Policy Transfer, Disaster Affected Governments and Recovery

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

1.1. Problem Statement and Research Question

1.2. Objectives

1.3. Research Design

1.4. Utility

2. Literature Review and Theoretical Framework

2.1. Literature Review: Achieving Greater Quality & Accountability

2.2. Studying Policy Transfer Using Conceptual/Analytical Frameworks

3. Methodology

3.1. Comparative Method

3.2. Reliability and Validity

3.3. Case Selection

3.4. Conclusion

4. Policy Transfer: a Conceptual/Analytical Framework

4.1. Policy Transfer as a Dependent Variable

4.2. Supporting Techniques for the Conceptual Framework

4.3. Policy Transfer as an Independent Variable

4.4. Conclusion

5. Third Variables: Disaster Impact and Political Context

5.1. Impact of Disaster: Indonesia

5.2. Impact of Disaster: Haiti

5.3. Political Context: Indonesia

5.4. Political Context: Haiti

5.5. Conclusion

6. Policy Transfer – Comparing the BRR and IHRC

6.1. Organisational Structure and Mandate: BRR

6.2. Organisational Structure and Mandate: IHRC

6.3. Funding Mechanisms: BRR

6.4. Funding Mechanisms: IHRC

6.5. Anti-Corruption Measures: BRR

6.6. Anti-Corruption Measures: IHRC

6.7. Activity Prioritisation: BRR

6.8. Activity Prioritisation: IHRC

6.9. Conclusion

7. Analysis: Policy Transfer as Two Variable Types

7.1. Policy Transfer as a Dependent Variable

7.2. Policy Transfer as an Independent Variable

8. Conclusion and Recommendations

8.1. Concluding Step by Step

8.2. Recommendations for Future Research

Research Objectives and Themes

This thesis examines the effect of policy transfer processes on the ability of ad hoc post-disaster governmental recovery agencies to effectively facilitate "build back better" recovery efforts. Through a comparative study of the Aceh Nias Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Agency (BRR) in Indonesia and the Interim Haiti Recovery Commission (IHRC) in Haiti, the research investigates why certain recovery models succeed or fail in different political contexts.

• The impact of policy transfer mechanisms on recovery agency performance.
• Comparative analysis of organizational structures and mandates in post-disaster settings.
• The role of "third variables" such as political context and disaster impact on policy outcomes.
• Assessment of anti-corruption measures and funding mechanisms in recovery agencies.
• Evaluation of "build back better" as a dependent variable in humanitarian relief.

Excerpt from the Book

Summary of Chapters

1. Introduction: Introduces the shift toward humanitarian cooperation and the central research question concerning the efficacy of post-disaster recovery agencies.

2. Literature Review and Theoretical Framework: Reviews academic literature on policy transfer and establishes a conceptual framework using existing theories from comparative politics and development studies.

3. Methodology: Outlines the comparative case study approach, detailing the selection of the BRR and IHRC as key cases for analysis.

4. Policy Transfer: a Conceptual/Analytical Framework: Elaborates on the integrated framework used to analyze policy transfer as both a dependent and independent variable.

5. Third Variables: Disaster Impact and Political Context: Analyzes the political and disaster-specific backgrounds of Indonesia and Haiti to establish the context for comparative analysis.

6. Policy Transfer – Comparing the BRR and IHRC: Provides an empirical comparison of the two agencies, focusing on their structures, funding, anti-corruption strategies, and priorities.

7. Analysis: Policy Transfer as Two Variable Types: Synthesizes the empirical findings to determine the impact of policy transfer processes on the success of the recovery agencies.

8. Conclusion and Recommendations: Summarizes the findings and provides recommendations for future research in humanitarian governance.

Keywords

Policy Transfer, Disaster Recovery, Humanitarian Action, Build Back Better, Aceh Nias Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Agency (BRR), Interim Haiti Recovery Commission (IHRC), Political Context, Comparative Method, Accountability, Governance, Humanitarian Assistance, Ad Hoc Agencies, Institution Building, Third Variables, Crisis Management.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the core focus of this research paper?

The paper investigates how policy transfer—the borrowing or copying of administrative models—affects the performance of ad hoc government agencies created to lead recovery after large-scale disasters.

Which thematic areas does the thesis prioritize?

Key areas include organizational mandates, funding channels, anti-corruption strategies, and how these agencies prioritize activities to meet the needs of the affected population.

What is the primary research question?

The study asks what effect policy transfer processes have on the ability of these ad hoc governmental recovery agencies to successfully facilitate "build back better" recovery efforts.

What scientific methodology is utilized in this study?

The research employs a qualitative, comparative case study methodology, triangulating secondary source data and expert interviews to analyze the BRR in Indonesia and the IHRC in Haiti.

What does the main body of the work address?

It provides a comparative analysis of two specific agencies, using an integrated conceptual framework to test hypotheses about why certain recovery models succeed where others face structural limitations.

Which keywords best characterize this study?

Core terms include Policy Transfer, Disaster Recovery, Humanitarian Action, and Build Back Better.

Why were Indonesia and Haiti chosen as the primary case studies?

They serve as "mega-disaster" examples where different political contexts allowed for contrasting outcomes in the implementation of recovery policies, making them ideal for a "method of difference" comparative study.

How does the author define "build back better"?

The author identifies it as an abstract but crucial goal that involves community ownership, physical infrastructure improvement, and risk reduction, used here as the dependent variable for measuring agency success.