Tsunami engulfs Sri Lankan governance
| Date | 01 December 2008 |
| Published date | 01 December 2008 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0020852308098474 |
| Author | Ramanie Samaratunge,H.M.A. Herath,Ken Coghill |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Review of
Administrative
Sciences
Tsunami engulfs Sri Lankan governance
Ramanie Samaratunge, Ken Coghill and H.M.A. Herath
Abstract
The features of governance during the provision of relief immediately following
the 2004 tsunami, the restoration of key services and facilities, and the longer term
rebuilding of damaged/destroyed infrastructure, in the Galle District of Sri Lanka,
are investigated in this case study. Interview data revealed that recovery attempts
were significantly weakened by the lack of collaboration among key players at the
central and the district level. In particular, at the district level, interactions among
key stakeholders have lacked focus and were ad hoc. We argue that despite the
growing recognition of the advantages of the integration of the actions of various
state and non-state actors in such governance, government appears to be reluc-
tant to move away from the existing ‘command and control mode’ of governance.
As a result, transaction costs of governance were excessive, and the resources
allocated for reconstruction were either misused or left underutilized.
Points for practitioners
Following a major disaster there is enormous goodwill, with willingness to overlook
previous divisions and partisan interests. However, this is fragile and easily dissipat-
ed. It must be deliberately preserved and built on. Practitioners should seize the
opportunity to build collaborative relationships and to reform administrative
processes to facilitate the delivery of supplies and services, giving priority according
to need. Advice to the political executive must emphasize the urgency and public
interest in drawing on all available human, financial and physical resources through
collaborative arrangements involving all sources, including the public service at each
level of government, business and non-government organizations.
Keywords: collaboration, governance, Sri Lanka, tsunami
Ramanie Samaratunge and Ken Coghill are at the Department of Management, Faculty of
Business and Economics, Monash University, Australia, and H.M.A. Herath is at the Department of
Public Administration, University of Sri Jayawardenapura, Sri Lanka.
Copyright © 2008 IIAS, SAGE Publications (Los Angeles, London, New Delhi and Singapore)
Vol 74(4):677–702 [DOI:10.1177/0020852308098474]
678 International Review of Administrative Sciences 74(4)
Introduction
Governance is an essential component of disaster management. It may be studied
from a number of perspectives as demonstrated by Allison and Zelikow in their
seminal analysis of the conduct of the Soviet and US Governments in the Cuban
missile crisis (Allison and Zelikow, 1999). This article reports a study of the roles of
different sectors and organizations in response to a massive natural disaster. As it
embraces different sectors and organizations, good governance largely depends on
effective links between them (Corkery, 1999; Krahmann, 2003; Haque, 2004;
Kernaghan, 2005). It follows that the nature of these links and the extent of their inte-
gration affect the outcomes both within each sector and, significantly, the entire
society. As nurturing and facilitating these links has attracted much attention, new
forms of network organizational structures have become significant, encouraging
‘synergic relationships, with private and public activities partially reinforcing each
other’ (Knill and Lehmkuhl, 2002: 42). High levels of cooperation and collaboration
between different actors would not only reduce governance transaction costs (for
details see Birner and Wittmer, 2006), but would also ensure better outcomes of gov-
ernance (Kemp, 2006). A recent World Bank report (2007) points out that creating a
right governance environment is one of the key conditions to poverty reduction in
South Asia. Disaster management is not an exception.
Growing attention to a collaborative approach which highlights the importance of
integrated governance questions the significance of the command and control mode
of governance in the present context (Bourgon, 2007; Rizvi, 2008). Good governance
suggests that all members of society must feel that they have a stake in governance
and do not feel excluded from the mainstream (Vigoda, 2002; Bloom et al., 2004).
This has been the focal point in the present poverty reduction strategy advocated by
international development agencies such as the World Bank (World Bank, 2007).
