In 2005, the
Government of India set up a Disaster Management authority at the
Central level - called the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) as did almost all the State Governments at
the State level, subsequently. The whole concept, as presently
named, is inherently designed to be a
big failure.
The name
Disaster Management implies and enjoins upon the officials working there
to “Manage Disaster”. This means that
their work begins only after the
disaster occurs. As a consequence the
whole thrust is on how to manage the situation post –
disaster, i.e. how to provide relief
to the affected people after the disaster occurs. Clearly, therefore, the focus is on :-
·
Arranging
for evacuation
·
Providing
relief material
·
Providing
medical support and medical supplies
·
Sending
teams of doctors and/or engineers
·
Clearing
the rubble
This is a highly capital-intensive, procurement and logistics-oriented activity
with huge expenditures involved – an activity that our bureaucrats greatly
enjoy and revel in. As can be readily understood, it gives the officials huge authority and
importance as a dispenser of large amount of funds to “ Manage Disasters”. It increases their importance simply because
they hold the purse-strings and have authority on “priority allocation”.
On the other hand if this authority was renamed as “Disaster Prevention Authority” it would see a
dramatic change in the focus and drastic reduction in costs incurred and
greatly move towards long term solutions.
Let’s take the example of a disaster caused
by floods. The disaster management
authorities, as already mentioned above,
would be focused on supply chain.
· How
to reach all the affected people by
using boats, helicopters, using trained
manpower,
·
Providing
shelter to the displaced people
·
Providing
food and medicines to the affected population
· Disaster
Mitigation Activity like pumping out water, restoring damaged buildings to be
appropriate etc.
On the other hand, a Disaster
Prevention Authority would actually try to go to the root of the
problem as to
·
why
floods repeatedly occur in the area,
· what
needs to be done to prevent such floods, (which may involve river beds cleaning, cleaning of drains well
before the monsoon, increasing the size of the drainage pipes, ensuring that
the garbage that goes inside the drainage pipes is prevented from getting into
it, raising embankment levels, installing early warning systems etc.)
·
at
the earliest signs of flood, ensuring
greater co-ordination and information dissemination with the weather forecast
departments
These
activities will also entail expenditure, but they would go towards solving of
problems before hand and in giving relief in the long term.
It’s my
belief that the cost of prevention would be far less than the cost of relief.
· Cost
of prevention can be planned and budgeted and spread over time, whereas
cost of relief comes under tremendous pressure because of public
suffering.
· Politicians
insist on doing things instantly and in
such a situation, any questioning of the
relief measures because it appears to be exorbitantly priced is termed as
insensitive or not relevant !
Another feature that distinguishes the two is
that, under the caption of Disaster
Management, there is no pressure to do
any work till the disaster strikes . By definition, if there is no disaster then, where is the question of managing it ?
On the other hand Disaster Prevention extols
people in authority to continuously study
·
Likelihood
of disasters
·
Probable
extent of damage
·
Ways
and means of preventing the disasters
·
Mitigating
its damaging effects
· Finding
long term solutions either to eliminate or reduce the occurrence of disasters.
I examined the National Disaster Management
Authority Website to understand what objectives they had set for themselves.
Here is what the website says.
1 Preamble 1
1.1.1 The Context 1
1.2.1–1.2.2 Disaster Risks in India 1
1.3.1 Paradigm Shift in Disaster Management
(DM) 1
2 Approach and Objectives 7
2.1.1 Vision 7
2.2.1–2.2.2 Disaster Management (DM) 7
2.3.1 Approach 8
2.4.1 Objectives 8
3 Institutional and Legal Arrangements
9
4 Financial Arrangements 15
5 Disaster Prevention, Mitigation and
Preparedness 17
5.1.1 Disaster Prevention and Mitigation 17
5.1.2–5.1.3 Risk Assessment and Vulnerability
Mapping 17
5.1.4 Increasing Trend of Disasters in Urban
Areas 18
5.1.5 Critical Infrastructure 18
5.1.6 Environmentally Sustainable Development
18
5.1.7 Climate Change Adaptation 18
Preparedness
18
5.2.1–5.2.3
Role of Central Ministries and Departments, and States 18
5.2.4
Forecasting and Early Warning Systems 19
5.2.5–5.2.6
Communications and Information Technology (IT) Support 19
5.2.7
Strengthening of the Emergency Operations Centres 19
5.2.8–5.2.9
Medical Preparedness and Mass Casualty Management 20
5.2.10
Training, Simulation and Mock Drills 20
Partnerships
for Mitigation and Preparedness 20
5.3.1–5.3.2
Community Based Disaster Preparedness 20
5.3.3
Stakeholders’ Participation 20
5.3.4
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Public-Private Partnership (PPP) 21
5.3.5
Media Partnership 21
6 Techno-Legal Regime 23
..........
