Despite the recurring social, economic, and humanitarian costs, disaster affected populations repeatedly fail to Build Back Safer housing to protect themselves from future hazards. This paper seeks to understand how affected households interpret and intend to act upon hazard-resistant construction knowledge by assessing their motivation, ability and opportunity (MAO). We present a novel adaptation and application of the social scientific MAO model to the disaster risk reduction field by analyzing empirical data and debating how humanitarian technical assistance either inhibits or facilitates the intention to adopt. In two districts affected by the 2015 Gorkha earthquakes, nearly 1500 households were compared in 25 communities that received different intensities of humanitarian technical assistance to reconstruct safer housing. The application of the MAO model provides a novel understanding of intentions to reconstruct safer housing. Levels of motivation, ability and opportunity demonstrate both positive and negative impacts of technical assistance. Technical assistance did increase the self-efficacy and applicability of knowledge. Nevertheless, significantly lower were acceptability of the knowledge, perceived physical capacity and perceived opportunities to reconstruct. The case of Nepal, despite good intentions of humanitarian agencies, gives reason to rethink technical assistance approaches.

尽管经常发生社会，经济和人道主义成本损失，受灾人口仍然屡屡无法重建更安全的住房，以保护自己免受未来的危害。本文旨在通过评估受影响的家庭的动机，能力和机会（MAO）来理解受影响的家庭如何解释并打算采取行动。通过分析经验数据并讨论人道主义技术援助如何抑制或促进采用的意愿，我们提出了社会科学MAO模型在减少灾害风险领域中的一种新的改编和应用。在受2015年戈尔卡地震影响的两个地区，对25个社区的近1500户家庭进行了比较，这些社区获得了不同强度的人道主义技术援助，以重建更安全的住房。MAO模型的应用提供了对重建更安全住房意图的新颖理解。动机，能力和机会的水平表明了技术援助的积极和消极影响。技术援助的确提高了知识的自我效能和适用性。然而，知识的可接受性，感知的身体能力和感知的重建机会要低得多。尽管人道主义机构有良好的意愿，但尼泊尔的案件仍然有理由重新考虑技术援助的方法。技术援助的确提高了知识的自我效能和适用性。然而，知识的可接受性，感知的身体能力和感知的重建机会要低得多。尽管人道主义机构有良好的意愿，但尼泊尔的案件仍然有理由重新考虑技术援助方法。技术援助的确提高了知识的自我效能和适用性。然而，知识的可接受性，感知的身体能力和感知的重建机会要低得多。尽管人道主义机构有良好的意愿，但尼泊尔的案件仍然有理由重新考虑技术援助方法。