CRISIS
MANAGEMENT - AN OVERVIEW
2.2
Types of Crises
Crises
can be classified into the following categories:
(i)
Crises caused by acts of nature. These can further be divided into the
following sub-categories:
a.
Climatic events: cyclones and storms (associated sea erosion), floods and
drought and
b.
Geological events: earthquakes, tsunamis, landslides and avalanches;
(ii)
Crises caused by environmental degradation and disturbance of the ecological
balance;
(iii)
Crises caused by accidents. These, again, can be further classified into:
industrial and nuclear mishaps and fire related accidents;
(iv)
Crises caused by biological activities: public health crises, epidemics etc;
(v)
Crises caused by hostile elements: war, terrorism, extremism, insurgency etc;
(vi)
Crises caused by disruption/failure of major infrastructure facilities
including communication systems, large-scale strikes etc; and
(vii)
Crises caused by large crowds getting out of control.
2.3
Scale of Crises
Depending
on its intensity and area of impact, a crisis situation may be labeled as
local, subdistrict, district, state or national level. State Governments and
their agencies, district officials and local governments have important roles
to play along with communities in crisis management.
The
scale of crisis determines the nature and level of response. The Union
Government has to step in for major disasters by way of providing financial,
material and human resources support.
Also,
in case of certain specific crisis situations, which affect the national
interest, a national level response is necessary. Such contingent situations
may be terrorist incidents like hijacking of an aircraft, suicidal attacks,
sabotage, attacks on important installations/buildings or community symbols;
hostage crisis; threat or actual use of nuclear/ chemical/biological weapons;
war or war-like situations; mutiny; migration/infiltration/; breakdown of
important services like Railways; chemical/biological disasters and those relating
to major mines-mishaps; oil spills; cyber terrorism etc.
2.4
Crisis Management
2.4.2
It is also necessary to recognize that often a crisis does not emerge suddenly;
it has a life cycle, which may take days, months or even decades to develop
depending on its causative factors. A crisis, therefore, needs to be examined
in terms of its management cycle that would enable us to anticipate the crisis,
prevent and mitigate it to the extent possible and deal with the crisis
situation as it emerges. This ‘life cycle’ of crisis management may
be
divided broadly in three phases - pre-crisis, during crisis and post crisis.
2.5
Phases of Crisis/Disaster Management
2.5.1
Pre-Crisis: Preparedness
2.5.1.1
This is the period when the potential hazard risk and vulnerabilities can be
assessed and steps taken for preventing and mitigating the crisis and preparing
for actual occurrence.
These
include long-term prevention measures like construction of embankments to
prevent flooding, creating or augmenting irrigation facilities and adopting
water shed management as drought proofing measures, increasing plantations for
reducing the occurrence of landslides, construction of earthquake resistant
structures and sound environment management.
Crisis
can also be mitigated through various short term measures, which either reduce
or modify the scale and intensity of the threat or improve the durability and
capacity of the elements at risk, for example, better enforcement of building
codes and zoning regulations, proper maintenance of drainage systems, better
awareness and public education to reduce the risks of hazards etc.
For
different types of disasters, mitigation measures may vary but what needs to be
emphasized is the priority and importance to be attached to various measures.
In order to do that, an appropriate legal and operational framework is
essential.
2.5.2
During Crisis - Emergency Response
2.5.2.1
When a crisis actually occurs, those affected by it require a speedy response
to alleviate and minimize suffering and losses. In this phase, certain ‘primary
activities’ become indispensable. These are, evacuation, search and rescue,
followed by provision of basic needs such as food, clothing, shelter, medicines
and other necessities
essential to bring the life of the affected community back to a degree of
normalcy.
2.5.3
Post-Crisis
1
Recovery : This is the stage when efforts are made to achieve early
recovery and reduce vulnerability and future risks. It comprises activities
that encompass two overlapping phases of rehabilitation and reconstruction.
2
Rehabilitation: Includes provision of temporary public
utilities and housing as interim measures to assist long term recovery.
3
Reconstruction: Includes construction of damaged
infrastructure and habitats and enabling sustainable livelihoods.
2.6
Elements of Crisis Management
These
three stages - preparedness and risk management, emergency response and
recovery and rehabilitation may be subdivided into various detailed activities
as presented in Fig 2.1.
Thus
a crisis management strategy should aim at:
i.
Creating appropriate legal and organizational framework;
ii.
Making government organizations, local bodies, communities/groups and
individuals at all levels aware of the risk of potential natural and man-made
hazards as well as their vulnerabilities;
iii.
Meticulous long and short term planning for crisis management, and effective
implementation of plans and enforcement measures;
iv.
Building resilience of the communities to face crises and ensuring their full
participation;
v.
Building and maintaining capabilities (human and institutional), infrastructure
and logistics; and
vi.
Developing and disseminating knowledge for effective crisis management.
Integration of traditional knowledge in crisis management efforts.
2.7
A Shift to Disaster Risk Reduction
1
Little attention was paid in the past to disaster risk reduction strategies
that have the potential to save thousands of lives by adoption of simple
preventive measures. Reviews of the global scenario carried out in the 1990s in
the wake of the “Yokohama Declaration” also brought home the fact that economic
losses caused by natural disasters were increasing. Lack of coherent disaster
reduction strategies and the absence of a ‘culture of prevention’ were
identified as the major causes for this disturbing phenomenon3.
2
Disaster risk reduction (disaster reduction) has been defined as the
‘systematic development and application of policies, strategies and practices
to minimise vulnerabilities, hazards and the unfolding of disaster impacts
throughout a society, in the broad context of sustainable development’.
Disaster
reduction strategies include appraisal of likelihood and intensity of hazards
and analysis of vulnerabilities thereto of the community. Building of
institutional capabilities and community preparedness is the next step.
Crucial
to all these efforts, however, is the existence of a ‘safety culture’ in
societies. Inputs like education,
training
and capacity building play a very significant role. It needs to be understood
that such preparedness can not be a ‘one time’ effort, but is a continuous
process.
3
Knowledge plays an important role in disaster reduction. The traditional
knowledge available with the communitity has to be used along with knowledge
acquired through research and past experiences.
4
Risk (in the context of disaster) is defined as the probability of harmful
consequences or expected losses (deaths, injuries, property, livelihoods,
economic activity disrupted or environment damaged) resulting from interactions
between natural or human-induced hazards and vulnerable conditions.5 Thus
‘risk’ depends on the nature and intensity of the hazard on the one hand and
the vulnerability of the community on the other.
2.8
Disaster Risk Reduction Framework
The
disaster risk reduction framework is composed of the following fields of
action:6
1
Policy towards Risk Management
A
policy framework has to be drawn up backed by the requisite legal and
institutional mechanism that focuses on risk reduction as the major priority in
disaster management.
2
Assessment of Risk including Hazard Analysis and Vulnerability
Risk
assessment is done based on the assessment of hazards and the resilience of the
community. The likely intensity, location, frequency and past experience would
determine the magnitude and impact of a likely hazard. A social, cultural,
political and economic and technological assessment of the community would
indicate its vulnerability. The two
combined together would give an indication of the risk.
3
Risk Awareness and Preparation of Plans for Risk Mitigation
Having
assessed the risk the next step is to make the stakeholders and the decision
makers aware of the risk. This enables government and civil society to take
measures to mitigate the harmful effects of disasters. A plan of action, which should include both long term
and short term components need to be prepared. The plan would be complete only
if it also includes measures to improve community resilience.
4
Implementation of the Plan
The
disaster management plan need not be confined only to rescue and relief
measures but should be all encompassing and include measures like environment
management, urban planning, and enforcement of safety laws.
5
Early Warning Systems
6
Use of Knowledge
Research
in the field of disaster management has contributed substantially towards
acquiring knowledge about disasters and their impacts. Most of the natural
disasters can now be predicted with a fair degree of accuracy (earthquakes are
an exception), and this has led to establishment of efficient Early Warning
Systems. Similarly, a reservoir of knowledge and experience now exists about
managing all aspects of disasters. The challenge is to ensure that the
community at large and the decision makers are empowered with this knowledge.
Moreover, information on the subject is growing at a rapid rate, which, again,
calls for development of systems for processing and sharing of such
information. While limitations of technology do exist, they are being addressed
through research globally.
Box 2.3: World Conference on Natural
Disaster Reduction, Yokohama, 1994
Yokohama Strategy and Plan of Action for
a Safer World
• Risk assessment is a required step for the adoption
of adequate and successful disaster reduction policies and measures.
• Disaster prevention and preparedness are of primary
importance in reducing the need for disaster relief.
• Disaster prevention and preparedness should be
considered integral aspects of development policy and planning at national, regional,
bilateral, multilateral and international levels.
• The development and strengthening of capacities to
prevent, reduce and mitigate disasters is a top priority area to be addressed
so as to
provide a strong basis for follow-up activities to
IDNDR.
• Early warnings of impending disasters and their
effective dissemination are key factors to successful disaster prevention and
preparedness.
• Preventive measures are most effective when they
involve participation at all levels from the local community through the
national government to the regional and international level.
• Vulnerability can be reduced by the application of
proper design and patterns of development focused on target groups by
appropriate education and training of the whole community.
• The international community accepts the need to
share the necessary technology to prevent, reduce and mitigate disaster.
• Environmental protection as a component of
sustainable development consistent with poverty alleviation is imperative in
the prevention and mitigation of natural disasters.
• Each country bears the primary responsibility for
protecting its people, infrastructure, and other national assets from the
impact of natural disasters. The international community should demonstrate
strong political determination required to make efficient use of existing
resources, including financial, scientific and technological means, in the
field of natural disaster reduction, bearing in mind the needs of the
developing countries, particularly the least developed countries.
INDIA’S
KEY HAZARDS, VULNERABILITIES AND THE CRISIS RESPONSE MECHANISM
3.1
The High Cost of Disasters
India
is very vulnerable to natural hazards because of its unique geo-climatic
conditions. Disasters occur in India with grim regularity causing enormous loss
of life and property. Almost 85% of the country is vulnerable to single or
multiple disasters and about 57% of its area lies in high seismic zones.
