. When the reality of the new life sets in, after this period of relief, the people and community may go through a difficult time marked with disillusionment and anger. Resentment of others and of society's lack of care and provision may stir strife and conflict. In the reconstruction stage, individuals and groups retrace the past, reframe it as a meaningful event, and re-evaluate future goals, both privately and publicly.

Community resiliency and vulnerability can be attributed to various factors, such as social and economic variables. The socially connected tend to be more resilient and thus the poor, due to the limited choices available to them, are more likely to live in high-risk areas with decreased resiliency (Priestley & Hemingway, 2006). The role of the family and social support system, as the most important resource, is a crucial factor for social recovery (Dynes, 2002). Social support could be both tangible and emotional, like encouragement, advice, and companionship. The family assumes a key role in detecting and confronting problems and providing support in the rethinking and reconstruction of meaning, as well as in resolving conflicts (Herman, 1992; Dynes, 2002).

The recovery process is a normalizing process of helping the community to come to terms with trauma and disaster (Herman, 1992). This involves network support and practical assistance for one another. Successful recovery strategy is often based on shared community problem solving and developing ownership of the problem and the solutions, which invokes not only bonding capital but also bridging collaborations with existing and potential local and non-local human resources.

The community can support the recovery of members through creating an understanding of and the opportunity for working through trauma and providing specific support where warranted. The community assists in maintaining integrity and resolving dissensions and conflicts. Thus, it is vital to consider the community and social context of recovery. The integrative process of recovery involves the active reestablishment of social networks. For example, community expressions of care, grief, and support, aid in emotional healing and re-bonding in addition to helping the community move on to a more hopeful future.

The roles and tasks of recovery workers often include that of facilitator, educator, and broker of resources. The worker may also coordinate projects, advocate on behalf of affected community, and provide consultancy where needed. The tasks of recovery managers are those of community organizers, which may include managing resources, staffs, and systems. They may be called upon to provide information to stakeholders and mediate in conflicts (Tan & Rowlands, 2006). They may also assist families and communities through public policy, community education, and support for children, families, and groups.

Besides having to develop close, positive working relationships with the community, the skills required of recovery workers include planning, programming, collaborating, negotiating, budgeting, monitoring, and evaluating, as well as personnel and information management. In addition, workers must have the ability to utilize appropriate individual and public communication. The worker should, together with the community, identify the problems and capacities. Services and resources should be analyzed. Finally, as with all purposeful intervention, the collaborative short, medium, and long term aims and objectives must be identified. The action plan, including tactics, tasks, processes, and growth strategies, are jointly developed. As emphasized in every social work intervention, it is in partnership 'with the clients' that these action plans are carried out. The final and important process is one of evaluation - of both the process and outcome of intervention.

Social work intervention is governed by the key ethical principles of informed consent and self-determination, which emphasize the clients' and communities' freedom to make choices and decisions. It is important to remain objective, focus on the big picture, consider strategic planning, and mobilize the community's inherent social capital.

Preparedness and planning

Preparedness and planning for the future are key processes in disaster intervention. Preparedness is important at both the individual and societal levels. Each person is readied for any disaster, understanding what needs to done and equipped to face any possible emergency. At the community level, structures and networks have to be in place in preparation for anticipated future disasters (Sphere Project, 2006). One of the key approaches to future disasters is risk reduction, which focuses on the mitigation and preparedness aspects of the disaster management process. Mitigation is prevention and focuses on the long-term approach to dealing with risk. Strategies of mitigation are not only relevant for community recovery but also long term preparedness of society for disaster (Sphere Project, 2006).

The Sphere Project (2006) defines disaster prevention as the "activities designed to provide permanent protection from disasters," and defines disaster preparedness as the "ability to predict, respond to and cope with the effect of a disaster" (p. 1). In this model, prevention and mitigation are viewed together as preparedness. Being prepared also includes a readiness for mitigating or reducing the impact of potential disasters.

