Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 150
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 151
 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]
Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]
LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Disaster management authority a disaster?-Sreelatha Menon

Disaster management authority a disaster?-Sreelatha Menon

Share this article Share this article
published Published on Jul 21, 2013   modified Modified on Jul 21, 2013
-The Business Standard


The Uttarakhand floods have put the spotlight on the competence of the national body which was created with a vision 'to build a safer and disaster-resilient India'

When thousands got swept away by floods in Uttarakhand on the night of June 16, little help reached the mountains till at least a day had passed. Though the weather department had issued a warning, the magnitude of the disaster shows that neither was it heeded nor was any effort made to prepare for a calamity that ought to have been anticipated.

The catastrophe from which the flood-hit areas of Uttarakhand could take years to recover has put the role of the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) under sharp scrutiny. The effectiveness, if not the relevance, of the body which is headed by the country's executive head, the prime minister, is being questioned.

NDMA, which is headquartered in south Delhi's upscale Safdarjung Enclave, states that its vision is "to build a safer and disaster-resilient India by developing a holistic, pro-active, multi-disaster and technology-driven strategy for disaster management..." This vision was far from visible when the waters came cascading down the slopes in Uttarakhand.

Ask NDMA Vice-Chairman Shashidhar Reddy, who is equal to a cabinet minister in status, and he says that his office received information of the disaster 30 minutes after the floods had caused havoc in the upper regions of Uttarakhand. A rescue team, he says, left immediately by road to reach Dehradun by morning. That it would be stranded for two days, with most reads blocked, is a fact that the team realised only after it reached there. But then rescue is not the core function of NDMA. In Uttarakhand, that task was taken over by the Indian Air Force which airlifted hundreds of victims to safety. But, preparedness and coordination is NDMA's job, agrees Reddy. Even so, a day later when floods hit Srinagar, there was no alert for the people there.

The Disaster Management Act of 2005, which led to the creation of NDMA in September 2006, states that the authority's responsibilities include "laying down the policies, plans and guidelines for disaster management for ensuring timely and effective response to disaster." NDMA can also issue directions to state or district disaster management authorities. While Uttarakhand has a state disaster management authority, which is headed by its chief minister, it has none at the district level. All states and districts are supposed to have disaster management authorities, but so far only 11 states set them up. And most districts, except for those in Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Assam and Gujarat, don't have them.


* * *

In Uttarakhand, the guidelines for the state's disaster management authority are relief-centric. They mention nothing on what needs to be done in terms of preparedness. There is no guideline on how buildings should be constructed in flood-prone regions or a map of safe zones where people can head to. While NDMA does have guidelines for floods, these, too, are silent on where people in a flood-hit area should go for safety. There is also no mention of how weather warnings can be conveyed to people in sensitive areas at the earliest and without creating a panic.

NDMA members admit that there was no system in place to warn people and stop the pilgrims from heading to unsafe areas, or even to shift them to safe places. "There were no helipads. There was no arrangement to secure some telecom lines in disaster-prone places," says T Nanda Kumar, a member who specialises in drought management. "We, and the states, have to create or identify the safe zones. If we warn people (about an impending flood), they might just go back to their hotels which could also get washed away," he says.

Of NDMA's act of omission in Uttarakhand, Reddy says, "The disaster was a great learning experience. With every disaster, we learn more." But then, only a year ago, in 2012, flash floods had washed away buildings in Uttarkashi, but few lessons seem to have been learnt from that incident, say environmentalist. Not once has the Uttarakhand state disaster management authority met since it was set up in 2007. According to the Disaster Management Act, NDMA can issue directions to the state government on what the state authority needs to do. But Reddy says he cannot interfere in state issues as that would disturb the federal structure. "Compare this with Japan, where the world's greatest nuclear disaster took place. They decided not to have any more nuclear reactors in coastal areas," says Himanshu Thakkar, coordinator of South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers & People, an environment think tank.

The list of things NDMA could have done but did not do is long. The authority has failed to get states to prepare for calamities they might be vulnerable to. Nothing on its website indicates the risks for states. NDMA has not mapped the flood-prone areas or the safe zones, though it has spent Rs 1,300 crore in the six years that it has been in existence. In this respect, other agencies too are to blame. NDMA has no means of forecasting floods. It can only broadcast what the Central Water Commission forecasts. But CWC has no forecasting station in Uttarakhand, though it has one in Srinagar. And it did not make any forecast about the Uttarakhand floods. CWC said that the rivers flow very fast and forecasts can only be made a few hours in advance.

"Though NDMA has a big role to play, it has failed significantly,'' says Thakkar. He blames the lack of coordination between the ministry of earth sciences, state governments and NDMA for this. Take the example of Uttarakhand. Funds were sanctioned in 2008 for the state to install Doppler radars, but this has not been done. A Doppler radar detects precipitation intensity, wind direction and speed, and can help in early forecast of severe storms and heavy rainfall. This can help in issuing advance and accurate weather warnings. An NDMA member blames the ministry of earth sciences for not setting up Doppler radars in Uttarakhand, but does not say if NDMA pushed for it. Rather than raise an alarm, NDMA also kept silent when hydropower plants were being sanctioned in the state. As power plants came up, millions of cubic tonnes of muck were deposited in the rivers which added to the force of the disaster.