Approximately 40 million hectares of the country’s land area is prone to flood,
about 8% of the total land mass is vulnerable to cyclone and 68% of the area is
susceptible to drought Of the 35 states and union territories, 27 are
prone to one or more of these ‘events’. To this, it must be added that some
areas are also vulnerable to industrial, chemical and biological disasters.
3.7
Industrial Disasters
1
Among the man made disasters, probably the most devastating (after wars) are
industrial disasters. These disasters may be caused by chemical, mechanical,
civil, electrical or other process failures in an industrial plant due to
accident or negligence, which may cause widespread damage within and/or outside
the plant. The worst example globally was the Methyl Iso-cynate gas leak in
1984 from the Union Carbide Factory in Bhopal (hereinafter referred to as the
Bhopal Gas Tragedy) which has so far claimed more than 20,000 lives and
injured
several lakh persons16 besides stunting the growth of a
generation born from the affected population. This disaster triggered a
completely new legal regime and practices for preventing such disasters.
2
In the pre-Bhopal Gas Tragedy era, industrial safety was governed by
legislations like the Factories Act, 1948 and the Explosives Act, 1884. These
laws proved to be inadequate to provide safety to workers as well as to the
people living in the surrounding areas. After the Bhopal Gas Tragedy, a new
chapter was inserted in the Factories Act, 1948 dealing with hazardous
processes. The Environment Protection Act, 1986 was enacted. More importantly,
several Rules were promulgated under the Act. Important among them are:
1.
The Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986.
2.
Hazardous Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 1989.
3.
The Manufacture, Storage and Import of Hazardous Substances Rules, 1989/ 2000
(MSIHS).
4.
The Public Liability Insurance Act and Rules and Amendment, 1992.
5.
The Chemical Accidents (Emergency Planning, Preparedness, and Response) Rules,
1996.
6.
The Environment (Siting for Industrial Projects) Rules, 1999.
7.
The Municipal Solid Wastes (Management and Handling) Rules, 2000.
8.
The Ozone Depleting Substances (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000.
About
1633 major industrial hazard units are located in 245 districts in 19 States/
UTs17.
Stringent environmental protection laws have prevented major industrial
disasters after Bhopal, but minor disasters do take place on and off site and
also during transportation of hazardous materials, which claim a number of
lives each year besides creating environmental problems. Industrial disasters
are a major concern today because of increase in the pace of industrialization.
It
is reported that more than 1140 workers lost their lives and 48,000 workers
suffered injuries in factories in 200518. The figure would be
more if one includes the civilians who have lost their lives due to accidents
in manufacturing processes, storage and transportation of hazardous material.
With rapid industrialization, the threat of industrial disasters has increased.
However, in spite of the existence of a large number of laws, their enforcement
has left much to be desired.
3.8
Epidemics
1
In India, the major sources of epidemics can be broadly categorized as follows:
(a)
Water-borne diseases like cholera (and forms of gastroenteritis), typhoid,
Hepatitis A, Hepatitis B etc - major epidemics of such diseases have been
recorded in the past and continue to occur;
(b)
Vector-borne (often mosquito-borne) epidemics like dengue fever, chikungunya
fever, Japanese encephalitis, malaria, kala-azar etc, which usually occur in
certain regions of the country;
(c)
Person to person transmission of diseases e.g. AIDS and other venereal
diseases; and
(d)
Air-borne diseases like influenza and measles that can also be transmitted
through fomites (used clothes etc.).
2
In addition to the above, there are certain types of emerging infectious
diseases such as epidemic of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), which
had occurred in China or the recent outbreak of avian flu in poultry in certain
parts of the country and which has the potential of being transmitted to human
beings. Epidemics due to the Dengue virus have occurred in many metropolitan
cities of India and outbreak of various other types of viral diseases is also a recurring phenomena.
3
Epidemics often take place due to poor sanitary conditions leading to
contamination of food and water or due to inadequate disposal of human or
animal carcasses in postdisaster situations. They become real dangers during
floods and earthquakes. Sometimes, poor solid waste management may create
epidemics like plague. Incidence of plague is quite uncommon now but it can
still occur claiming many human lives and disrupting normal life as it did in
Surat in 1994.
4
Avian Influenza: The continuing outbreaks of highly pathogenic avian influenza
(HPAI) in some parts of the country have spelt disaster for the poultry
industry and have raised serious public health concerns. Over a million
domestic poultry have either died or been destroyed. Economic losses to the
poultry sector are likely to have serious implications, but despite control
measures the disease continues to recur, causing further economic losses and
threatening the livelihood of millions of poor livestock farmers, jeopardizing
small-holder entrepreneurship and commercial poultry production and seriously
impeding regional and international trade and market opportunities.
5
The HPAI virus has the potential of being transmissible among human beings,
thereby causing threat to millions of lives. It has been estimated by the WHO
that millions of people could die of HPAI, should a human pandemic occur.
Considering the potential for this scenario, it is imperative to have a synergy
between global and national strategy to help stem the broad negative impact of
the disease. The long-term vision of the strategy is to minimize the global
threat and risk of HPAI in domestic poultry and humans, through progressive
control and eradication of HPAI, particularly that caused by H5N1 virus, from
terrestrial domestic poultry in the country. Achieving this goal will diminish
the global threat of a human pandemic, stabilize poultry production, enhance a
robust regional and international trade in poultry and poultry products,
increase human and food safety, and improve the livelihoods of the rural poor.
3.9
Nuclear Hazards
3.9.1
With increased emphasis on power generation through nuclear technology, the
threat of nuclear hazards has also increased. The Department of Atomic Energy
(DAE) has been identified as the nodal agency in the country in respect of man
made radiological emergencies in the public domain. Nuclear facilities in India
have adopted internationally accepted guidelines for ensuring safety to the
public and environment. A crisis management system is also in place to take
care of any nuclear hazard. In addition to the other types of emergency
response plans in place within the facility to handle local emergencies,
response plans have also been drawn up for handling such emergencies in the
public domain, which are called as “off site Emergencies”. These plans - drawn
up separately in detail for each site - which are under the
jurisdiction of the local district administration, cover an area of about 16 km
radius around the plant or the off site Emergency Planning Zone.
3.12
Crisis/Disaster Response Mechanism in India
2
Legal Framework
2
In India, recurrent crises in the form of widespread famines and locust
invasions were a common feature of the colonial period and to deal with these,
various famine commissions were set up in the 19th century
and Famine Codes were developed as mentioned earlier. The entire crisis
management exercise was confined to fighting natural calamities, particularly
severe droughts causing famines. After Independence, drought relief works were
undertaken in areas affected by severe droughts. With the onset of the green
revolution in the late 1960s the necessity for famine relief work declined and
a holistic drought management programme was taken up in the form of the Drought
Prone Areas Programme (DPAP).
3
Legislation on disaster management at the national level was enacted in the year
2005 with the Disaster Management Act, 2005. Several states had also passed
their own legislation on disaster management prior to the National Act. A
comparison of these state legislations and the salient features of the Disaster
Management Act, 2005 are placed at Annexures-II and III respectively.
3
The Response Mechanism
1
The community is usually the first responder in case of a disaster. Field level
response on behalf of the government in rural areas is by the nearest police
station and the revenue functionary (patwari/patel/talati/karnam etc); in urban
areas the response is articulated by agencies like the civic authorities, the
fire brigade and the local police station.
At
present, panchayats do not have the capacity to react institutionally in any
effective manner to such situations and it is the district administration,
which retains the basic responsibility of handling crises situations with the
Collector playing a pivotal role.
2 The
Indian Constitution has delineated specific roles for the Union and
State Governments. However, the subject of disaster management does not find
mention in any of the three lists in the Seventh Schedule of the Indian
Constitution.
3
Role of State Government: In India the basic responsibility to
undertake rescue, relief and rehabilitation measures in the event of natural
disasters rests with the State Governments. The entire structure of crisis
administration in the State Governments had been oriented from the very
beginning towards post disaster relief and rehabilitation.
Most
of the states have Relief Commissioners who are in charge of
the relief and rehabilitation measures. The Relief Commissionerate is usually
an adjunct of the Revenue Department whose main job is to administer land
ownership, land revenue and tenurial conditions in rural areas. Relief
Commissioners work under the Secretary of the Revenue Department. In some
states, the Revenue Secretary is also the ex-officio Relief Commissioner. This
has the advantage of providing a direct chain of command to the district
Collectors and the Tehsildars who are the main field functionaries in the
districts and sub-districts, the basic units of administration, but the focus
on crisis prevention and mitigation or even of preparedness is missing in such
a supervisory framework.
A
few states have switched over to a Disaster Management Department with
the required linkages with the various development and regulatory departments
concerned with prevention, mitigation and preparedness.
4
Every state has a Crisis Management Committee under the chairpersonship of the
Chief Secretary, consisting of secretaries in charge of concerned departments,
which reviews crisis situations on a day-to-day basis at the time of crisis,
coordinates the activities of all departments and provides decision support
system to the district administration.
At
the ministers’ level, a Cabinet Committee on Natural Calamities under
the chairpersonship of the Chief Minister takes stock of situations and is
responsible for all important policy decisions.
5
The District Magistrate/Collector has the responsibility for the overall
management of disasters in the district. He has the authority to mobilize the
response machinery and has been given financial powers to draw money under the
provisions of the General Financial Rules/Treasury Codes. All departments of
the State Government including the police, fire services, public works,
irrigation etc. work in a coordinated manner under the leadership of the
Collector during a disaster, except in metropolitan areas where the municipal
body plays a major role. The District Collector also enjoys the authority to
request for assistance from the Armed Forces if circumstances so demand. NGOs
have also been effective in providing relief, rescue and rehabilitation in
recent times.
6
Role of Union Government: Although the State Government
concerned has the primary responsibility for crisis management, the Union
Government plays a key supportive role in terms of physical and financial
resources and providing complementary measures such as early warning and
co-ordination of efforts of all Union ministries, departments and
organizations.
At
the apex level, a Cabinet Committee on Natural Calamities reviews the crisis
situations. A High Level Committee of Ministers under the chairmanship of
Minister of Agriculture deals with the issue of financial support to be
provided to the State Governments from the National Calamity Contingency Fund,
if the funds available with the State Governments under Central Relief Fund are
not adequate. Matters relating to nuclear, biological and chemical emergencies
are looked after by the Cabinet Committee on Security.
