Disaster Management

Disaster Management

What is Hazard?

National Disaster Management Plan (NDMP), 2016 defines hazard as “a dangerous phenomenon, substance, human activity or conditions that may cause loss of life, injury to health, property, loss of livelihood and services, social and economic disruptions or environmental damage”.

India due to its unique physiographic and climatic conditions is one of the most disaster-prone areas of the World. Eg- 59% of landmass is prone to moderate to high intensity earthquakes, 12% of land is prone to floods and river erosion, 5700 kms out of 7500 kms of coastline prone to cyclone and tsunamis, nearly 68% of cultivable area vulnerable to drought huge threat of landslides and snow avalanches in hilly areas (NDMP, 2016). Thus, NDMP talks of multi-hazard vulnerability (Natural and Human-induced) of India.

What is Vulnerability and Why India is highly vulnerable?

Vulnerability is the characteristic and circumstances of a community, system or assets that make it susceptible to ill-effects of the Hazard. Vulnerability is a multi-dimensional concept it includes:

1. Socio-Economic vulnerability: Due to lack of social capital or wide prevalent poverty. E.g- 21% of India falls under BPL category and as per Economic Survey 2016-17 there is less expenditure in India in poorer areas.
2. Ecological: Imbalance and disturbance in environment. Eg- Amazon Wild Fire has threatened biodiversity and whole ecosystem. In India land use change (deforestation, industrialization) has decreased the average farmland size threatening food security in future.
3. Organizational: Poor capacity and infrastructure to face hazard. Eg- Chennai flood saw agencies cut-off from each other due to lack of satellite phones.
4. Educational: Awareness about impending hazard and response to it lacking in society. Ex- Lack of preparedness in India as hazard and disaster are considered god made
5. Cultural: Vulnerability due to faith or cultural practices. Eg- Religious congregation during Covid-19 pandemic.
6. Physical: Weak infrastructure (Ex- building) and residences. Eg- Over-populated India with 2.4% land surface catering to 17% of population of world created shortfalls in physical infrastructure creation
7. Political: Marginalized and impacted section not properly represented. Eg- tribals in India are 8% of population and consists of 40% of displaced population (XAXA committee).

What is Risk from hazards?

As per NDMP, Risk is the probability of an event (hazard) and its negative consequences.

Risk = (Hazard * Vulnerability)/Capacity

What turns hazard into disaster?

It is said that there is natural hazard and not natural disasters. Disasters happens when a hazard overwhelms the coping capacity of the community. Hence, the disaster and its extent are actually determined by the vulnerability of the community to hazard. Generally, this vulnerability is not natural, rather it is different dimensions induced by human during its growth model, population growth etc. This role of human is the determinant of disaster resulting from hazard.

United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR) says that disaster is a result of exposure to hazards combined with the vulnerability at the time amidst overwhelmed capacity to tackle its negative consequences or Risks.

NDMP, 2016 defines disaster as the serious disruption of the functioning of community or a society involving widespread human, material, economic or environmental losses or impacts, which exceed the ability of the impacted community to cope using its own resources.

United Nations (UN) defines it as the occurrence of a sudden or major misfortune which disrupts the basic fabric and normal functioning of the society or community.

What causes disasters?

Disasters in nature are in way tool to balance the environment through disruptions. But, the human activities like urbanization, industrialization, deforestation, emission of Green House Gases, increased population density around industrialization, lack of awareness among general public has increased the frequency of disasters.

Categories of Disasters as per NDMP, 2016

Each Disaster is unique due to:

1. Local socio-economic factor: High intensity earthquakes in Japan today leads to less loss compared to medium intensity earthquake in India due to poverty, high population density or lack of preparedness of society.
2. Social Response it generates: social response to each disaster from Uttarakhand flood to Chennai flood differs based on capacity, cultural practices and community participation.
3. Way social group negotiates: Equitable society lessen vulnerability, but, when some marginalized sections who don’t have representation or say in negotiation then disaster result is even worsened.
4. Scale of damage: It varies from place to place and hazard to hazard along with capacity to handle it.

What is Disaster Management (DM)?

