Emergency Shelter Assessment
Tropical Cyclone Evan Fiji, 16 – 17 December 2012
Fact Sheet, Informal Settlements
BACKGROUND
Tropical Cyclone Evan (Category 4) passed over the
Northern and Western Divisions of Fiji on 16 and 17
December 2012, with winds near the centre gusting
over 230 km/h causing serious damage to key
economic and tourist infrastructure, including wide
spread power outages and disruptions to water
supply. Flooding was recorded across the country,
including the Navua and Rewa rivers. The impact of
TC Evan compounded the damage experienced by
some of the same communities and businesses in the
wake of the Western Floods of March 2012.
Due to the slow approach of the cyclone public
advisories and warnings were disseminated hours
and even days in advance and no lives were lost.
Evacuation centres in schools and other public
buildings were established prior to the arrival of the
cyclone and accommodated families with damaged
and destroyed homes in the wake of the cyclone. At
the peak of the emergency, nearly 14,000 people
were accommodated in 242 evacuation centres in
Northern, Western, Central and Eastern Divisions.
The passage of TC Evan through the Fiji group of
islands has resulted in significant damage to the
shelter sector, both legal occupants and informal
settlers. Most damage to dwellings resulted from the
high winds, however storm surge affected low lying
coastal areas and flooding occurred along some
rivers.
The Government of Fiji (GoF), the Fiji Red Cross
Society (FRCS) and others have undertaken
assessments of all the dwellings recognized as having
legal tenure. On the 21st December 2012 the GoF
released a ‘Rehabilitation Housing Policy’ that
identified those persons who will qualify for
government assistance. Persons who do not qualify
for this assistance are expected to be able to selfrecover due to their financial status.
The GoF assessment and assistance in the Western
Division however excludes the informal settlements
and the local and international NGOs are expected to
provide shelter solutions to this section of the
affected population. As a result a detailed assessment
has been undertaken of 41 of these informal
settlements in the Western Division with the help of
NGOs, FRCS, and IFRC.
METHODOLOGY
The overall objective of the assessment is to contribute to
an effective response in these settlements by informing
the humanitarian community of the needs of the most
vulnerable affected population.
The shelter assessment consists of four components: (1)
collection and analysis of secondary data from agency and
government sources where available; (2) key informant
https://www.sheltercluster.org/Asia/Pacific/TCEvan2012/Pages/default.aspx
interviews with local government officials; (3) a household
survey that serves as the backbone of the assessment; and,
(4) GIS and mapping of all the aforementioned data
collected, collated and analysed.
TECHNICAL ASSESSMENT
The assessment team consisted of four teams of five or six
enumerators each from seven different agencies, namely
Community Support Network (CSN), Fiji Red Cross Society
(FRCS), Good Neighbour International (GNI), Habitat for
Humanity Fiji (HFHF), International Federation of the Red
Cross/Red Crescent Society (IFRC), Ministry of Local
government, Urban Development, Housing & Environment
(MoLGUDH&E) Peoples Community Network (PCN). A total
of 35 persons were used overall for the assessment that
was undertaken over 2 days on January 17 and 18 2013.
Table 1: Shelter Damage Categories
Assessment target settlements were all the known informal
settlements in the Western Division in the Districts of
Sigatoka, Nadi, Lautoka, Ba and Tavua, a total of 41
settlements. One survey team was allocated to each target
settlement. Within each target settlement the assessment
team sampled 100% of the houses that displayed damage
in category 1 and 2 (see Table 1).
As part of the sampling process, key informant interviews
were conducted with local government officials. These
individuals provided background information on the specific
situation in assessment target areas and worked with the
assessment team to identify the areas with houses in the
targeted damage categories.
Once identified the
assessment team conducted household interviews in groups
of two.
The assessment categorized shelter damage in 2
categories. Table 1 shows the breakdown of each category
and how shelters were rated.
Category
1
2
Description
Significantly affected with structural damage (major
rehabilitation required); inhabitable
Completely damaged (must be rebuilt); inhabitable
Supported by visual observation and detailed household
surveys for the above categories only, Table 2 shows the
identified damage by district and damage level.
Table 2: Shelter Damage by Districts and Categories
District
Damage Level
Number of
Significantly
Completely
Settlements
Sigatoka
1
3
2
Nadi
21
34
18
Lautoka
27
44
11
Ba
2
30
5
Tavua
6
9
5
Total
57
120
41
SHELTER SOLUTIONS POST TC EVAN
ASSESSMENT RESULTS
In all of the target locations, evacuation centres did not play
a large role as a shelter solution for households post-TC
Evan. The majority of households remained in situ or
returned to their affected house or to makeshift shelters on
the property. The shelter cluster identified ‘transitional
shelters’ as the best solution for the above houses in the
informal settlements and this fits with the GoF long-term
policy of relocating the informal settlers to permanent
resettlement areas.
DEMOGRAPHICS
PARTICIPATING AGENCIES & INSTITUTIONS
177 households were surveyed as part of this assessment
with an average household size of just over 3.
CSN, FRCS, GNI, HFHF, IFRC, MoLGUDH&E, PCN
In total, the assessment team surveyed 177 households.
All data was entered into survey monkey by a team of data
entry assistants from MoLGUDH&E and other agencies.
Analysis was conducted by the Assessment Coordinator in
the form of standard binary and cross-tabulation techniques.
https://www.sheltercluster.org/Asia/Pacific/TCEvan2012/Pages/default.aspx