7
The Cabinet Secretary, as the highest executive officer, heads the National
Crisis Management Committee (NCMC). Secretaries of ministries and departments
concerned and heads of other organizations are members of NCMC, which reviews
and monitors crisis situations on a regular basis and gives directions to the
Crisis Management Group as deemed necessary. The NCMC can give directions to any
ministry, department or organization for specific action needed for meeting the
crisis situation.
8
Till recently, the Department of Agriculture and Cooperation had the nodal
responsibility for managing disasters. After the Gujarat earthquake in 2001, this
responsibility has been shifted to the Ministry of Home Affairs. However, in
view of the highly technical and specific nature of certain disaster events
such as aviation disasters, rail accidents, chemical disasters and biological
disasters etc; the ministries dealing with that particular subject have the
nodal responsibility for handling that particular type of disaster, as shown in
Table 3.3 .
Table3.3: Nodal Ministries for Managing Different Types of Disasters
Types of Disasters /Crises
Nodal
Ministry
Natural and Man made
Disasters
Ministry of Home Affairs
Droughts
Ministry
of Agriculture
Air
Accidents
Ministry of Civil Aviation
Railway Accidents
Ministry
of Railways
Chemical Disasters
Ministry
of Environment
Biological
Disasters
Ministry of Health
Nuclear
Accidents
Department of Atomic Energy
9
The Central Relief Commissioner in the Ministry of Home Affairs is the Chairman
of the Crisis Management Group (CMG) consisting of nodal officers from various
concerned ministries. The CMG’s functions are to review annual contingency
plans formulated by various ministries, departments and organizations in their
respective sectors, measures required for dealing with a natural disaster,
coordinate the activities of the Union Ministries and State Governments in relation to disaster
preparedness and relief, and to obtain information from the nodal officers on
all these issues. In the event of a disaster, the CMG meets frequently to
review relief operations and extends all possible assistance required by the
affected states to overcome the situation. The Resident Commissioner of the
affected state is also associated with such meetings. The existing structure of
crisis management is shown in Fig 3.2.
10
Schemes for financing expenditure on relief in the wake of natural calamities
are governed by the recommendations of the Finance Commission appointed by the
Government of India every five years.
Under
the existing scheme, each state has a corpus of funds called Calamity Relief
Fund (CRF) administered by a State Level Committee headed by the Chief Secretary of the State
Government. The size of the corpus is determined with reference to the
expenditure normally incurred by the state on relief and rehabilitation over
the past ten years. In case the funds under CRF are not sufficient to meet the specific
requirements, State Governments can seek assistance from the National Calamity
Contingency Fund (NCCF) – a fund created at national government level. Both
these funds, as the names suggest, are meant for relief and rehabilitation and
do not cover either mitigation or reconstruction works, which have to be funded
separately by the State or Union Government.
.11
Armed Forces: The Armed Forces, in
view of their ability to organize action in adverse ground circumstances, their
speed of operational response and also the resources and capabilities at their
disposal play a major role in assisting the civil administration particularly
in emergency support functions such as communications, search and rescue
operations, health and medical facilities, transportation, power, food and
civil supplies, public works and engineering, in the immediate aftermath of
major disasters.
12
Apart from natural disasters, certain other types of crises are dealt with
through separate legislations or rules framed thereunder. For example, the
Chemical Accidents (Emergency Planning, Preparedness, and Response) Rules, 1996
have been framed under the Environment Protection Act. Similar Rules have been
framed under Atomic Energy Act. Most States Governments have passed Essential
Services Maintenance Acts (ESMA) to ensure provision of essential services during the time of
crisis. The Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C) still remains the most
important Act to tackle crisis situations due to public order problems.
3.12.4
High Powered Committee [HPC]
1
A paradigm shift in the approach to crisis management from relief and
rehabilitation to prevention and mitigation and towards a holistic and
comprehensive framework, took place with the United Nations deciding to observe
the 1990s as the International Decade of Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR).
National Governments were expected to pay special attention to measures to deal
with natural disasters in a manner designed to minimize their occurrence and to
mitigate hardships if they do occur. The HPC came out with a large number of
recommendations, dealing with the constitutional and legal framework,
organizational structures and institutional mechanism in the overall disaster
management system of the country.
5
New Institutional Arrangements
1
Following the Gujarat earthquake, the Government of India took important policy
decisions/measures for revamping the disaster management system in the country.
These are:
•
Disaster management with reference to rapid onset disasters was moved from the
purview of the Ministry of Agriculture to the Ministry of Home Affairs. The
Ministry of Agriculture retains the responsibility for droughts, pest attacks
and hailstorms;
•
State Governments were advised to reorganize their Relief & Rehabilitation
Department into a separate Disaster Management Department;
•
State Governments were further advised to constitute State Disaster Management
Authority under the Chairmanship of State Chief Ministers and the District
Disaster Management Committee under the Chairmanship of District Collectors;
•
A specialized force comprising eight battalions to be named as National
Disaster Response Force to be constituted with state-of-the-art equipment and
training to respond to various natural and man made disasters;
•
An advanced fail-proof disaster communication network would be set up through
Emergency Operation Centres (EOC) at national, state and district levels;
•
The National Institute of Disaster Management was set up at Delhi for training,
capacity building, research and documentation on different aspects of disaster
management in the country;
•
Basics of disaster management to be introduced in school education, disaster
resistant technologies to be introduced in engineering and architecture courses
and emergency health management to be introduced in medical and nursing
education;
•
A community based disaster risk management programme to be launched in
multi-hazard districts throughout the country.
3.12.6
Unification of Crisis Management: The Disaster Management Act, 2005
3.12.6.1
While the post-Gujarat earthquake reform initiatives were still in their
initial phase of implementation, a devastating tsunami hit many countries on
the rim of the Indian Ocean including several states of our country. This
experience brought home the necessity of further reforms in the system. Taking
the institutional reform process further, the Union Government decided to
formulate a comprehensive disaster management legislation, providing for a
legal and institutional framework of crisis management at all levels in the
country. The Disaster Management Bill was introduced in Parliament in May 2005
and finally enacted in December 2005
4LEGAL
AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
4.1
Constitutional Provision - is there need for a separate entry?
4.1.1
Under the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution, subjects that come under the
legislative competence of the Union and State Governments are enumerated in the
Union and the State Lists respectively. Subjects have also been identified for
which both the Union and the States have concurrent legislative jurisdiction
and these are included in the Concurrent List.
As
already noted, ‘Disaster Management’ as a subject is not mentioned in any of
the three lists. A subject not specifically mentioned in any of these lists
comes under the Residuary Powers of the Union under entry 97 of the Union List.
According to one view, Parliament therefore has the competence to legislate on
this subject. However, by practice and convention the primary responsibility
for managing disasters rests with the State Governments. The Ministry of
Agriculture made a plea to the National Commission to Review the Working of
the
Constitution (NCRCW) to recommend insertion of an entry on the subject in the
Concurrent List. The High Powered Committee (HPC) also recommended that a
conscious view needs to be taken to make an appropriate mention of the subject
of disaster management in one of the lists. The NCRCW ultimately made the
following recommendation;
“Management
of Disasters and Emergencies, natural or man-made be included in list three
i.e. the concurrent list of the Seventh Schedule of the Indian Constitution”.
4.1.2
Parliament has enacted the Disaster Management Act, 2005 by invoking entry 23
namely ‘Social security and social insurance, employment and unemployment’ in
the Concurrent List even though all aspects of crisis management cannot be said
to be covered by this entry. Similarly, some States have also passed laws
governing disaster management. Before one examines the issue of where the subject
should appropriately be included, it is
necessary
to analyze the activities that constitute ‘disaster management’ so as to ensure
that these do not come into conflict with other entries in the three lists.
4.1.3
Disaster management encompasses all activities including preparedness, early
warning systems, rescue, relief and rehabilitation. The term disaster includes
natural calamities, health related disasters (epidemics), industrial disasters
and disasters caused by hostile elements such as terrorists. There are already
various entries in the three lists, which deal with some aspect or other of
disaster management. ‘Public order’ finds a place in the State List, as does
Public Health. Entries 14 and 17 in the State List deal with Agriculture and
Water respectively. Environment and Social Security are included in the
Concurrent List. Atomic energy and Railways are part of the Union List. In
addition, after the 73rd and 74th amendments
all civic powers have been delegated to local bodies.
4.1.4
Due to the cross cutting nature of activities that constitute disaster
management and the vertical and horizontal linkages required which involve
coordination between the Union, State and local governments on the one hand and
a host of government departments and agencies on the other; setting up of a
broadly uniform institutional framework at all levels is of paramount
importance. The legislative underpinning for such a framework would need to
ensure congruence and coherence with regard to the division of labour and
responsibilities among the agencies at the Union, State and other levels. This
could best be achieved if the subject of Disaster Management is placed in the
Concurrent List of the Constitution. Unlike in other cases of proposals for
inclusion in the Concurrent List, State Governments may also welcome this, as
this will also enable them to have legislation without ambiguity regarding the
entry.
4.2
Legal Framework
4.2.2
What should a law on crisis management provide?
1
The experience from past disasters and the prospect of more disasters/crisis,
demand a holistic and an agile system for dealing with crisis/disasters. This
would require strengthening of the existing legal framework, removal of
loopholes, wherever they exist, ensuring an effective coordination mechanism
and an administrative structure with unity of command and well defined
responsibilities at all levels.
2
The traditionally used definition of the word ‘disaster’ and its association
with natural calamities is limited in scope. With rapid economic development,
man-made disasters pose equally grave threats to all life, property and
environment.
Moreover,
man-made disasters are preventable and therefore what needs to be tackled is
‘crisis’ and not disaster. Every disaster is a crisis, but every crisis may not
lead to a disaster. Focus should be on management of crises so that their
degeneration into a disaster is prevented.
3
The multidisciplinary nature of crisis/disaster management, its large canvass
spreading from preparedness to rehabilitation and evaluation, and its
widespread impact, which require resources to be drawn from different levels of
government, means that a totally centralized or totally decentralized mechanism
would be ineffective. It is best if certain functions of disaster management
are centralized while others are decentralized down to the lowest level.
4
Immediate rescue and relief should be the responsibility of the level of
government closest to the affected population. This logically has to be the
district administration and the local self-governments. The same argument also
holds good for the rehabilitation efforts.