NDMP, 2016 uses the term DM in similar terms as used in Disaster Management Act 2005 and defines it as:

“A continuous and integrated process of planning, organizing, coordinating and implementing measures which are necessary or expedient” for the following: 1) Prevention of danger or threat of any disaster, 2) Mitigation or reduction of risk of any disaster or its severity or consequences, 3) Capacity-building, 4) Preparedness to deal with any disaster, 5) Prompt response to any threatening disaster situation or disaster, 6) Assessing the severity or magnitude of effects of any disaster 7) Evacuation, rescue and relief, and 8) Rehabilitation and reconstruction.”

Or a simple definition can be: DM is the management of all aspects of emergencies emerging out of a disaster with focus on preparedness, response and recovery to lessen its impact and build back better for future.

Disaster Management Cycle or stages of DM:

1. Preparedness: Plan, educate, skill and capacity developed by the government, professionals, people, organizations etc. for events that can’t be prevented.
2. Mitigation: It includes prevention (outright avoidance of adverse impact. Ex- prevent deforestation, overcrowding, large congregation during epidemic etc.) andRisk Reduction (Eg- “Do GajkiDuri” (physical distancing during COVID-19), Watershed Management, restore water channels etc.)
3. Response: Provision of public services and assistance immediately after or during disaster. Eg- Food packets, Evacuation, Shelter etc.
4. Recovery: making communities resilient after a disaster by alternative and sustainable livelihood, better infrastructure, capacity building etc.

Disaster Management Policy or approach in India:

1. Traditional approach: It is a post-disaster approach which is relief centric i.e. Evacuation, shelter, food etc. India before coming of Disaster Management, Act, 2005 followed this approach.
2. Progressive approach: Focus on pre-disaster as well as post-disaster cycle. Risk Reduction and a developmental approach as part of overall DM. Focus is on assessing hazard, vulnerabilities and capacity to understand risk better. Based on risk understanding capacity, coping mechanism, local solution and response mechanism has to be led down. Post-DM, Act 2005 India started moving on Progressive approach and saw disaster management as part of development plans
3. Expansion-Contraction approach: Under expansion the capacity, early warning, assessment etc. capacity has to be boosted during quiet pre-disaster phase. Post-disaster is contraction phase for response, recovery and strategies for Build Back Better.

Post-Sendai framework and NDMP, 2016 India has started DM policy third phase with better understanding of Risk, approaches for Risk reduction and finally Building Back Better post-response.

Evolution of DM framework in India:

• Initially “Disaster Management” was not found in any of the subject mentioned in the Constitution and came under residuary power.
• But, on the ground the state has been always been the first responder.
• Before 2002, DM was under the Agriculture Ministry. J C Pant Committee suggested to insert the disaster-related aspects in one of the lists. NCRWC 2^nd ARC suggested it to be included in concurrent list.
• After 1990s was adopted as the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR) permanent DM cell created under Agriculture ministry.
• High Powered Committee on DM in 1999 recommended strong DM mechanisms at the national, state and the district level. Its recommendation also led to adopting the Disaster Management Act,2005.
• The DM act, 2005 institutionalized the institutional framework for Disaster Management in India. It created world’s first specialized Disaster Response Force in form of NDRF (at state level created SDRF).

DM institutional framework at National and state level:

1. National Level: As per the DM Act, 2005 overall coordination of DM is with the Ministry of Home Affairs. CCS and NCMC are key decision-makers in regard to DM. The NDMA with the PM as chairperson is the apex agency which deals with the national disaster Management Plan and the execution of the DM functions at the national level. 

Under NDMA functions NIDM (Concerned with human research development and capacity building in DM, carrying out research activities, assist in policy formulation) and NDRF (Provide assistance to the relevant State Government/District Administration in the event of an imminent hazard event or in its aftermath).

National Executive Committee (NEC) under the chairmanship of the Union Home secretary assists the NDMA in its functions, deals with the national plans and implements national policies. Armed forces and CAPFs also functions as responder to disasters under the direction of NEC.

