Articles
The Beginning of a ‘New Era’ of War – Challenges to Global Security
September 24, 2024
Women’s Safety in Hospitals – Are the Recent Government Advisories Truly Progressive?
September 25, 2024Wayanad: Decentralisation in Disaster Management
A drone view shows a landslide site after multiple landslides in the hills in Wayanad district, in the southern state of Kerala, India, July 31, 2024. REUTERS/Francis Mascarenhas (REUTERS)
The news and the images from the landslides in Wayanad district in Kerala depicting horrific losses prompt us to revisit the disaster management and governance of areas vulnerable to natural disasters.
The realpolitik of the times has led to a contestation about information shared and interpreted at various levels of governance and administration, and how affected communities received them. It is rather strange to get into such an animated discussion after a disaster, at the cost of loss incurred already.
Like many other states, Kerala faces immense threat due to climate crisis-induced disasters, and many areas are identified as vulnerable. The 14th State Plan based on the working group report on disaster management mentions, “Scientific analysis has also brought out that there is a knowledge gap, a lack of disaster risk awareness, and a lack of scientific mitigation measures”. Let us have a look at how decentralisation can mitigate the risk of these inherent limitations, along with improving our disaster management planning, preparedness, and rehabilitation.
It goes without saying that in India, we follow centralised information dissemination rather than a decentralised, shared approach at the local level. The role of local self-governments is often neglected or ignored in information dissemination exercises and the need for strengthening such institutions is met with a lack of interest in transferring resources and power from the state to the local governments.
The rescue, relief, and rehabilitation work demands huge resource mobilisation and spending. The resources are often collected at the centralised level, and it ignores the beneficiaries and the governance system at the local level. This leads to accusations and complaints about how the money is being spent, as such an arrangement often ignores the requirements and demands of the affected communities.
Planning to restore the livelihoods and the social security of the affected communities in the medium term, and infrastructure development in the long term is overlooked by the instant political promises.
In a centralised planning system, the decisions are imposed and the beneficiaries lack ownership and control over them. This framework needs an urgent revisit as the collected resources should be in a joint account of the state and the local governments of the affected areas to ensure accountability, and the ownership of the post-relief works.
The local governments at the district, block and the local levels needs to be considered and any taskforce for the planning, rehabilitation and restoration shall be comprised of their representatives. Affected communities shall be given community health insurance plans, in case it was absent previously in a mapped disaster vulnerable area, for a reasonable period. The premium could be paid by the state. It helps them to seek medical assistance and treatment anywhere in the state.
Students shall be provided with educational scholarships till they complete higher education. The resource mobilisation of the scale helps the beneficiary to receive a sizable direct cash transfer if one demands it. The dialogue between the community and the state is very important in any future planning and it helps in better policy perspectives and prescriptions.
Science, technology and innovation play a crucial role in the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030.
The framework highlights the role of local governments in effective preparedness to the rehabilitation stages. Audit of the local institutions about their resources available, the capacities and the data management skills shall be the routine protocols in the vulnerable areas. Proactive drills and demos are part of the systemic design to mitigate the risks, while at the same time skilling the local population.
It is worth exploring any of the District Planning Committee (DPC) medium-term plans for disaster management. Global experience is that resilient cities are more attractive to investors and businesses, fostering economic growth and stability. The challenge is for governance in rural areas to be given resources and power to build resilient and empowered structures and strategies to face disasters in the future, without any impositions or centralised planning.
The local governments in the areas vulnerable to natural disasters need to be set up with the local disaster management units (LDMUs). These LDMUs, shall be branched out from the national and state level, and shall do the local mapping of the disaster-prone areas and identify the dissemination techniques suitable for their areas. The LDMUs shall be responsible for data collection, and information sharing in a scientific manner. They shall follow protocols such as objectivity, neutrality and collectivity to inform and incentivise the local communities and individuals in their decision making about their safety and the future.
This article was first published in Hindustan Times.
D Dhanuraj is the Chairman of Centre for Public Policy Research (CPPR). Ananthitha Anandan is the General Manager at Ultra-Tech Environmental Consultancy & Laboratory, Kochi.
Views expressed by the authors are personal and need not reflect or represent the views of the Centre for Public Policy Research.
Dr Dhanuraj is the Chairman of CPPR. His core areas of expertise are in international relations, urbanisation, urban transport & infrastructure, education, health, livelihood, law, and election analysis. He can be contacted by email at [email protected] or on Twitter @dhanuraj.