The
district administration is part of the State Government and the primary
responsibility for managing any disaster is with the State Governments. The
resources of states being limited they seek and get assistance from the Union
Government. This arrangement of ‘bottom-up’ responsibilities regarding
implementation is appropriate and has worked well in the past and should not be
disturbed.
5
On the other hand, disaster management planning requires wider perspective and
expertise.
Developments
in science and technology should be used for mitigating the adverse impacts of
disasters and have to be studied, researched and updated.
Specialized
manpower and equipment for dealing with disasters also needs to be readily
available.
A
repository of best practices needs to be created so that these could be
replicated, adapted, if necessary and used on future occasions.
National
and regional early warning systems need to be developed and deployed.
Moreover,
there is the need for implementation of standard capacity building and
awareness generation programmes.
These
types of activities call for an agency to coordinate efforts at the state and
the national levels.
6
Thus, the legislation for disaster/crisis management needs to create agencies/
authorities at local/district/state and national levels.
The
responsibility and the authority assigned to each one of these have to be
distinct.
National
level planning, research, analysis and adoption of best practices, development
of standard operating procedures (national level), development of training and
capacity building programmes, administration of early warning systems and formulating
policy on crisis/disaster management are best entrusted to a national body.
Local planning and the actual work of implementation are better left with State
Governments, local governments and the district administration with support
from the Union Government’s implementing agencies.
7
Disaster/crisis management may require mobilization of resources and services.
Such resources and services may have to be requisitioned including from
individuals and private organizations. The law needs to empower authorities
handling disasters to requisition such resources for specified periods and the
issue of compensation should not be a hindrance in crisis management efforts.
8
Responsibilities of citizens should also be appropriately provided for in the
law.
9
Another lesson learnt from past disasters is that funds meant for disaster
relief often tend to get misused as normal procedures are not followed because
of urgency. While enforcing stringent procurement procedures may become a
hurdle in the disaster management effort, the penalty for misutilization of
funds meant for disaster relief should be stringent and could form part of the
law itself.
4.2.3
Analysis of the Disaster Management Act, 2005
1
The Disaster Management Act, 2005 defines disaster as natural or man made event
that cause substantial loss to life, property and environment.
The
scope of this definition does not cover a variety of other crisis situations
that may or may not culminate in a disaster. The Act concentrates very
comprehensive powers and functions at the national level for dealing with
disasters. Thus, the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) has the
responsibility for not only laying down policies, plans and guidelines, but
also has executive functions for ensuring timely and effective response to
disasters.
The
National Executive Committee (NEC) which is to be set up under the NDMA would
be chaired by the
Secretary
to the Government of India in charge of the Ministry or Department of the Union
Government having administrative control of disaster management . This body has
extensive powers and functions including laying down guidelines and giving
directions to the concerned ministries or departments of the Government of
India, State Governments and State Disaster Management Authorities regarding
measures to be taken by them in response to any threatening disaster and also
powers to require any department or agency of the government to make available
to the national authority or state authorities, such men or material resources
as are available with it.
In
other words, the NDMA as well as the National Executive Committee (NEC) have
been given the role not just of planning, coordinating, monitoring and
providing assistance during a disaster but also executive functions related to
implementation of the emergency relief and disaster response.
2
The Disaster Management Act envisages a unified structure of disaster
management in the country; the integration of this institutional structure with
the existing constitutional, legal and administrative framework of the country
may, however, pose several problems.
Under
the Act, the NDMA and the NEC will not only approve the national plans and the
plans of the respective union ministries/departments; they will also lay down
guidelines for the state authorities, coordinate the enforcement and
implementation of these policies and plans for disaster management and ensure
timely response. All these functions traditionally have been performed by State
Governments.
What,
in fact, is however needed is further empowerment and delegation to the
front-end functionaries when it comes to implementation of disaster management
efforts. Moreover, in any crisis situation, expeditious and appropriate
response is the essence, and the field functionaries, the State Governments and
the line
departments
and ministries of the Union Government being aware of the field situation would
be in the best position to provide timely and effective response, if they are
fully authorized to do so.
3
International practices also do not normally involve setting up centralized
authorities with command and control functions to deal with disasters. For example, in the US, the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is an agency that operates
under the control of the Department of Home Land Security for the purpose of
overseeing federal government assistance in domestic disaster preparation,
training of first responders and coordination of the government’s disaster
response efforts.
Similarly,
in Japan, although legislation provides an overall structure for planning and
response, local governments have the primary responsibility of disaster
management. Bangladesh, on the other hand, with its history of recurrent floods
and cyclones, has adopted a more unitary model, setting up a Ministry of
Disaster
Management
and Relief (MDMR) at the national level under which a Directorate of Relief and
Rehabilitation (DRR) operates relief activities for distribution to the remote
field levels.
4
The Commission has considered the issues carefully from an administrative angle
and is of the view that the Disaster Management Act, 2005 requires substantial
amendments to ensure that it provides a coherent and practical framework for
dealing with disasters at the Union, State, District and local levels.
4.3
Institutional Framework
4.3.1
Institutional Framework at Apex Level
1
HPC had observed that disaster/crises management needs full political
commitment at all levels of national, state and local government as cataclysmic
events sometimes assume the nature of national crisis involving the
mobilization of practically the entire government at the highest level25.
The
HPC had recommended that an institutional mechanism needs to be created at the
highest level by setting a Cabinet Committee on Disaster Management that would
ensure continued and sustained focus on this area at the highest level of the
government.
The
HPC also recommended that the All Party National Committee under the
Chairmanship of the Prime Minister and the Working Group set up under it, need
to be institutionalized as permanent standing bodies as the former would help
generate the necessary political will, consensus and support, while the latter,
that is the Working Group, being a body of experts, will evolve appropriate
strategies for implementation of broad policy guidelines.
2
The Commission broadly agrees with the suggestions of the HPC that a Cabinet
Committee on Crisis Management be set up and notes that such a Committee has
already been set up. However, with the setting up of the National Disaster
Management Authority, on the lines proposed, the Working Group as recommended
by the HPC may not be required.
4.3.2
Is There a Case for a Separate Ministry/Department of Disaster/Crisis
Management?
The
HPC recommended the creation of a separate ministry of disaster management for
sustained and focused efforts in the area of disaster preparedness, mitigation
and management. It was envisaged that this ministry would deal with both
man-made and natural disasters as a “nodal ministry’.
The
functions expected of the ministry were networking and coordination of national
resources while the concerned ‘functional’ ministries would continue to
discharge their responsibilities and functions in accordance with their
respective disaster management plans and also work in close cooperation with
the nodal ministry.
A
separate department of disaster management and mitigation was also mooted at
the state level. Uttaranchal is the only state, which has a separate department
of disaster management.
Bangladesh
is the only South Asian country to have set up a separate ministry for disaster
management and relief26.
2
The Commission feels that given the multi-disciplinary nature of activities in
crisis management, creation of a separate ministry is likely to lead to
conflict and delays rather than coordination. For planning, research, capacity
building and coordination of national resources; such a coordination mechanism
is now available with the formation of the NDMA.
And
for the purposes of implementation, a coordination mechanism headed by the
Cabinet Secretary would be more effective. Therefore, the Commission is not in
favour of creation of a separate ministry/department at the national or the
state level.
4.3.3
Coordination at the Apex Operational Level
1
The National Crisis Management Committee (NCMC) headed by the Cabinet Secretary
coordinates and guides the work of different departments of Government of India
in times of crisis. The NEC envisaged under the Disaster Management Act, 2005
would be duplicating the role of NCMC to a great extent. The NCMC has inherent
advantages of ensuring quick decisions and immediate implementation. If
parallel bodies are created the possibility of the pre-existing and newly formed committees
trespassing on each other and creating confusion and blurring of
responsibilities during crisis situations cannot be ruled out.
Moreover,
there is need to shift the focus from managing disasters to managing crises and
the NEC would not be in position to handle all types of crises. This problem
would be further compounded in case of multiple crises or disasters. Unity of
command and quick decision making are paramount in any crisis management
situation. The Commission is therefore of the view that NEC, as envisaged under
the Disaster Management Act need not be constituted and that the existing coordination mechanism
under the Cabinet Secretary should continue. Similarly, at the state level the
existing coordination mechanism under the Chief Secretary should be retained.
2
The Act also envisages establishment of a National Disaster Response Force
(NDRF), a uniformed and highly trained quick response agency to respond to the
needs of search and rescue and to provide, on the spot, life-saving assistance to
the victims. To a large extent, this role has been admirably filled by our
Armed Forces, in particular, the Army. The lessons learnt from the devastating
hurricane Katrina in the US is that extraordinarily severe disasters could
overwhelm specialized agencies and that in such situations the Armed Forces
remain the ‘measure of last resort’. It is imperative that even after the NDRF
becomes fully functional, the ‘enabling role’ of the Armed Forces in assisting
the civil authorities be retained and the Armed Forces continue to maintain
capabilities in specialized search and rescue operations.
4.3.5
Crisis Management Set Up for Metropolitan Cities
1
In major cities (say, with population exceeding 2.5 million), Municipal
Corporations have a large administrative system including departments like
engineering, public health and revenue, and sometimes fire services. These
should provide a good mechanism for coordinated response in case of any
crisis/disaster. Moreover, in cities where there is a Police Commissioner
system, the District Collector does not have as much a role as in other
districts. In such situations, District Disaster Management Authority
prescribed by the Disaster Management Act, 2005 may not be very suitable. In
metropolitan cities it is advisable to make the urban metropolitan
government directly responsible
for disaster management.
4.3.6
Bringing “Water” at the Centre Stage of Policy Domain
1
Two of the major types of disasters i.e. floods and droughts are primarily
water related. Adoption of both short and long term measures would
remain sub-optimal unless larger issues like the National Water Budget and a
policy regime that takes cognizance of the mismatch between supply and demand
are properly addressed.
A
major impediment to making any progress in this direction is the ‘segmented
policy attention’ from a number of ministries/ departments. Without being
exhaustive, attention may be invited to the following different policy
platforms:
•
Ministry of Water Resources; Irrigation and Flood Control, Inter-State Basin
Issues etc.
