Hearts across the globe are aching for communities along the Nepal-Tibet border.

Last Wednesday, a catastrophic flash flood ripped apart whole villages and swept away dozens of vital bridges and roads. It has claimed the lives of more than 1000 people, as authorities race to find thousands more who are unaccounted for and free hundreds of trapped hydropower tunnel workers.

In the wake of the flood, the world has rallied to support ongoing rescue and humanitarian efforts. But as with any disaster, shifting from rescue to recovery will be far from straightforward. Soniya, co-author of this article and a Nepali national, experienced this firsthand while providing humanitarian assistance to communities rocked by the deadly 2015 Nepal earthquake.

Our research shows local communities are critical to ensuring disaster-hit regions can recover and rebuild.

In the wake of disaster

It is difficult to comprehend the scale and severity of the Nepal-Tibet floods.

Families around the world are grieving, with many still wondering whether their loved ones are even alive.

Aside from the tragic human cost, the floods have destroyed whole networks of critical infrastructure. In the worst-affected districts, roads, bridges, power lines, and river gauges have collapsed, cutting off the very channels needed to get medical aid and supplies to stranded residents.

The demand for these local infrastructure services is at an all-time high, as displaced families seek shelter, the injured search for hospitals and people wait hours and days for their deceased relatives to be identified.

Our research team studies how communities, government agencies, not-for-profit organisations and businesses work together in the wake of disasters. Our research shows local communities consistently carry the weight of disaster recovery. People whose homes remain standing, whose phones still work or who live outside the danger zone often become the first source of support for those who have lost everything.

From the ground up

Several remarkable stories of rescue and resilience are emerging out of Nepal. There is the school teacher who saved the lives of hundreds of students, after receiving several phone calls warning of an imminent flood. There are also people from upstream villages who alerted downstream communities of the coming deluge.

These stories illustrate the crucial role communities play in disaster warning and response.

Formal agencies alone may not have the resources to forewarn communities with the same speed as a local teacher. Instead, they can work alongside informal networks, such as the guthi of Nepal. Guthi are a kind of social support system that looks after the religious sites, rituals and general welfare of a specific community.

Local social networks can also be repurposed for disasters as phone trees, where one person alerts several others, complementing formal warning systems. These networks range from women’s microfinance and cooperative groups to community forest user groups, which collectively manage local woodlands. These groups often know who is living alone, which households have older people and which trekking lodges fill during peak periods. This knowledge is indispensable and, if sought before disaster strikes, could save lives.

When infrastructure fails to meet urgent needs, communities improvise and self-organise. In partnership with emergency responders, locals carry patients across damaged roads, relay messages when communication networks fail and turn schools, monasteries and homes into shelters.

Community networks may need to evolve during and after disasters. This could involve establishing new communication channels or using existing networks for different purposes. In Nepal, for instance, local transport networks have already pivoted to deliver water, food and clothes to flood-ravaged regions. Meanwhile, restaurants are distributing hot meals to households that community groups have identified as being particularly vulnerable.

When attention fades

Community-led responses are perhaps most valuable in the recovery phase. In the aftermath of disaster, streams of international aid and funding can dry up. Media coverage often wanes or diverts to the next fire or flood.

During this period, disaster-hit communities do their best to return to daily life. They may need substantial support to do so, particularly in the form of consultation to help rebuild their future, including their homes, businesses and social networks.

Nepal’s parma system may support recovery in an informal way. Parma is a type of reciprocal labour exchange in which households lend a day’s work to a neighbour and then receive one back. If outside help has not arrived and reconstruction grants are months away, parma could be used to clear debris, salvage intact belongings or housing materials and set up temporary shelters. Agencies can build on this existing system by providing tools and supplies, while communities contribute skills, labour and local knowledge.

Along the Nepal-Tibet border, the long road to recovery has only just begun. In the midst of profound grief and loss, local communities are already mobilising to provide support to their most vulnerable neighbours. Governments and international organisations would do well to follow their lead. Resilience in the face of catastrophe

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.