2. State Level: The DM Act 2005 mandated institutional framework in each state with the SDMA (CM as the chairperson) as the apex authority. Similar to the NEC at the national level there is State Executive Committee (SEC) for implementation of plan and policies. Each state under the act must have own State Disaster Response Force for responding to disasters.
3. District Level: At the district level there will be DDMA (District Disaster Management Authority) headed by the District Collector. The DDMA will act as the planning, coordinating and implementing body for DM at the District level and take all necessary actions as per the guidelines of SDMA and NDMA. It will prepare DM plan at district level and see implementation of all plans at the ground level.

National Policy on Disaster Management, 2009

• Vision: It seeks to build a safe and disaster resilient India through a holistic, pro-active, multi-disaster oriented and technology driven strategy through a culture of prevention, mitigation, preparedness and response.
• Pre and Post disaster processes:

• Five pillar themes of policy:

1. 1. Community based DM with last mile integration of policy, plan and execution.
   2. Capacity development in all spheres
   3. Consolidating lesson learnt from past and best practices
   4. Cooperation with agencies at national and international levels
   5. Multi-sectoral synergy

• Integrated approach for the DM with the focus on building strategic partnerships at different levels and 24*7 monitoring of critical infrastructures like DAM, power grid, embankments, port etc.
• Assigns primary responsibility of DM to the states aided by the national, state and district level bodies as provide in the DM act, 2005.
• DM to be mainstreamed in development process and National Disaster Mitigation Fund may be created especially for mitigation purposes. Mitigation based on technology, traditional wisdom and environmental sustainability.
• Responsive, failsafe and accurate forecasting and early warning.
• Reconstruction and recovery, capacity development, knowledge management and research and development in the area through institutional and funding support.
• Awareness through media and increasing capacity of people according to type of threats.
• Focus on rehabilitation and recovery moving away from rescue and response.
• State police force and Fire service to be trained and upgraded for disasters as they are the crucial immediate responder.
• Train and utilize National Cadet Corps (NCC), National Service Scheme to develop community-based initiatives.
• Mandate of civil defense and home guards to be amended to include DM.
• Focus on international cooperation as disaster does not recognize national boundaries.
• Techno-Finance regime (as government assistance may not be enough): Catastrophic risk financing, risk insurance, catastrophe bonds, micro-finance and insurance etc. will be promoted with innovative fiscal incentives. Environmental Relief Fund under Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991 for chemical accident victim is worth following in other disasters.
• Geographic Information System-based central database for emergency management.

International efforts to address Disasters:

1. International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR) (1990-2010): Aimed at comprehensive assessment of Risks from hazard taking into account impact on development plans. Mitigation plans at all level of governance and ready access to local, national and global Early Warning System.
2. Yokohoma Strategy (1994): 1^st time all stages of DM included in DM practices preparedness, prevention, mitigation and response was included. It also started talk on Risk reduction, technology transfer and environment protection with the primary responsibility to protect on countries.
3. International Strategy Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) (2000-2015): Create a resilient framework through Risk-Management, hazard mitigation and sustainable development (1^st time talk of sustainable development).
4. Hyogo framework for action for a Safer World (2005-15): 1^st plan to explain, describe and detail the work required from different stakeholders from bottom to the top. DRR to become national and local priority with strong local institutions. Monitor and Early Warning System along with use of knowledge & innovation for Culture of safety.

Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR): 2015-2030

It was the first major international agreement post-2015 and is next step from Hyogo Framework (2005-15) for concrete steps for protecting development gains from disasters. It talks of 4 priorities for actions and 7 global targets.

National Disaster Management Plan, 2016

It aimed at conforming to the Sendai framework priorities and goals. It seeks to achieve all the four priority actions of Sendai framework for each hazard.