•
Department of Drinking Water Supply; Rural Water Supply.
•
Ministry of Urban Development and Poverty Alleviation; Urban Water Supply.
•
Ministry of Environment and Forests; Lakes, control of desertification/aridity.
•
Ministry of Agriculture; Watershed Development/Droughts.
•
Ministry of Rural Development; Water conservation in rural areas.
•
Ministry of Science and Technology; Hydrology, Hydrogeology etc.
2
The long term interests of the country, including drought related concerns,
will be better addressed if all the policy aspects and schemes with water,
water conservation and improving water availability as their primary focus are
brought on a single policy platform. This aspect needs to be considered along
with other issues concerning ‘machinery of the central government’. It may be
added here that while a National Water Policy encompassing diverse policy
concerns was framed in 2002 with the Ministry of Water Resources as the
‘nodal
point’, recognition of ‘policy diversities’ has not resulted in the emergence
of a road map for integration of responsibilities.
3
The National Commission for Integrated Water Resources Development Plan-1999,
examined the issue of institutional set up at the state and national levels.
That Commission stated as follows about the structure at the state level.
The
dominant institutional structure of governments in India is departmental and
that is true of the water sector also. In that structure, there is division of
responsibilities among departments, both in the Ministry (secretariat) and at
the implementing levels (Head of the Department and his vertical organization
down to the field level) - No department is in charge of or can command
services of all components of work that are essential for achieving results.
Since
the number of departments has increased, there is need for time-consuming
consultations.
While
there are constant inter-departmental references and meetings, there is a weak
coordination and lack of a holistic approach.
The
negative effects of departmental structure are aggravated by the lack of
internal delegation of decision-making. The head of the department and
organization for research, education, training and survey and data collection -
which should have enough autonomy in their working, function as subordinate
offices and have to seek the Ministry’s orders and approvals on most matters.
Micro-management and not achievement of results is the main result.
The
basic constraints in a departmental structure are compounded in the case of
‘Water’, because many
departments
deal with different aspects of water.
Since
the raison de’etre of departmental officialdom is to serve farmers, the
irrigation bureaucracy must understand and appreciate the socio-economic
dynamics of human interaction. The pressing needs of integrated decision-making
require an organizational restructuring to a more holistic management
orientation involving a multidisciplinary interaction of diverse expertise
covering the full range of water management skills to achieve the goals. The
irrigation departments may be restructured from a hierarchical to a functional
orientation.
4.3.7
Essential ‘Policy Integration’ between Long and Short Term Measures to
AchieveDisaster Avoidance
.1
While a number of Centrally Sponsored Schemes have objectives connected
directly or indirectly, with drought avoidance, the two major interventions in
this sphere are the Drought Prone Areas Programme (DPAP) and the Desert
Development Programme (DDP).
The
thrust of these schemes is to ‘treat’ land and vegetation in selected areas in
a manner that the ‘treated areas’ become less vulnerable to ill effects
associated with high drought vulnerability and aridity. These schemes are
handled by the Department of Land Resources (DoLR) in the Ministry of Rural
Development. DoLR is also entrusted with another issue of crucial significance
to agriculture, namely, Land Reforms. It is learnt that there is a proposal
under active consideration for forming a National Rainfed Areas Authority. As
already mentioned, for droughts, management of the chronic malady and the
crisis are best dealt with in a holistic manner in the same Ministry.
4.3.8
Creation of Legal and Institutional Framework for Managing Floods in
Inter-State Rivers
1
This year’s (2006) unprecedented floods in many states have highlighted the
need for coordinated release of waters from reservoirs in the case of
inter-state rivers. Timely information of storage levels and inflows is not
published and there is also the tendency to retain water in the reservoirs
until the levels reached are considered dangerous. Sudden release of water
leads to large scale flooding of downstream regions.
The
National Commission for Integrated Development Plan for Water Resources (1999)
had recommended the constitution of
inter-state river basin authorities. A beginning should be made at least for
the purpose collection of data, timely release of such data and working out of
agreed releases from reservoirs on reaching certain levels of storage.
Legislation needs to be enacted urgently by Parliament using the power under
Entry 56 of the Union List dealing with inter-state rivers.
4.3.9
Empowering the Relief Commissioners/Disaster Management Departments to
Effectively Discharge Disaster Related Responsibilities
1
The state level nodal points, by whatever names known, have to discharge
onerous responsibilities of coordination and supervision of disaster relief
operations. Such duties are more demanding in case of droughts due to the much
longer duration of the phenomenon and involvement of more governmental
agencies. Keen observers of the scene have generally held the view that there
needs to be a standing, though not necessarily permanent arrangement, to enable
the nodal points to discharge the heavy responsibilities effectively during crisis.
This
responsibility encompasses many spheres - damage assessments, planning of
relief operations, sectoral arrangements, inter-sectoral cooperation,
distribution of relief and monitoring activities with communication of reports
and returns. Added to this is the daunting task of rendering accounts. Clearly,
therefore, a strengthening of the nodal point and establishment of an
executing-coordinating agency is imperative. This could be achieved by secondment of officers from related
departments to the State Disaster Management Authorities during a crisis. All
these officers should work under the leadership of the Disaster Management
Department/Authority. An added advantage of this arrangement will be that over
a period of time departmental representatives will develop expertise in
disaster management. This should help address the long term need for a
dedicated cadre of disaster managers.
5 RISK
REDUCTION
5.1
Reducing Disaster Risk
1
As explained in the previous chapter, disaster risk is a consequence of hazard
and vulnerability. Disaster risk can be reduced by forecasting occurrence of
hazards as accurately as possible and well in time, and preparing in advance
for their onset and even manipulating those natural hazards, which lend
themselves to manipulation. It can also be brought down by taking measures to
reduce vulnerability. In this chapter, the issues involved in risk reduction
are analyzed and recommendations made. The underlying principles apply to all
types of crises/disasters. However, some crises/disasters have very specific
features which are also dealt with in this chapter. The chapter has been
structured around the different components of risk reduction, described in the
following paras.
5.2
Enunciating a Policy Towards Crisis Management Which Emphasizes Risk Reduction
1.
The enactment of laws and the setting up of national, state and district level
authorities is an acknowledgement of the fact that disaster management is an
integral part of administration. The preparation of well considered disaster
management plans with preventive and risk management measures and their
implementation will be an important component of the work of these bodies.
2
The NDMA has been mandated to lay down policies, plans and guidelines for
disaster management .The Commission is of the view that a national policy
should reflect the paradigm shift in disaster management
from
a short term to a long term perspective, from relief and rehabilitation to
mitigation and risk reduction, and from a government led approach to innovative
partnerships involving the community, civil society, corporate bodies and with
a focus on women and children who often bear the brunt of most disasters.
5.3
Assessment of Risk - Hazard and Vulnerability Analysis
1
The first step in planning for mitigation measures for any crisis in an area is
an understanding of the potential hazards in that area. Closely linked with
this is assessing the vulnerability of society to such hazards. The operational
level at which disaster management plans are prepared, is the district level. But
it has been noticed that these plans are usually not based on proper hazard and
vulnerability analysis of the district. Hazard analysis is a multi-disciplinary
task and requires inputs from different specialized organizations. Similarly,
vulnerability analysis also requires study of social, cultural, economic and
political aspects of the local communities.
2
The entire landmass of India has been mapped for the three natural hazards,
viz. earthquake, cyclone (windstorm) and flood in a scale of 1:2.5 million
using the Survey of India maps of the same scale as the base map. This map was
published as Vulnerability Atlas of India in 1998. This was followed up by
preparing Vulnerability Atlases for each state in the same scale covering these
hazards. The census data of existing housing types were used to assess the
vulnerability of structures and to carry out district-wise risk analysis of
housing units. This atlas,
which offers a useful guide to development planners, decision makers,
professionals and householders for assessing the risk to the shelters in a
particular area, is currently under revision, similarly, the Building Materials
and Technology Promotion Concil (BMPTC) has prepared the Landslide hazard
zonation atlas of India.
5.3.3
Based on the available data on epicentres and years of occurrence of
earthquakes (>5.0 intensity) as per the IMD catalogue of earthquakes, and
expected maximum intensity of earthquake related seismo-tectonic features in
different parts of the country (on the basis of studies conducted by the
Geological Survey of India and the Department of Earthquake Engineering of IIT
Roorkee), a seismic zone map of India has been standardized. This map divides
the entire country into four seismic zones, II to V, as shown in Table 5.1 :
5
The seismic zone based categorization of the entire country on 1:1.25 million
scale is a good indication of the seismic hazards of the states and districts,
but is inadequate for undertaking seismic mitigation activities at the
sub-district or city level. This requires advanced micro-zonation maps in
1:1000 scale, based on local geological, soil and ground water surveys.
The
preparation of such maps was taken up on a pilot basis for the selected cities
of Delhi, Guwahati and Jabalpur, but none of the studies has been completed
with common standards and protocols that can be accepted as the scientific
basis for seismic designing of new buildings and retrofitting of old buildings.
In the absence of such maps, broad macro-level maps are being used for
regulating building design, which may not always be ideal particularly for
high-rise structures which have come up in metro cities. Priority needs to be
given to seismic micro-zonation of
vulnerable major cities and urban centres, with topmost priority being given to
cities with population of more than one million, along with detailed assessment
of buildings and infrastructure.
6
It is also possible to use the Geographical Information System (GIS) tools to
integrate various spatial data such as topography, hydrology, land use, land
cover, settlement pattern, built up structures etc and non-spatial data such as
demography, socio-economic conditions and infrastructure like road, rail
network, communication system, hospital etc. on a common platform for
developing a sound information base for crisis management. This can be further
integrated with satellite and aerospace data and Geographical Positioning
System (GPS) for real time monitoring
of crisis situation and for scientific assessment of damages. This should be
taken up as a Plan scheme during the Eleventh Five Year Plan bringing all the
scientific, technological and research organizations such as NRSA, ISRO, NIC,
GSI, NIDM and other institutions together on a common platform for this
purpose. Care has to be taken to ensure that these efforts are able to generate
hazard maps, which can be used as a base for preparing operational plans.