Planning is useful as it prepares members to face any future disaster the community may experience. The community, as well as public agency planners, learn from previous experiences of emergency management and develop action plans, procedures, protocols, checklists, and appropriate training and scenario rehearsals to deal with disasters. Roles and responsibilities of different players in disaster situations, along with public education, communication, and warning systems are established in collaboration with both private and public neighborhood groups. In planning, a system for the rational deployment of societal resources is developed. The police, fire department, schools, businesses, and the general public are all involved with emergency exercises and armed with information and skills which lead to a state of preparedness. The role of community leaders at the planning stage cannot be overemphasized as they have an invested stake in the community. Neighbors must be viewed as participants rather than 'victims', and be mobilized for action. Those affected by disasters may later be advocates for prevention and planning.

Perspective and Examples of Social Work in Disaster Management

The purpose of social work is to enhance community expertise and empowerment of members for participation in the decision making process through all stages of assessment, rescue, planning, and intervention for recovery and preparedness. Below are examples of ways in which social work professionals have attempted to partner with communities following disastrous events.

Families and survivors of tsunami (FAST) project

The FAST Project, developed in response to the Asian tsunami of December 2004 by the International Federation of Social Workers and the Commonwealth Organization for Social Work, aimed to provide community level support for long term recovery, rebuilding, and support for local social workers in reaching out to and assisting the vulnerable. The strategy ensured social-emotional support, advocacy and planning, and capacity building for family and community recovery (Tan & Rowlands, 2006, 2008). Social workers were involved in relief work through non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and government agencies using their professional expertise, resources, and networks. Bridging capital was evidenced in bringing together the collaborating organizations and the national associations, the International Red Cross, and other government agencies. Funds raised were allocated to program initiatives developed in consultation with local professional groups in Sri Lanka, Indonesia, India, and Thailand.

The Indonesian Association of Professional Social Workers (IPSPI), with seed funding from the FAST Project, conducted a training of trainers (TOT) workshop for community-based social service workers in Banda Aceh, Indonesia. The collaboration between IPSPI, the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), and the provincial social welfare office enhanced the community resource for protecting the community's children. The TOT program was reportedly effective in training local service providers to train and help others thus multiplying the local capacities (Tan & Rowlands, 2006).

The FAST Project for Psychosocial Intervention with Tsunami Victims, mounted by the Sri Lankan Association of Professional Social Workers (SLAPSW), launched three programs - a Children's Group, a Home Garden, and a Women's Group (Tan & Rowlands, 2006, 2008). The Children's Group was both therapeutic and developmental in nature, bringing volunteers and professionals together in working with the needs of tsunami orphans. The Home Garden and Women's groups were multi-ethnic and multi-religious support groups engaged in micro enterprise, which facilitated social and community integration as well as supplemented family income. Both community and external resources were mobilized to aid in social recovery (Tan & Rowlands, 2006, 2008).

Extensive rehabilitation work is currently done by the National Institute of Mental Health and Behavioral Sciences (NIMH) in India. The FAST Project partnered with NIMH and focused on designing manuals for trainers in order to impart basic knowledge and skills relating to psychosocial care in disaster management for social work students (Tan & Rowlands, 2006). Similar to the TOT program in Indonesia, local collaborators in India were engaged in training multiple cohorts of social workers to effectively assist in the social recovery of the children and families affected by the tsunami. Local schools and agencies participated in the training and deployment of the social workers.

Local Community Intervention in China: Action Love Project and other Community Efforts

Soon after the 2008 Sichuan Earthquake, volunteers from all over China and those within Sichuan province rallied to help the victims and those displaced. One of the biggest transitional housing projects (see photograph below) is found In Leigu, Sichuan, and is supported by the people of Shandong Province to a sum of 4,000 million RMB. This twining project is an example of the use of bridging social capital in action.

Tan

Action Love started as a local Christian medical rescue effort and found the need for longer-term intervention for social-psychological recovery and support. 30 Chinese medical personnel arrived in Sichuan within 24 hours of the earthquake and worked alongside Chinese soldiers. They appeal for more volunteers to, with appropriate training, provide children and youth services, education, post-trauma counseling for the victims and establishing a network of 'Community and Family Counseling Centers'.