There are also no standard operating procedures on how various departments should react in the event of an earthquake or flood. Asked about these failings, Reddy says that workshops were held in various states, but there was a lack of interest. "Ministries don't listen to NDMA as it has no teeth," says an insider. "We don't require teeth," says Reddy, blaming the apathy of the states and the bureaucracy. "I have met bureaucrats who don't want to talk of prevention. They want to wait for disaster," he says.


* * *

Last year, the home ministry set up a committee to review the Disaster Management Act of 2005 with an ex-member as its chairman. The committee reported that NDMA should be pruned and only five of its nine members should be retained. The five-year tenure of these members, it added, should be not extended. Currently, the vice-chairman is in his third tenure as member, while some other members are into their second tenure.

No specific qualification is needed to become a member nor is there a selection procedure. Critics within NDMA say that if members are to be effective, only those with administrative experience or with experience in a disaster situation, as superintendent of police, district magistrate or collector, should qualify. Despite the criticism, most members have rich experience backing them: B Bhattacharjee is a former director of Bhabha Atomic Research Centre with expertise in nuclear energy related issues; JK Sinha is a IPS officer; KM Singh retired as director general in the Central Reserve Police Force; Major General J K Bansal (retd) served in the Army Medical Corps and pioneered the Radiation Disaster Medical Management Centre; T Nanda Kumar is an administrative officer with experience in drought management; Muzaffar Ahmed is a health expert; Harsh K Gupta specialises in seismology; and V K Duggal is a former Union home secretary.

NDMA clearly does not lack experience. But this doesn't help when its national executive committee, which is chaired by the home secretary and is supposed to evaluate the work done by NDMA and the states, does not meet to discuss the issues. In its report tabled this April, the Comptroller and Auditor General had slammed NDMA saying: "The NDMA which was conceived as the apex planning and supervising body was found ineffective in its functioning in most of the core areas. It neither had information and control over the progress of work at the state level nor was it successful in implementation of projects. Coordination between NDMA and nodal ministries for various disasters need to be improved..." It further said that the national executive committee has not met since 2008, thus affecting evaluation of disaster preparedness.

While NDMA has been inviting flak from various quarters, the National Disaster Response Force (NDRF), its disaster response arm, has been more visible. NDRF was seen in action in Bihar during the floods in 2008, in Sikkim during the earthquake in 2011 and now in Uttarakhand. But even NDRF has been criticised for lacking infrastructure and preparedness. In Sikkim, the force landed without any arrangement for food and tents for its personnel, creating confusion.

Though NDMA's record of coordination leaves much to be desired, last year NDRF did try to form a national grid with the 10-lakh strong Civil Defence and Home Guard - the civilian paramilitary arms of the Indian police. The idea was to have a large peace force of volunteers trained to cope with disaster.

Reddy, meanwhile, vehemently defends NDMA. "What is wrong is the attitude of the people who think that disaster is all about rescue and not preparedness. If states, districts, and various ministries understand that disaster preparedness and planning can reduce damage, we would be able to function," he says. "We were set up for a paradigm shift in thinking," which, he admits, has not happened.

Ask him about NDMA's targets and deadlines for this year and Reddy says there are no targets as such. "We want to look at crowd management." As for plans for hill stations and tourist spots in mountains where similar incidents could take place, he says there are none.

On whether NDMA should be held accountable for the damage and the delayed rescue, he asks: "Accountable for what?" Reddy reiterates that states have all the power and NDMA can only coordinate with them. NDMA, he says, cannot force states to do anything. It can only create model guidelines. NDMA has drawn guidelines on 18 different types of disaster, including floods and landslides. But these have not inspired states to give area-specific action plans for disaster management. As CAG points out, there were no provisions to make the national guidelines binding on states.

A member of NDMA candidly admits: "We need to change or we will remain ineffectual."

The Business Standard, 20 July, 2013, http://www.business-standard.com/article/economy-policy/disaster-management-authority-a-disaster-113072000633_1.html


Related Articles

 

Write Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Video Archives

Archives

Im4Change.org हिंदी वेबसाइट का परिचय. Short Video on im4change.org...

Im4Change.org हिंदी वेबसाइट का परिचय. Short Video on im4change.org...

"Session 1: Scope of IDEA and AgriStack" in Exploring...

"Session 2: Farmer Centric Digitalisation in Agriculture" in Exploring...

"Session 3: Future of Digitalisation in Agriculture" in Exploring...

Objectives | About Us | Workshops | Disclaimer
share on Facebook
Twitter
RSS
Feedback
Read Later

Contact Form

Please enter security code
      Close