7
However, till such time that the GIS based hazard maps become operational,
conventional maps will have to be used for hazard analysis. A proper
vulnerability analysis would require in-depth knowledge about the conditions of
people in the hazard prone zone which is only possible with full community
participation. These principles would apply to all types of natural disasters,
including industrial disasters.
5.4
Generating Awareness about Risk
5.5
Preparation of Disaster Management Plans
1
Disaster Risk Reduction Plans (or mitigation30/prevention
plans) are important components of the plans to be prepared for disaster
management at different levels. In this context for ease of analysis, the whole
question of disaster management plans is being examined.
2
The Disaster Management Act, 2005 mandates preparation of District, State and
National level Plans. The Tenth Five Year Plan also accorded a high priority to
such planning
“...
we now have to look ahead and plan for disaster preparedness and mitigation, in
order that the periodic shocks to our development efforts are minimized.”.
3
The Disaster Management Act, 2005 visualizes the district plan as the one that
lists out the vulnerable areas in the district, the measures required for
prevention and mitigation of disasters, the capacity building and preparedness
measures involved, the allocations of responsibilities among the different
district level departments, and the emergency response mechanisms including
communication systems, procurement of essential resources, dissemination of information etc.
4
While the concept of the district plan as mentioned in the Act is quite
comprehensive, it should be understood that measures for prevention and
mitigation of disasters are capital intensive and usually cut across district
boundaries. Therefore, the mitigation plan may have a longer perspective
ranging from 5-20 years depending upon the local situation.
Normally,
it is understood that plans incorporate only developmental measures such as
construction of shelters, construction of embankments etc. But disaster
mitigation plans should also incorporate a schedule of
‘enforcement
measures’ and the functionaries who will be held responsible for these. Such
enforcement measures being ‘unpleasant’ and unpopular are very often not
contemplated leave aside acted upon. These measures could include enforcement of building regulations in
urban areas, removal of encroachments from natural watercourses or
environmentally fragile areas, and strict enforcement of environmental, safety
and public health regulations.
5
Therefore, the District Disaster Management Plan should have two components:
a.
Long Term Disaster Management Plan.
b.
Emergency Response Plan including a listing of ‘standard operating procedures’.
The
Long Term Disaster Management Plan, in turn, should have the following parts:
a.
Long Term Development Plan.
b.
Long Term Enforcement Plan.
6
Annual plans should be culled out from the Long Term Development/Enforcement
Plans. These principles should apply to the state and the national plans. It
should also be borne in mind that there is a distinct possibility of
duplication between plans of various districts, particularly those that are
geographically contiguous, in the matter of long term plans. This calls for a
mechanism at the state level to quickly scrutinize such plans and suggest improvements.
7
The HPC has recommended an outline for the preparation of the District Disaster
Management Plan. The outline provides framework for preparation of the plan,
but it has to be ensured that all the components mentioned above should form an
integral part of the plan.
8
Apart from the district plan, on site and off site plans are to be prepared for
nuclear installations and major hazardous industries. The plans prepared for
nuclear emergencies are quite comprehensive as they are prepared under the
supervision of experts. But the same cannot be said for the other off-site
emergency plans {Preparation of such plans is stipulated under the Chemical
Accidents (Emergency Planning, Preparedness and Response) Rules, 1996}. The
quality of off-site emergency plans requires considerable improvement in terms
of completeness and
practicability of implementation considering the situation at the ground level.
Lack of proper vulnerability analysis again constitutes a major weakness of
these plans.
5.6
Making Crisis/Disaster Management Plans a Part of Development Plans
1
The Yokohama message emanating from the International Decade for Natural
Disaster Reduction in May 1994 underlined the need for an emphatic shift in the
strategy for disaster mitigation. It was emphasized that disaster prevention,
mitigation and preparedness are better than only disaster response in achieving
the objectives of vulnerability reduction. It has been stated that mere
disaster response is insufficient as it yields only temporary results at very
high costs whereas prevention and mitigation contribute to lasting improvement
in safety and are essential to integrated disaster management31.
The Tenth Plan also emphasizes that development cannot be sustainable without
mitigation being built into the development process.
2
Long term disaster mitigation/prevention plans include major capital intensive
activities such as training of water courses, construction of protective bunds,
afforestation, plantation of drought resistant vegetation, construction of
shelters, raising embankments, retrofitting of buildings, permanent relocation
of vulnerable settlements etc, which can sometimes have inter-district or even
inter-state ramifications. Therefore, the long term plans may have to encompass
block, district, state and national levels and once the national and state
level works have been
detailed; the works, which would be taken up at the district, block and
panchayat level can be planned. It has also been noted that since the benefits
from such works are not experienced in the short term, local bodies tend to give
low priority to such works and consequently not many are taken up. Therefore,
the immediate supervisory level should ensure that while preparing their annual
developmental plans, the long term works included in the disaster plan are
given priority and they do not remain “paper plans”.
5.7
Instruments for Mitigation of Hazards
There
are various instruments through which the adverse impact of a hazard can be
reduced.
Such
instruments differ for different types of hazards but these could be
categorized into the
following:
_ Proper
environmental management.
_ Hazard
reduction measures.
_ Effective
implementation of legal measures
5.7.1.
Proper Environment Management
1
Over-exploitation of natural resources and unplanned growth in human
settlements leads to environmental degradation. This, in turn, may lead to a
disaster as the delicate ecological balance gets disturbed, and may also
increase the vulnerability of certain sections of society which depend on these
environmental resources. A disaster may further degrade the environment. Thus,
environmental degradation and disasters constitute a vicious cycle. Development
practices that enhance the quality of environment would not only help in
mitigating disasters but could also build community resilience. Normally,
environmental management is lost sight of in disaster management plans, as well
as in the normal development plans. Environment management must be factored
into all planning and development activities.
5.7.2
Hazard Reduction Measures
1
Different disasters require different mitigation measures.
Another
cross cutting mitigating/preventive measure is effective implementation of laws
governing planned
development
of habitations, building byelaws and environmental regulations. In order to
have a comprehensive and integrated approach it would be better if all these
measures are also made part of the long term mitigation plans. Long term
prevention and mitigation measures can be broadly be divided under three heads
- (i) construction of major civil engineering structures, (ii) construction of
disaster resistant dwellings and public use buildings, and (iii) non-structural
measures.
Construction
of Major Civil Engineering Structures
1
Structural measures are mainly engineering solutions to prevent disasters such
as construction of dams, diversion channels, flood protection walls, sea walls,
cyclone shelters, shelterbelt plantations and regeneration of mangrove belts in
coastal areas etc. Structural prevention measures, if properly planned, after
taking into account environmental considerations are effective and lasting
solutions to prevent disasters but these are usually highly capital intensive and cannot provide
complete solution to prevent every crisis situation. Since these measures are
in the nature of civil works, they should be included in all long term disaster
management plans, and executed as explained in para 5.6.
Construction
of Disaster Resistant Dwellings and Public Use Buildings
1
Unlike the major structures mentioned in the previous para, (which seek to
divert the impact of the hazard itself), disaster resistant structures (dealt
with here) seek to protect the people staying inside them by withstanding the
onslaught of the disaster or at least by remaining intact. In this context it
may truly be said that whereas ‘earthquake hazard is natural,
earthquake-disaster is ‘man-made’, as the earthquake by itself may not kill but
the damage caused by it to
buildings results in large scale loss of life and property. Similarly, disaster
resistant structures also minimize damages during floods and cyclones.
2
Construction of houses and other buildings is regulated through the mechanism
of building byelaws. These byelaws exist in major cities but are virtually
non-existent in the smaller cities and rural areas. Even in areas where these
byelaws exist, they generally regulate the total built up area in a housing or
commercial unit and also specify the extent of land, which can be used for
construction. But they do not stipulate the construction standards which have to be maintained. Thus safety of
the constructed units is not sought to be enforced by these byelaws. As a
result, unsafe buildings are added on day by day to the already large number of
existing unsafe buildings. Most of these buildings are non-engineered
constructions where engineers and architects are not consulted.
The
technology for construction of disaster resistant units exists and has been
codified by the Bureau of Indian Standards. The National Building Code of India
(NBC) 2005, a comprehensive building Code, is a national instrument providing guidelines for regulating
the building construction activities across the country. It serves as
a Model Code for adoption by all agencies involved in building construction.
The Code mainly contains administrative regulations, development control rules
and general building requirements; fire safety requirements; stipulations
regarding materials, structural design and construction (including safety); and
building and plumbing services32.But these Standards,
Codes and guidelines for earthquake resistant design and construction of buildings are seldom used. The main reason for
unsatisfactory implementation of these codes is ignorance about them and even
if there is awareness in some sections of society, the fear that adoption of
these measures would increase the costs substantially discourages people from
adopting them. A balance has to be struck between safety and cost.
As
a pre-requisite, the Codes, should be in public domain and freely available at
the BIS33 website.
Simplified booklets/ practical manuals/ guidelines explaining the various
clauses of the codes with some practical examples need to be generated so that
it is easily understood even by common people interested in building their own
houses.
A
programme seeking adoption of disaster resistant technologies for construction
of dwelling units by the people at large would not succeed without creating
proper awareness r egarding:
(i)
earthquakes/disasters, the phenomena including causes and their natural
characteristics,
(ii)
how the natural occurrence of ground motion (or onslaught by floods or waves or
storms) becomes disastrous (iii) how the disastrous effects can be avoided.
There
is definite need to start broad based educational and training programs in
seismic zones34 III,
IV and V and intensive training programme in zone V areas. For awareness
generation, apart from the normal means, setting up Building Technology
Demonstration Centres and undertaking demonstrative constructions should be
taken up.
Awareness
generation about disaster resistant construction may lead to voluntary
acceptance of the technology to some extent, but recourse to legal measures
would be necessary in the larger public interest. Incorporation of the safety
codes in the building byelaws would provide the necessary legal framework.
An
approach of applying these safety norms to selected areas first would prove
more successful, rather than an across-the-board application to all areas. The
areas in zone V should be taken up on priority. Also for all public buildings,
and buildings constructed under government schemes in hazard prone areas,
adoption of such safety norms should be inbuilt in the model design. The
Municipalities/Corporations/Development Authorities at present do not have the structure and the
capability to implement the new building byelaws incorporating the disaster
resistant construction. Institutional changes are needed either to establish
self-sustaining new Wings/Cells or to reorganize the set up so that it is able
to meet the demand.