Tan

Action Love volunteers distributing food in Sichuan, China

In Thailand, the FAST Project utilized educational technology to raise the awareness of crises, as well as skills in coping with trauma and disasters. The Project produced educational materials for the public, especially those who work with and assist tsunami survivors with families. This approach utilized the community education model by developing tangible local assets and emphasizing strengths and coping potentials of the community (Tan & Rowlands, 2006, 2008).

The four FAST projects were led and developed by local organizations and experts in collaboration with international groups. The local collaborators were thus able to continue with the projects working with women, children, families, and communities when the seed funding was discontinued. The international sponsor sought partners that were capable of sustaining the venture. IPSPI, for example, was able to demonstrate effective training for other child protection and service workers funded by UNICEF after the initial workshop (Tan & Rowlands, 2006, 2008). The Sri Lankan Association of Professional Social Workers (SLAPSW) was able to mount three programs in Hambantota which were sustainable and received further funding from a Japanese foundation (Tan & Rowlands, 2008).

Wenchuan earthquake taskforce

The Sichuan earthquake disaster affected some 14 million people, with almost 100,000 dead or missing. Just after the earthquake, World Effort Together (WET) was jointly established by the State Council Emergency Management Experts Council, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Civil Affairs, and the Beijing Normal University. Scholars from the Beijing Normal and Hong Kong Universities developed a Resource Center that linked international and local resources for working with the earthquake recovery. The taskforce aims at linking the social sector with policy process, knowledge, intervention, research, policy making, bridging donations with needs, and providing technical assistance for disaster recovery (WET, 2008).

Drawing on their international experiences, 48 international institutions and experts were linked with 80 Chinese experts and institutions. This was an effective way to harness the global response to international disasters. Various training sessions and outreach programs were conducted. This sharing of expertise and collaborations is a good example of using bridging capital for working with disaster affected communities.

Just after the China earthquake, a number of pilot programs were mounted by WET. These programs included social work and psychotherapy training, along with programs with Plan China and Mobile Social Services. All of the developed programs were collaborations with different organizations, both local and international. Various children's programs, such as Early Child Care and Education, Caravan for Children, and the "Right to Play", were established (WET, 2008). Social workers, students, and volunteers joined with local groups in implementing the plans and running the programs. Connections at different levels of government, along with coordination with the grassroots and community members, are vital to the successful implementation of an integrated physical-social-psychological approach to community development.

The response to the earthquake saw the rise of many NGOs in China, both in numbers and stature. The Chinese government harnessed the country's resources for the rescue and disaster management and was open to external assistance. China has impressed the world with the way the Chinese government has dealt with the crisis and, as a result, has enhanced its image in terms of being credible and accountable (Sheikh, 2008).

The goal of intervention for social recovery is to maximize a person's opportunities to make decisions and enhance quality of life (Tan & Rowlands, 2008). Persons who have survived a disaster need to have more control over their lives and communities, and must reclaim their rights to contribute towards their own rebuilding. Collaboration of community 'outsiders' with 'insiders' is essential to providing effective and sustainable interventions. For disaster management to be useful, international organizations must work with local organizations in ways that build their capacities and empower their communities (Tan & Rowlands, 2008).

Conclusion

In summary, principles of social recovery and disaster management must necessarily involve the community from the outset. They should focus on both the organizational and community potentials and needs. External initiatives should engage and empower local groups that are working to enable and build the community's assets, as well as its bonding and bridging capital.

The question is not whether disaster will strike, but, rather, when it happens will the community be ready to deal with it? Effectively dealing with the disaster and successfully coping with the situation engenders hope and a positive future orientation. Disaster can enhance community closeness and social cohesion and bring about positive changes at the individual, community, and societal levels. Social work intervention that uses inherent strengths and resilience can be a catalyst for social change. The key to overcoming disaster and crisis lies in the resilience of people and communities to surmount all odds and usher in the necessary hope for the future. Crisis can thus be an opportunity for community development and growth (Tan, 2004).