• It includes all phases of DM: Preparedness, prevention, mitigation, response and recovery
• Roles and responsibilities of each and every level from National to panchayat and urban local bodies w.r.t DM.
• Approach is guided by National Policy on DM, 2009 and seeks to convert adversity into oppurtunity by providing for majors at each stage in short-term, mid-term or long-term. It mainstreams DM in to development perspective. Ex- For recovery it gives early response (cash for work, resumption of markets etc.), Mid-term (Recovery plans for assets and livelihoods), Long-term (infrastructure development, DM merged into development plan).
• Regional approach with plans for specific disasters and community role in focus along with the capacity building from national level down to community.
• Standard Operating Procedures and upgrading major activities such as early warning, information dissemination, medical care, fuel, transportation, search and rescue, evacuation, etc.
• Greater need for IEC activities to prepare communities to cope with the disaster.
• Lists down 18 major activities as ready guides in case of disaster response (Ex- Search and rescue of people and animals, Medical Care, Power etc.)
• Promoting Quality Standards, Certifications, and Awards for Disaster Risk Management, Grievance redressal mechanism, work with elected representatives etc. to improve Disaster Risk Governance

Challenges and issues with the Disaster Management Framework in India

CAG observations w.r.t DM in India:

• Hardly few major project of NDMA completed.
• National Disaster Mitigation Fund not created in spite provision in the DM act 2005.
• No provision to make plans (Ex- NDMP, 2016) and guidelines binding has seen poor implementation by the states.
• 4,862 large dams across India were ordered to prepare detailed disaster management plans. Of the 349 dams CAG surveyed, only 40, or 7 percent of the dams, had such a plan in place. Only one had rehearsed the mandatory emergency drill. This was pointed out by the CAG as one of the causes of Kerala flood disasters in 2018.
• Communication system, satellites phones not developed as per standard (As evident in Chennai flood).
• National Disaster Response Force (NDRF) has shortage of man-power, infrastructure and equipment. Even SOPs for NDRF deployment is not finalized.

P.K. Mishra Committee to review DM Act, 2005 observations:

• Overlapping authorities under the Act (NEC, NDMA, CCA etc.) are not conducive for carrying out activities Act is mandated to perform.
• Overall, the act is heavily dependent on ground-level functionaries. But currently they are not administratively, financially or politically empowered to initiate quick actions which eats away precious time.
• The appointment process of NDMA members is not transparent currently.
• NDRF lacks strength as well as fund and technical support.

Other issues:

• On ground progressive approach is still not followed as there is no separate provision of the mitigation fund.
• Resource Coordination Network (India Disaster Resource Network, India Disaster Knowledge Network, National Disaster Communication Network- NDCN etc.), though provided for is still not functioning efficiently. Ex- Evident in NDRF forces cut-off from other forces during Chennai flood.

Way ahead to strengthen Disaster Management:

1. Governance reform: As recommended by P K Mishra committee the overlapping bodies should be abolished, for example NEC (National Executive Committee).
2. Finance: As CAG, Finance Commission said there is urgent need to create National Disaster Management Fund. Also, at ground level there has to be financially empowered district agencies to react to disasters.
3. Specialized Forces: NDRF has been doing exceptional work (Japan called it in 2011 for response to Tsunami). Yet, any disaster army has to be called upon today. There is need to add more battalion of forces under NDRF and SDRF.
4. Early Warning system: India is already ahead on this through INCOIS providing Tsunami and waves data, Radio Sonde Stations for Cyclones etc. But there is need to develop exchange of information in Indian Ocean region as well with its neighbors on land for accurate and timely warning.
5. Binding NDMP: As CAG noted it is not binding and is seen in lackluster response by agencies and states. Thus, these have to be given legal sanction under the authority of State Disaster Management Authority.
6. Preparedness and Prevention: Cutting down on deforestation, capacity building of people in sensitive areas (Ex- Coastal, Hilly) along with land development strategy through watershed development is needed.
7. Sustainable development: Kerala flood highlighted gap in aims through policy, plans and actual actions as land encroachment continued leading to a big disaster. Hence, sustainable development has to be made a reality as per SDG commitments and monitoring by Niti Aayog.
8. National Disaster Communication Network to be deployed at earliest as recommended by CAG after Kashmir flood crisis in 2014. It was said by CAG that the satellite phones were not available at the district centers.

Miscellaneous (Source: 2^nd ARC)

1. DM and Sustainable Development: As per International Strategy for Disaster Reduction 2004, there is no way we can eliminate natural hazards. But we can eliminate those we cause, minimize we exacerbate, and reduce our vulnerability to the most.

To achieve this, we need healthy and resilient communities and   ecosystems. Seen in this light disaster mitigation is clearly part of a strategy for sustainable development. By this communities and nation will be socially, economically and ecologically sustainable.