There
are large areas where town planning legislation and development control/
building byelaws are not applicable and the sanctioning authority is the
panchayat. The safety norms stipulated by the BIS are complicated and can be
understood only by qualified engineers and architects. It would be incorrect to
presume that such complicated provisions (BIS codes) would be enforced by the
panchayats. The BIS should convert these norms (at least for small dwelling
units) into commonly understood principles, which could be followed and
enforced even by village panchayats.
The
approach of drafting model byelaws and circulating them to the states for
incorporation by the local bodies has not produced the desired results.
Adoption of these model regulations would require periodic monitoring. Targets
should be fixed each year and even financial incentives need to be used to
motivate the local bodies to adopt the safety features in their building
byelaws.
Owners
of private buildings and the general public need to be made aware and advised
to carry out upgrading of their residential buildings by providing incentives
in terms of subsidies, reduced insurance premia and allowing increased Floor
Area Ratio (FAR).
The
limitation of building byelaws, even if they are effectively enforced, is that
their effect is only prospective. The huge stock of existing dwelling and other
units would continue to be vulnerable. Technically, retrofitting of buildings
provides a solution, but it is too expensive to be adopted by a common citizen.
In the case of government buildings, the concerned departments could take it
up, with the more commonly used public buildings being given priority. Private
buildings like hospitals and schools in hazardous areas would also have to be
given the same priority but the issue of financing the retrofitting effort
would remain. A financial package to fund such an effort may be worked out by
the state governments along with banks and insurance agencies. Even
non-financial incentives like relaxation on extent of built up areas could act
as an incentive to motivate private owners to take up retrofitting.
Zoning
regulations: Zoning regulations are normally issued under the
Town and Country Planning Acts of the respective states. They stipulate the
nature of construction and the density of construction permissible in a defined
zone. Zoning regulations provide an important mechanism for planned development
of any area. These could be used to prevent settlements in hazard prone areas
like the riverbanks, which are flood prone, or areas near coasts, which are prone to cyclones, or areas
of extremely high seismic activity, or ecologically sensitive areas. Apart from
preventing human settlements in critical areas, these could also be used to
spread out the population so that impact of any hazard is limited. However, at present
zoning regulations exist only in big cities. In small towns and rural areas the
concept of zoning regulations is almost non-existent. Even in bigger cities
where they do exist, they are often not prepared with an intention to mitigate
hazards or reduce vulnerabilities of populations. Another weakness of these
zoning regulations is their poor enforcement. Therefore, there is an urgent
need to update the zoning regulations in the cities from the point of view of
disaster management. The town and country planning set up in the smaller cities
and rural areas also need to be strengthened. It would be advisable if the
hazard analysis is used as one of the important tools in preparing zoning
regulations for an area.
Non
structural measures: These measures are in
the form of capacity building and improved livelihood practices. These include
afforestation, scientific watershed management, vegetative bunds, improved
agricultural practices and relocation of habitations. All these measures should
be included in the long term disaster management plans.
5.7.3
Effective Implementation of Laws and Regulations
5.8
Early Warning Systems
5.8.1
The objective of an early warning system is to alert the community of any
impending hazard so that they can take preventive measures. An early warning
system basically has four components - capturing the precursor events,
transmission of this data to a central processing facility, alert recognition
of an impending crisis and warning dissemination.
Capturing
the precursor events is generally a technology driven process for most
disasters.
However
for disasters like epidemics, strikes and terrorism, the human element plays a
vital role in the data capture. Transmission of this data to the central
processing facility is also totally technology based. Alerts are generated
based on data analysis. Sometimes, alert generation may take some time, as a
decision making process may be involved. The dissemination of warning to the
vulnerable sections again has both technology and human elements.
5.8.2
The last decade has seen major advances in technology relating to data capture,
transmission, analysis
and
even dissemination. Thus, the early warning phase of disaster management is
largely technology driven with satellite imagery, remote sensing, seismology,
oceanography, climatology etc providing vital inputs. But like most
technologies there are last mile problems which make human intervention
essential. It is important
that
the warning reaches the most vulnerable sections in a manner that is understood
by them. Therefore, in
spite
of far reaching technological advances, mechanisms still have to be put in
place to suit the local conditions. And without the total involvement and
awareness of the local community, the last mile issue cannot be addressed or
resolved..
5.9
Building Community Resilience
5.9.1
Disaster risk reduction can be effective if the communities feel that their
needs are being met and participate in it. The community is also a repository
of knowledge and skills which have evolved traditionally and these need to be
integrated in the risk reduction process. It is necessary to educate the community
about the entire disaster risk reduction and even to impart skills and assign
specific roles to the members of the community, so that the first response from
the community is a well coordinated one. This could be achieved by:
i. Undertaking
location specific training programmes for the community: Such
programmes should be a part of the disaster management plan. As the number of
persons to be imparted knowledge and skills is very large, a cascading approach
should be followed. Village panchayats, should be entrusted this
responsibility. These training
programmes could be made more meaningful if roles are assigned to
individual members and then they are given the necessary skills to
discharge their respective responsibilities.
ii. Mainstreaming
crisis management in education: Disaster management education needs to
be integrated and institutionalized
within the formal and informal systems of education (already, substantial
progress has been achieved in this direction by CBSE in incorporating
disaster management in the school syllabi). An appropriate component of
disaster awareness at the school/college/university level will help increase
awareness among student and teacher community and their family members. All
state governments may be persuaded to include disaster management education in
junior, middle and high schools and in colleges and universities. Disaster
management and disaster resistant development practices may be included as
specific components in professional and technical education. Appropriate short
duration courses could also be developed for various vocational courses.
iii. Mainstreaming
crisis management in training programmes: Priority should be given to
training and capacity building of elected leaders and personnel in critical
sectors like police, revenue, agriculture, irrigation, health, public works
etc.
5.10
Financial Tools for Risk Reduction
5.10.1
As already stated, the two funding mechanisms are mainly for relief and
rehabilitation
efforts.
While post disaster funding is an important element of crisis management,
excessive
dependence
on it creates a regime where there are no incentives for adoption of risk
reduction methods by individuals, agencies and governments, The HPC was of the
opinion that insurance brings quality in infrastructure and a culture of
safety. However, the large sections of low income populations coupled with low
penetration by the insurance companies poses a major challenge to provide
insurance cover to the vulnerable sections.
5.10.2
Following the success of micro-credit for rural development, micro-insurance
has started emerging as a tool for ex ante risk management. In
fact, micro-credit and micro-insurance support each other. Several government
agencies and NGOs have come forward in this field, but their efforts need to be
scaled up.
5.10.3
While the Commission would not go into the details of working out an insurance
framework for disaster management,
it would strongly recommend that that the tool of insurance be made attractive
through a set of policy measures and fiscal incentives.
Box 5.10: Constraints of Insurance in
Developing Countries
Yet, despite their growing exposures and
vulnerabilities to hazards, developing countries retain most of the attendant
risk due to the undeveloped state of
their domestic insurance markets and a resultant inability to transfer risk to
international reinsurance markets. In these countries, less than 1% of
total direct losses from natural disasters is insured, compared with 40-100% in
industrial countries such as the
United States or France. Even the small amount of
insurance coverage that is available in practice tends to be limited to major
commercial properties in urban
areas. With the level of insurance negligible. Catastrophe protection for
better off homeowners is sometimes present in middle-income emerging markets.
The key constraint on insurance market development is low per capita income,
since lowincome consumers have less discretionary income and fewer assets to
insure. The major determinant of insurance density (premium per capita) is per
capita income, and there appear to be few means to circumvent this “iron law”
through private markets alone.
Box 5.9: Insurance and Disaster
Management
“Insurance is a potentially important mitigation
measure in disaster-prone areas as it brings quality in the infrastructure
& consciousness and a culture of safety by its insistence on following
building codes, norms, guidelines, quality materials in construction etc.
Disaster insurance mostly works under the premise of ‘higher the risk higher
the premium, lesser the risk lesser the premium’, thus creating awareness
towards vulnerable areas and motivating people to settle in relatively safer
areas.”
Box
5.11: Risk Reduction through Catastrophic Insurance: Examples from Japan
Lying
in one of the most seismically active zones on Earth, Japan is home to a
dynamic catastrophe insurance market. Under the guidance of
a governmental organization established after the 1995 Kobe Earthquake, the
Earthquake Research Committee (ERC) has brought out the Japan National Seismic
Hazard Maps based on extensive seismic sources and ground motion modeling which
incorporate the latest understanding of subduction zones, active faults, crustal zones, and
intraslab seismicity zones. Theses maps have been put to use and have been
found appropriate for modeling financial risk, including time-dependent and
time-independent rates of earthquake recurrence. In addition, a more robust set
of cascade events was introduced in the model. The risk assessment provides the
most advanced modeling of the vulnerability of individual risks in Japan.
The
methodology uses an objective measure of ground motion intensity called
spectral acceleration to directly correlate ground motion to building
performance based upon building height, construction material, and ground
motion propagation. Vulnerability functions in the model are based on actual
building behavior observed in the Kobe Earthquake and other recent events,
including the 2004 Niigata-ken Chuetsu earthquake. These functions also reflect changes to the seismic
design criteria in the Japanese building code by considering year of
construction, building height, and construction type. At the heart of the
vulnerability module is the regional inventory database, which uses detailed
exposure information from housing surveys, the census report, and other sources
to estimate the density of exposure values by city/ward for insured lines of
business. Japan’s Earthquake Model meets the unique needs of insurance
market by allowing insurers to assess the seismic vulnerability of individual
locations and successfully manage their entire portfolio at risk using the
latest scientific modeling techniques and market research on financial loss
perspectives.
EMERGENCY
RESPONSE SYSTEM 6
6.1
Emergency Plan
6.1.1
During a major crisis, the normal emergency response system usually gets
overwhelmed and mobilization of all resources of community, government, local
bodies (municipalities and panchayats), NGOs and private sector becomes necessary.
The problem gets further compounded because of the following:
o
At the onset of any crisis the picture is often unclear and the situation
usually gets chaotic, making organized relief and rescue difficult. The
situation is further complicated in case disaster hits during night time.
o
The resources available are limited while the demand is very high. It becomes
difficult to prioritise the allocation of the available resources, as there is
pressing demand from all quarters for deployment of resources.
o
The first reaction is to act spontaneously without due planning and thinking.
o
Collapse of communication and transportation networks further worsens the
situation.
