Tribhuvan University

Institute of Engineering
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING
Central Campus
Pulchowk

ASSIGNMENT 11
Post-Disaster Assessment and Response Planning

Submitted To:

Prof. Dr. Hari Darshan Shrestha

Department of civil engineering
IOE, Pulchowk campus

Submitted By:

Mani Shrestha
079MSDRM008
A. Review of Sphere Handbook 2014 and 2018:
The Sphere Handbook serves as a critical reference for humanitarian practitioners worldwide,
offering standards and guidelines to ensure effective and principled response in humanitarian
crises. Comparing the 2014 and 2018 editions reveals several notable revisions aimed at
enhancing the handbook's comprehensiveness, relevance, and applicability in diverse contexts.
Sphere Handbook 2014:
This edition marked a significant milestone in humanitarian response standards. It provided
guidelines for humanitarian actors to ensure quality and accountability in their response to
various crises, including natural disasters, conflicts, and epidemics. It emphasized the importance
of upholding the rights and dignity of affected populations and outlined core humanitarian
principles and minimum standards across key sectors such as water and sanitation, shelter,
health, and food security.
Sphere Handbook 2018:
The updated edition incorporated feedback and lessons learned from implementing the previous
version. It aimed to improve clarity, relevance, and usability for practitioners in the field. Key
revisions included enhanced guidance on protection, inclusion of persons with disabilities, and a
stronger focus on addressing the needs of displaced populations and urban crises. The 2018
edition also emphasized localization and community engagement, recognizing the importance of
involving affected communities in decision-making processes.
Reasons for Revision:
The revisions made in the 2018 edition were driven by evolving humanitarian challenges and
best practices. Feedback from practitioners highlighted the need for clearer guidance on
protection issues, greater inclusivity, and a more localized approach to humanitarian response.
Additionally, emerging trends such as urbanization and displacement influenced the content of
the updated handbook. The Sphere project continuously seeks to reflect the evolving landscape
of humanitarian action and incorporate the latest evidence and lessons learned. Some reasons are
listed below:
1. Strengthened Focus on Localization:
 Revision: The 2018 edition emphasizes the importance of localizing humanitarian
response, acknowledging the expertise and capacities of local actors.
 Why: This revision reflects a shift towards more inclusive and participatory approaches,
recognizing the critical role of local communities in effective humanitarian action.
2. Integration of Protection across Sectors:
 Revision: The 2018 edition integrates protection considerations across all sectors,
emphasizing the need to address protection concerns comprehensively.
  Why: This revision acknowledges the interconnectedness of protection issues with other
sectors such as health, shelter, and water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH), promoting a
holistic approach to humanitarian response.
3. Enhanced Accountability and Quality Assurance:
 Revision: The 2018 edition introduces stronger mechanisms for accountability and
quality assurance, including clearer indicators and guidance for monitoring and
evaluation.
 Why: By enhancing accountability and quality assurance, the handbook aims to improve
the effectiveness, transparency, and accountability of humanitarian interventions.
4. Inclusion of Emerging Challenges:
 Revision: The 2018 edition addresses emerging challenges such as climate change,
urbanization, and protracted crises, reflecting evolving humanitarian landscapes.
 Why: This revision ensures the handbook remains relevant and responsive to
contemporary humanitarian needs and challenges, equipping practitioners with guidance
to address emerging issues effectively.
5. Streamlined Structure and Clarity:
 Revision: The 2018 edition features a more streamlined structure and clearer language,
enhancing accessibility and usability for practitioners in the field.
 Why: This revision facilitates easier navigation and comprehension of the handbook's
content, enabling practitioners to quickly access relevant information during
humanitarian response operations.
B. Observation on COVID-19 Response in Nepal in Line with Sphere:
Nepal's response to COVID-19 can be assessed through the lens of the Sphere Handbook,
particularly in terms of preparedness, response, and recovery efforts. While Nepal faced
significant challenges due to its fragile healthcare system, limited resources, and socio-economic
vulnerabilities, several commendable actions were taken in alignment with Sphere principles:
 Preparedness: Nepal implemented early measures such as lockdowns, border closures,
and mass testing to contain the spread of the virus, demonstrating a commitment to public
health and safety.
 Response: Efforts were made to ensure the continuity of essential services, including
healthcare, food distribution, and education, albeit with limitations due to resource
constraints and logistical challenges.
 Protection: Attention was given to vulnerable populations, including migrant workers,
refugees, and marginalized communities, to mitigate the socio-economic impacts of the
