No abstract

No abstract

In some survey research settings, it may be not attainable or optimal to interview individual respondents without involving bystanders or third parties in the interview. Due to complex living circumstances or group culture, respondents may be helped by others in answering questions. However, this involvement of third parties raises questions about data quality and poses a challenge to the data collection process. Recognizing this, a natural field experiment was embedded in an urban resettlement study in the Philippines that allowed for spontaneous third-party help during certain parts of the interview. Using an event history calendar, data were gathered on numbers (of household-related transitions), names (of community

No abstract

The accelerated intensity and frequency of natural disasters due to climate change and the increasing population, which includes the vulnerable poor sector residing in high-risk areas have made countries consider preventive resettlement over post disaster resettlement as a disaster risk reduction strategy. Preventive resettlement of population is desired when the risks they are facing cannot be avoided or mitigated by other measures.In the Philippines, typhoons have increased 18 times since the 1970s (Porio, 2014) and with devastation frequently greatly felt in the densely populated urban centres like Metro Manila. Metro Manila is considered one of the most hazard-prone cities in the Southeast Asia region, and where 40 percent of its population are informal settlers (estimated at 500,000 plus 1 ), the majority are constantly suffering from flooding during rainy season.Following the issuance of a Supreme Court decision in December 2008 instructing concerned government agencies to undertake clearing operations in Metro Manila waterways that lead to Manila Bay and the typhoon Ondoy that inundated poor communities in 2009 incurring damage to properties valued at billions of Philippine pesos, the government in 2011 resorted to preventive resettlement strategy. This preventive resettlement programme was labelled as 'Oplan Likas' and 'Oplan Handa' with a Php 50 billion funding from the administration of former President Benigno Aquino III (2010 to 2016) upon strong recommendation of the civil society network. Oplan Likas connotes preventive resettlement for those informal settler families living in danger areas and those living on top and along waterways (i.e. rivers, canals, creeks) numbering to 104, 219. Subsequently, the programme was relabelled as 'One Safe Future' promising a better life for all the affected informal settler families (ISFs) including those living alongside or on stilts in waterways after resettlement to their new communities. The preventive resettlement of thousands of ISFs in Metro Manila was done in two approaches-the traditional, top-down model, taking the bulk of the budget and the people-led model, where 19% of the budget was allocated.Stark contrasting outcomes are seen in the two models under the 'One Safe Future' resettlement programme.Families who volunteered to resettle under the traditional, top-down approach ended up moving to 'off-sites', meaning the distance from their original location to the government-built sites ranges from 30 to 50 kilometres.While the objective of this resettlement programme was an improvement of the well-being of the ISFs, it was a paradox in the lives of the resettled. Thus, it was common to hear from them the loaded sarcasm 'from danger zone to death zone'. Mounting evidence reveals that apart from unemployment, expensive transportation fares due to