Para 1.3.1 states, very encouragingly : There will be a paradigm shift, from the erstwhile
relief-centric response to a proactive prevention, mitigation and preparedness-driven approach
for conserving developmental gains and to minimise loss of life, livelihood and
property.
However,
this turns out be a mere pious statement of intent with no evidence in
the subsequent pages of the entire
document that the above is the focus of this august Authority/Body.
Vision
2.1.1 To build a safe and
disaster resilient India by developing a holistic, proactive, multi-disaster oriented
and technology driven strategy through a
culture of prevention, mitigation, preparedness and response.
Objectives
2.4.1 The objectives of the
National Policy on Disaster Management are:
• Promoting a culture
of prevention, preparedness and resilience at all levels through
knowledge, innovation and education.
• Encouraging
mitigation measures based on technology, traditional wisdom and environmental
sustainability.
• Mainstreaming
disaster management into the developmental planning process.
• Establishing
institutional and techno-legal frameworks to create an enabling regulatory
environment and a compliance regime.
• Ensuring
efficient mechanism for identification, assessment and monitoring of disaster
risks.
• Developing
contemporary forecasting and early warning systems backed by responsive and
fail-safe communication with information technology support.
•
Ensuring
efficient response and relief with a caring approach towards the needs of the vulnerable
sections of the society.
•
Undertaking
reconstruction as an opportunity to build disaster resilient structures and
habitat for ensuring safer living.
• Promoting
a productive and proactive partnership with the media for disaster management.
So while the Vision Statement pays the
ritualistic lip-service to the “concept of prevention” the cat is immediately out of the bag when
you come to OBJECTIVES Section where out of 9 points only one verbatim repeats what is written in the VISION
STATEMENT on Prevention as a fine example of an efficient cut-and-paste job.
In all fairness, it
must be said that the NDMA Policy Document has a full chapter on Disaster
Prevention and Mitigation Ch 5 Titled “Disaster
Prevention, Mitigation and Preparedness”
is spread over 5 pages (P 17 to 21) but
a detailed reading will show it be largely an “administrator’s dream” with almost every page talking of
setting up of various Operations Centres at all and sundry locations at
Central, State And District levels – clearly aimed at creating more
work for the IAS bureaucracy and, by
natural corollary, give them more
powers, authority and bigger budgets !!
Please sample the following
extracts (by way of examples)
As a first step towards addressing disaster
vulnerabilities, Central Ministries and Departments, National agencies,
knowledge-based institutions and DM authorities at the State and District
levels need to carry out risk and
vulnerability assessment of all disaster prone areas.
The establishment of
Emergency Operations Centres at the National, State, Metro
and District level and equipping them with contemporary technologies and
communication facilities and their periodic upgradation, will be accorded
priority.
The creation of
additional bio-safety laboratories of level IV will be addressed by the Nodal Ministry. There is a need
to focus on creating adequate mortuary facilities. Proper and speedy disposal of dead bodies and
animal carcasses deserves due weightage.
Efficacy of plans and
Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) are
tested and refined through training,
seminars and mock drills. The NDMA will assist the States/UTs in these areas
and will also conduct mock drills in different parts of the country. State and
District authorities will be encouraged to generate a culture of preparedness
and quick response.
The participation of
civil society stakeholders will be coordinated by the SDMAs and DDMAs. Civil
Defence, NCC, NYKS, NSS and local Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) will be encouraged to empower the community and generate
awareness through their respective institutional mechanisms. Efforts to promote
voluntary involvement will be actively encouraged.
The only actionable statement
regarding prevention is the following :
It is of utmost
importance that critical infrastructure like dams, roads, bridges, flyovers, railway
lines, power stations, water storage towers, irrigation canals, delta water
distribution networks, river and coastal
embankments, ports and other civic utilities are constantly monitored for
safety standards in consonance with worldwide safety benchmarks and
strengthened where deficient.
Other Examples of faff
Efforts should be
made for setting up IT infrastructures consisting of required IT processes,
architecture and skills for quick upgradation and updation of data sets
from the PRIs or the
ULBs. A National Emergency Communication Network, involving contemporary space
and terrestrial-based technologies in a highly synergistic configuration and
with considerable redundancy, will be developed.
I, therefore, enjoin upon the Central
Government and State Governments to begin by
renaming these bodies and then, in consonance with the spirit of a Disaster Prevention Authority’s mandate,
rewrite its objectives and change its focus from work based post-disaster
to continuous vigilance, pre-disaster.
Another article on NDMA :