2. Gender issues and Disaster: Generally, women are more in casualties as a result of disaster worldwide. Oxfam report on Tsunami’s impact in Nagapattinam village says that 2406 women died compared to 1883 men.
   • Main reason is staying back in villages or coastal areas to look after family.
   • Women limited to homes leads to lesser life skills in case of disasters compared to men. Ex- Oxfam report on Tsunami impact on Tamil Nadu villages says that men can more often swim or climb trees then women. This was seen in high number of deaths of women in coastal villages.
   • Lesser professional skills also are a big hurdle for women in recovery and rebuild stages.
   • Women face reproductive health problem which is specific to them.
   • Women have lesser access to resources or are economically not empowered this impacts their self confidence which is needed during disasters.
   • Victim of violence in post-disaster scenario.

Disaster Management Act, 2005

The nationwide lockdown imposed to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, the orders were issued under the Disaster Management Act, 2005,invoked for the first time in the country since the legislation was drafted after the tsunami in 2004.

• The stated object and purpose of the DM Act is to manage disasters, including preparation of mitigation strategies, capacity-building and more. It came into force in India in 2006.
• The Act provides for “the effective management of disasters and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.”
• It calls for the establishment of National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA), with the Prime Minister of India as chairperson.
• The Act enjoins the Central Government to Constitute a National Executive Committee (NEC) to assist the National Authority. All State Governments are mandated to establish a State Disaster Management Authority (SDMA).

Powers given to the Centre:

• Power bestowed by DM Act on Central Government and NDMA are extensive.
• The Central Government, irrespective of any law in force (including overriding powers) can issue any directions to any authority anywhere in India to facilitate or assist in the disaster management.
• Importantly, any such directions issued by the Central Government and NDMA must necessarily be followed by the Union Ministries, State Governments and State Disaster Management Authorities.
• In order to achieve all these, the prime minister can exercise all powers of NDMA (S 6(3)). This ensures that there is adequate political and constitutional heft behind the decisions made.

Legal problems in using Disaster Management Act for pandemic

• The definition of ‘disaster’ under the Act is quite broad and, literally speaking, would include a pandemic too.
• Such a reading of the Act would vest the Central government with powers to issue directions and guidelines to State governments for dealing with the pandemic in their States. However, ‘public health and sanitation’ is a specific field of legislation under Entry 6 of List II.
• Thus, the Centre’s guidelines and directions to the States for dealing with the pandemic trench upon a field of legislation and executive action that is exclusively assigned to the States — public health.
• The Supreme Court has held time and again that federalism is a basic feature of the Constitution and the States are sovereign.
• Also, under Entry 29 of List III, both Parliament and State legislatures are competent to legislate on matters involving inter-State spread of contagious or infectious diseases.
• ‘Prevention of inter-State spread of contagious and infectious diseases’ being a specific legislative head provided in List III, the same must be deemed to have been excluded from Parliament’s residuary legislative powers.
• Therefore, the Disaster Management Act, which has been enacted under Parliament’s residuary legislative powers, cannot be applied to the prevention of the inter-State spread of contagious and infectious diseases.

Way Forward

Undoubtedly, India’s large population poses an administrative challenge in dealing with any disasters, especially a pandemic such as COVID-19. However, overall management can be strengthened through three possible ways.

Firstly, biological disaster of a national magnitude necessitates a close administrative and political coordination, led by Centre and followed by State governments, Disaster Management Authorities, and other stakeholders.

Secondly, success of effective implementation of the national and state decisions under the DM Act is dependent on its ground level implementation; district administration and local self-government institutions remain the best bet.

Third and finally, in times such as these, constitutional courts must play its role. Having assumed the role of sentinel on the qui vive (State of Madras v. V G Row, 1952), it is obligatory on all the constitutional courts in the country to suomotu register PILs and closely monitor the implementation of DM Act, ensure rule of law and protection of human rights as guaranteed under the Constitution of India.

Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897

Context: The COVID-19 pandemic leads one to examine India’s legal regime on epidemics.