References

Dynes, R.R. (2006). Social capital: Dealing with community emergencies. Homeland Security Affairs, II (2), 1-26. Retrieved May 21, 2008, from http://www.hsaj.org/?article=2.2.5

Federal Emergency Management Agency (2005). Long term community recovery process: A self help guide. Retrieved March 9, 2009, from www.fema.gov/ pdf/rebuild/ltrc/ selfhelp.pdf

Herman, J. (1992). Trauma and recovery. New York: Basic Books.

Kretzmann, J.P. & McKnight, J.L. (2005). Discovering community power: A guide to mobilizing local assets and your organization's capacity. ABCD Institute.

McKnight, J. Turner, N. & Kretzmann, J.P. (1999). A guide to mapping and mobilizing the associations in local neighborhoods. Chicago, IL: ACTA Publications.

Miskel, J. (2006). Disaster response and homeland security: What works, what doesn't. Westport, Conn: Praeger Security International.

National Geographic (2007). Tsunami facts: How they form, warning signs, and safety tips. Retrieved March 6, 2009, from http://news.nationalgeographic.com/ news/2007/04/070402-tsunami_2.html.

Perrow, C. (2007). The next catastrophe: Reducing our vulnerabilities to natural, industrial, and terrorist disasters. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

Priestley, M. & Hemingway, L. (2006). Disability and disaster recovery: A tale of two cities? In N.T. Tan, A. Rowlands, & F.K.O. Yuen (Eds), Asian tsunami and social work practice (pp. 23-42). New York: Haworth Press.

Putnam, R.D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Putnam, R.D. & Feldstein, L. (2003). Better together: Restoring the American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Ronald, J.D., Kettl, D.F., & Kunreuther, D. (2006). On risk and disaster: Lessons from Hurricane Katrina. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Sheikh, H. (2008). Wenchuan earthquake: China's turning point. Retrieved March 7, 2009, from http://forum.eastwestcenter.org/blog/2008/12/18/wenchuan-earthquake-china%e2%80%99s-turning-point/.

Saleebey, D. (Ed). (2006). The strengths perspective in social work practice. Boston: Pearson.

Sphere Project (2006). Disaster preparedness. Retrieved March 5, 2009, from http://www.sphereproject.org/component/option,com_docman/task,doc_details/Itemid,Array/gid,197/lang,english/.

Tan, N.T. (2004). Crisis theory and SARS: Singapore's management of the epidemic. Asia Pacific Journal of Social Work and Development, 14(1), 7-17.

Tan, N.T. & Rowlands, A. (2006). Report of FAST visit to Sri Lanka, 23-29 May, 2006. (mimeograph).

Tan, N.T. & Rowlands, A. (2008). Social redevelopment following the Indian Ocean Tsunami. Social Development Issues, 30(1), 47-58.

World Effort Together (WET) (2008). Wenchuan earthquake taskforce. Retrieved March 7, 2009, from http://cegrp.cga.harvard.edu/content/wenchuan-earthquake-taskforce-beijing.

World Health Organization (WHO) (2004). Strengthening health systems' response to crises: Towards a new focus on disaster preparedness. Retrieved April 3, 2009, from http://www.euro.who.int/document/e87920.pdf

Woods, R. (Ed). (2005, January 2). Focus: Nature's timebomb. Timesonline: The Sunday Times. Retrieved March 6, 2009, from http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/ news/world/article407697.ece.

Yodmani, S. (2001). Disaster preparedness and management. In I.D Ortiz (Ed.), Social protection in Asia and the Pacific. Manila, Philippines: Asian Development Bank. Retrieved March 6, 2009, from http://www.adb.org/Documents/Books/ Social_Protection/chapter_13.pdf

About the Author

Dr Ngoh Tiong Tan is Professor of Social Work at Augsburg College, Minnesota. He has formerly taught at the National University of Singapore and the College of St Thomas. Professor Tan is Co-chair of Commonwealth Organization for Social Work and former Vice President of International Federation of Social Workers.