Bourgon (2007) points out the importance of building collaborative relationships with
citizens and encouraging shared responsibilities with groups of citizens. This requires
that all groups and especially the most vulnerable have the opportunity to maintain
or improve their well-being and enjoy the feeling of social inclusion (Samaratunge,
2007). It means that processes and institutions must generate outcomes that meet
the needs of society while making the best use of resources at their disposal. UNPAN
(2002) suggests that the motives for integrated governance are diverse, but rising
expectations of quality and tailored responsiveness of services, government services
in particular, appear to have generated significant pressure for change. Government
institutions as well as private and civil society organizations must be accountable to
the public and to their respective stakeholders who will be affected by decisions or
actions. The current article seeks to contribute to research on the role of integrated
governance by examining the relief, recovery and rebuilding process following the
tsunami in Sri Lanka in December 2004.
Sri Lanka was among the countries hardest hit when the unprecedented Indian
Ocean tsunami struck coastal areas on 26 December 2004. It generated responses in
stages corresponding with those described by Regnier et al. (2008), i.e.
emergency relief does play a crucial role during the first weeks and months following
a disaster; it can include in a broad sense the delivery of minimum safety, stability
Samaratunge et al. Tsunami engulfs Sri Lankan governance 679
and confidence building beyond the material supply of survival equipment and tools;
and the role of humanitarian agencies should stop there, and be substituted by
reconstruction and development aid, supportive services and various types of
international grants and domestic incentives to enable the affected populations to
get back within shortest possible delays to their ex-ante economic and social
activities. (Regnier et al., 2008: 412)
We describe these as Relief, Recovery and Rebuilding.
Each stage required coordination of the efforts of individuals and of a wide range
of organizations in the mobilization, deployment and management of human, physi-
cal and fiscal resources. Effective assistance to tsunami victims in coping with the
devastating effects was the main concern of all governance actors. We examine
distinctive features of actors and how, when and why they interacted to provide
services to victims. In particular we focus on the integration of governance actions in
one of the most severely affected regions in the country, Galle District in southern Sri
Lanka, involving public, business and civil society organizations. The main focus is on
the horizontal integration in the process of service delivery at the district level.
We begin by sketching the literature that links different sectors of governance, and
highlight the new appreciation of integrated governance and its impact on the out-
come of any given situation. We then develop a conceptual framework involving
major governance actors and indicate how they interact with each other in different
circumstances. Key arguments are developed by drawing upon interviews conducted
in Sri Lanka during the period July–January 2005/06.
The governance model: an integrated approach
Governance ‘comprises the complex mechanisms, processes, relationships and insti-
tutions through which citizens and groups articulate their interests, exercise their legal
rights, meet their obligations and mediate their differences’ (UNDP, 1997: 2). Thus,
although pivotal, the state is not the only actor exercising power and authority in the
various levels of socio-political systems (Edwards, 2002; Rizvi, 2008). It is argued that
‘governance involves the process of decision making by allowing various segments in
society to voice their issues, implementing those decisions for the benefit of society
at large, means of conflict resolution amongst different factors and accountability for
ones actions to various stakeholders’ (UNESCAP, 2006: 4). Healthy discussions and
debate among various groupings, which aim to eventually lead to effective coordina-
tion and collaboration among them, have become a growing phenomenon in the
21st century (Rosenbaum, 2006).
Integrated Governance (Mattli, 1999; Coghill et al., 2005) involves formal and
informal relations between government agencies or across levels of government and
the non-government sectors (UNPAN, 2002). The state, market and civil society sec-
tors intersect, overlap and intermingle; the relative power and influence of each
changes dynamically (see Figure 1).
Integrated governance is thus a broader term than Integrated Public Governance
(Mattli, 1999; Goodsell, 2006; Kernaghan, in press). Integrated Public Governance
focuses on the public sector in a ‘whole of government’ sense and lacks an explicit
place for the market sector in its pantheon. Integrated governance is distinguished by
680 International Review of Administrative Sciences 74(4)
STATE
CIVIL
MARKET
SOCIETY
State, Market and Civil Society
Rule...
To continue reading
Request your trial