The Union government directed States and Union Territories to invoke the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897 within their jurisdiction to fight the Covid-19 outbreak. The nationwide lockdown was imposed as a combative strategy regulated by guidelines under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 (DMA) and disaster’. TheEpidemic Diseases Act aims to provide for the better prevention of the spread of dangerous epidemic diseases.

The colonial-era Act empowers the state governments to take special measures and prescribe regulations in an epidemic. It also defines penalties for disobedience of these regulations, and provides for immunity for actions taken under the Act “in good faith”.

The Epidemic Diseases Act (EDA) was enacted by the colonial government in India to curb the spread of the bubonic plague in erstwhile Bombay.

Provisions of the 1897 Epidemic Diseases Act:

• The Act, which consists of four sections, aims to provide “for the better prevention of the spread of Dangerous Epidemic Diseases.”
• Section 2 empowers state governments/UTs to take special measures and formulate regulations for containing the outbreak.
• The state may determine in what manner and by whom any expenses incurred (including compensation if any) shall be defrayed.
• It also provides penalties for disobeying any regulation or order made under the Act. 
• It also gives legal protection to the implementing officers acting under the Act.

Limitations

There are major shortcoming in the Act. These are:

1. It does not provide any clear definition of ‘dangerous epidemic diseases’. The identification of a disease to be classified as an epidemic should be based on scientific analysis of the magnitude of the impact of the disease, affected population and the possibility of international spread.
2. The distinction between ‘isolation’ and ‘quarantine’ is blurred. According to David Arnold the Act is one of the most draconian pieces of sanitary legislation ever adopted in colonial India.Using powers conferred by the Act, colonial authorities would search suspected plague cases in homes and among passengers, with forcible segregations, evacuations, and demolitions of infected places. In 1897, the year the law was enforced, freedom fighter Bal Gangadhar Tilak was punished with 18 months’ rigorous imprisonment after his newspapers Kesari and Mahratta admonished imperial authorities for their handling of the plague epidemic.
3. The Act historically failed to halt the spread of plague to other cities.
4. This act has major limitations in the changing public health scenario; it has become outdated now to deal with the challenges of modern-day realities

• It is not rights-based that’s why it is attracting whistleblowers from various sections of society.
• It laid stress on the powers of the government but not on the duties of the government.
• There is no mention of air travel. 

• The Epidemic Diseases Act fails to meet the objective of effective regulation and monitoring of reasonably imposed restrictions, as it neither sets out duties of the state nor guarantees rights to citizens during an epidemic.

Epidemic Diseases (Amendment) Bill, 2020 

• The bill amends the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897 to include protections for healthcare service personnel combating epidemic diseases and expands the powers of the Central Government to prevent the spread of such diseases.
• The bill intends to ensure that during any situation, there is zero-tolerance to any form of violence against healthcare personnel and damage to property.

Key features of the Bill include:

• The Bill defines healthcare service personnel as a person who is at risk of contracting the epidemic disease while carrying out duties related to the epidemic.  They include: (i) public and clinical healthcare providers such as doctors and nurses, (ii) any person empowered under the Act to take measures to prevent the outbreak of the disease, and (iii) other persons designated as such by the state government.
• An ‘act of violence’ includes any of the following acts committed against a healthcare service personnel: (i) harassment impacting living or working conditions, (ii) harm, injury, hurt, or danger to life, (iii) obstruction in discharge of his duties, and (iv) loss or damage to the property or documents of the healthcare service personnel.  Property is defined to include a: (i) clinical establishment, (ii) quarantine facility, (iii) mobile medical unit, and (iv) other property in which a healthcare service personnel has direct interest, in relation to the epidemic.
• If any damage is done to clinical establishments, quarantine and isolation facilities of patients, mobile medical units or any other property associated with healthcare personnel during a pandemic, penal provisions can be provoked.
• Penalty ranging from Rs 50,000 to Rs 2, 00,000 can be slapped on any individual who is involved in commission or abetment of such acts of violence. It can also be punishable in the form of an imprisonment for a term of three months to five years.

Conclusion

Today, we can reasonably presume that the Indian Government will take steps in regulating the spread of epidemics and will bring forth a comprehensive legislation which shall take into consideration the modern-day realities and control measures for the spread of such diseases.