pandemic and address protection concerns.
  Coordination: Coordination mechanisms were established at national and local levels,
involving government agencies, NGOs, and international partners to streamline response
efforts and maximize effectiveness.
 Challenges: However, challenges arose in ensuring equitable access to healthcare,
especially for marginalized and remote communities. The pandemic exacerbated existing
vulnerabilities, including limited access to clean water and sanitation facilities,
overcrowded living conditions, and inadequate healthcare infrastructure. Adhering to
Sphere standards could have helped address these challenges by prioritizing the needs of
vulnerable populations and ensuring the provision of essential services in a dignified and
inclusive manner.
 Lessons Learned: Nepal's experience with COVID-19 underscores the importance of
integrating Sphere standards into pandemic preparedness and response efforts.
Strengthening health systems, promoting community engagement, and addressing
systemic inequalities are critical for building resilience and mitigating the impact of
future crises.
Despite these efforts, Nepal faced significant challenges in scaling up testing and
healthcare services, addressing misinformation and stigma, and reaching remote and
marginalized communities. Moving forward, greater investment in healthcare infrastructure,
community engagement, and risk reduction measures will be essential to strengthen Nepal's
resilience to future health emergencies.
C. Case Study: Protection Issues in Jajarkot Earthquake:
The Jajarkot earthquake serves as a poignant case study highlighting protection issues in
humanitarian response. In the aftermath of the earthquake, which struck Nepal in 2015, several
protection concerns emerged, including:
 Shelter and Livelihoods: Many survivors faced challenges in accessing adequate shelter
and livelihood opportunities, exacerbating vulnerabilities and increasing the risk of
exploitation and abuse.
 Gender-Based Violence (GBV): Instances of GBV, including domestic violence and
sexual exploitation, increased in the post-earthquake context, underscoring the need for
targeted protection interventions and support services for survivors.
 Child Protection: Children were particularly vulnerable to exploitation, trafficking, and
separation from families in the chaotic aftermath of the earthquake, necessitating child
protection measures and family reunification efforts.
 Land and Property Rights: Displacement and loss of land and property rights posed
significant protection challenges for affected communities, highlighting the need for legal
assistance and advocacy to safeguard their rights.
In response to these protection concerns, humanitarian actors, including government
agencies, NGOs, and international organizations, implemented various interventions, such as:
  Establishing safe spaces for women and children to access support services and
psychosocial support.
 Conducting awareness campaigns on GBV prevention and response, targeting both
survivors and community members.
 Providing legal assistance and advocacy support to address land and property rights
issues and prevent forced evictions.
 Strengthening community-based protection mechanisms and promoting community
participation and empowerment in decision-making processes.
However, despite these efforts, several challenges persisted, including resource
constraints, coordination gaps, and cultural barriers. To enhance the effectiveness of protection
interventions in future humanitarian responses, greater investment in capacity-building,
coordination, and community engagement is imperative, ensuring that the rights and dignity of
affected populations are upheld throughout all phases of the response and recovery process.
Challenges:
Following the earthquake, there were reports of gender-based violence, child exploitation, and
inadequate protection mechanisms in displacement camps. Women and girls faced heightened
risks of sexual violence and trafficking, while children were vulnerable to exploitation and
separation from their families.
Response:
Humanitarian organizations, in collaboration with local authorities, worked to address these
protection concerns by establishing safe spaces for women and children, providing psychosocial
support, and strengthening community-based protection mechanisms. However, gaps remained
in terms of coordination, resource allocation, and accountability.
Lessons Learned:
The Jajarkot Earthquake underscored the importance of mainstreaming protection considerations
into humanitarian response efforts. It highlighted the need for robust prevention and response
mechanisms to safeguard the rights and dignity of affected populations, particularly those who
are most vulnerable. Integrating Sphere standards, particularly those related to protection and
gender equality, can help strengthen resilience and promote a more effective response to future
disasters.
Overall, analyzing humanitarian responses such as the COVID-19 pandemic and the Jajarkot
Earthquake through the lens of Sphere standards provides valuable insights into areas of strength,
challenges, and opportunities for improvement in humanitarian action. By incorporating Sphere
principles into practice, humanitarian actors can enhance the quality, accountability, and
inclusivity of their response efforts, ultimately ensuring better outcomes for affected populations.