6.1.2
Thus providing initial response when the onset and impact are sudden, is
extremely challenging and very vital.
6.1.3
The district administration headed by the Collector provides government’s first
organized response to any crisis. This is not to belittle the efforts of other
first responders, the community, NGOs, and the nearest government functionaries
like the policemen, firemen, the village officer and the local government
functionaries.
Standard
operating procedures (SOPs) lay down the drill in case of crisis. At the first
sign of any crisis the trigger mechanism should spontaneously set the emergency
quick response mechanism into action, without formal orders from anywhere as
per the standard operating procedures. In large cities, there is blurring of
responsibilities between the agencies
of the state government and those of local bodies.
6.1.4
In crisis situations, the Emergency Response Plan should define the trigger
point in unambiguous terms so that there is no delay on the part of the role
players to initiate action as laid down in the plan. This would entail that the
role players should have full knowledge about the tasks each has to perform.
The Emergency Response Plan should also identify resources, including human
resources, logistics, specialized equipments and the way to put them into
action.
6.1.5
It has been observed that the District Emergency Response Plans are not always
up to the mark. This is because ‘crises’ are considered low probability events
and advance planning does not receive the attention it deserves. The plans are
more often than not, prepared on assumptions (and not ground realities) and
without intensive consultations with the role players. They are also not
updated from time to time. Such plans also remain on paper as they are not
backed by mock drills and the required building of teams and their capacity.
6.2
Coordinating Relief
6.2.1
The emergency response phase can be divided into two distinct categories of
activities. The first is rescue and the second is relief. The immediate
response to any disaster should be launching of rescue operations which have
the primary aim of saving human lives and thereafter animal lives and property.
The rescue operations have to be carried over a short period of time as the
window of opportunity is usually small ranging from a few hours to a few days.
Mobilization
of local efforts, use of volunteers, civil defence and other personnel, police
and fire forces and armed forces, is important depending upon the intensity of
the disaster. As the rescue operations are on, the phase for providing relief
starts. Providing relief entails making immediate arrangements to ensure that
the basic minimum necessities of life like food, clothing, shelter, security,
and basic health and sanitation facilities are made available. The
relief phase may last for a few weeks, till the affected families are properly
rehabilitated. NGOs can play a
particularly important role during the relief phase.
6.2.2
The biggest task is to ensure that the resources are deployed in such a manner
that they reach all affected sections in an equitable manner. This calls for an
effective coordination mechanism at the district and sub-district levels. It
needs to be ensured that the needs are properly assessed and communicated to all
agencies so that unwanted relief material is not mobilized.
6.2.3
It has been observed that the focus of relief effort is on food, clothing and
shelter and aspects of public health and sanitation are often overlooked.
Chances of spread of epidemics immediately following a disaster are very high.
Therefore, ensuring supply of safe water and sanitized living conditions should
receive as much priority as other items of relief.
6.2.4
The distribution of relief material often raises issues about political discrimination,
partisan attitude and certain vulnerable sections getting left out. Total
transparency should be followed in distribution and procurement of relief
materials. It is desirable to constitute vigilance committees of the community
to keep a watch over these activities and act as grievance redressal fora.
6.2.5
Each major disaster is followed by an ‘assessment exercise’. Teams from
Government of India are deputed to validate the assessments reported by the
State Governments. This ad-hoc procedure has several drawbacks. There is need
to evolve objective methods of assessing the damage so that there are no
allegations of bias, distortions, exaggeration or arbitrary scaling down.
Satellite imagery could be used as a tool to validate the reported damages and
NDMA could draw up the necessary guidelines for the assessment teams. However,
after the recovery phase, a
more comprehensive assessment of all aspects of disaster management is
required, which is dealt with in the chapter on ‘Recovery’.
6.3
Role of Specialized Agencies
There
are several agencies which have an important role in disaster management. Some
of these are described in the following paras:
6.3.1
Civil Defence
6.3.1.1
The Civil Defence Policy of the Government of India till the declaration of
emergency in 1962, was confined to making the States and Union Territories
conscious of the need for civil protection measures and asking them to prepare
civil protection plans for major cities and towns under the then Emergency
Relief Organisation (ERO) scheme. The Chinese aggression in 1962 and the
Indo-Pak conflict in 1965 led to considerable re-thinking about the policy and
scope of Civil Defence. As a result, the Civil Defence Policy as it exists
today was evolved and Civil Defence legislation was enacted in the Parliament
in 1968. The country
was
subjected to further hostile attacks in December, 1971 when the Civil Defence
Organisation acquitted itself commendably. (Extracted from the website of
Civil Defence Organisation).
6.3.1.2
Civil Defence in the country has been raised on the strength of the Civil
Defence Act, 1968, C. D. Rules, 1968 and Civil Defence Regulations, 1968.
Although the Civil Defence Legislation is a Central Act, the C. D. Regulations,
1968 delegate all the powers to implement and execute the C. D. Scheme to the
State Government. However, the Union Government makes the policies and plans
and also finances the States for implementing of the C. D. Scheme on
discrete financial terms36.
6.3.1.3
Although the Civil Defence Act, 1968 is applicable throughout the country, the
organization is only raised in such areas and zones, which are tactically and
strategically considered vulnerable from the point of view of enemy aggression.
At present, Civil Defence activities are restricted to 225 categorized towns
spread over 35 States/Union Territories. Civil Defence is primarily organized
on voluntary basis except for a small nucleus of paid staff and establishment,
which is augmented during emergencies. The present target of C.D. volunteers is
12.98 lakh, out of which 6.6 lakh volunteers alone have been raised.Civil
Defence Corps has the following 12 services in which volunteers are trained:-
• Headquarters
Service
• Warden
Service
• Communication
Service
• Casualty
Service
• Fire
Fighting Service
• Rescue
Service
• Welfare
Service
• Salvage
Service
• Corpse
Disposal Service
• Depot
& Transport Service
• Training
Service
• Supply
Service
6.3.1.4
The relevant provisions of the Civil Defence Act, 1968 are as follows:
i.
It extends to the whole of India {Section 1(2)}
ii.
‘civil defence’ has been defined to include “any measures, not
amounting to actual combat, for affording protection to any person, property,
place or thing in India or any part of the territory thereof against
any hostile attack, whether from air, land sea or other places, or, for
depriving any such attack of the whole or part of its effect, whether such
measures are taken before, during at or after the time of such attack
6.3.1.5
Thus, ‘civil defence’ concerns itself with measures for protection of human
life and property. The catchword, however, is the term ‘hostile attack’ against
which such protective measures are envisaged. But its envisaged coverage is
wide: it not only includes concurrent, in situ measures for protection, but
also measures for preparedness, mitigation and postincident relief and
recovery.
6.3.1.6
The term ‘hostile attack’ has been defined in the Act to mean “any
attack by any person or body of persons, whether during any war, external
aggression, internal disturbance or otherwise which endangers
the security of any life, property, place or thing in India or any part of the
territory there of ”.
6.3.1.7
The inclusion of the phrase ‘internal disturbance or otherwise’ in the
definition of ‘hostile attack’ gives it a wide import. It can be construed to include incidents of
militancy, extremism, terrorism etc. as far as the application of the Act
is concerned. The lacuna inherent in this definition, for the purposes of
crisis
management,
is that it cannot be made applicable to natural disasters, thereby depriving it
of a wider role
in
the administrative set-up for crisis management.
6.3.1.8
As a result, the civil defence structure still exists with its old wartime
mandate. An examination of the powers vested in the Union Government to make
rules in matters described under section 3(1) of the Act reveals that with very
few amendments, the mandate of this Act can be extended to also include
crisis/disaster management. This could be achieved by inserting the term
‘disasters’ in section 2(a) of the Civil Defence Act to
give
a wider meaning to the definition of ‘civil defence’. Accordingly, a new
sub-section 2(d) may be inserted in the Act to include the definition of
‘disaster’ which should be in congruence with the National Disaster Management
Act, 2005. In the same vein, the provisions of section 3(1) of the Act may be
streamlined to bring it in consonance with crisis management protocols as per
international standards. Further, section 4(1) of the Act may be amended to
insert the phrase ‘all the districts within the State’ in
place of the existing phrase ‘any area within the State’.
6.3.1.9
The whole structure of ‘civil defence’ may be left at the disposal of the State
Governments (which is also provided in section 4 of the present Act). Further,
section 17 of this Act provides that the State Government may, by notification,
direct that all or any of the powers which may be exercised by it, shall be
exercised by an officer not being inferior in rank to that of a District
Magistrate (State Governments have notified the District Magistrate as this officer). As the District Magistrate
is also the authority charged with the responsibility of looking after disaster
management at the district level (both under the state and Union legislations
on disaster management), specific provisions may be inserted in the civil
defence legislation for making the powers of the District Magistrate
co-terminous with those under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 and allowing
induction of members of civil defence corps from the local community to make
community participation an important ingredient of crisis management at the
district level.
6.3.1.10
The existing enrollment of about 6 lakh volunteers is grossly inadequate for a
vast country like India. Some of the developed countries keep a target of about
1% of the total population as civil defence volunteers. But with the high
threat that India faces, this figure of 1% may not be sufficient. However, as a
first step, efforts should be made to reach this target within 5 years.
6.3.1.11
The financial allocation for civil defence activities is very inadequate38.
There is need to increase this substantially. For this to be done without
delay, the increase should not be linked to any matching contribution from the
states. The HPC had recommended that donations from corporate sector should be
permitted for civil defence activities. The Commission agrees with this.
6.3.1.12
Normally, the States have a common directorate for civil defence and home
guards. With the expanded definition of ‘Civil Defence’, all activities of the
Civil Defence Organization would be for crisis management. Therefore, the
Directorate of Civil Defence should be brought under the control of the State
Crisis Management set-up.
Box 6.3: Civil Defence
The term ‘civil defence’ has been defined in the
Protocol, additional to the Geneva Convention of 12th August, 1949, and relating
to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I)
adopted at Geneva on 8th June, 1977. The text of this Protocol is set out in
the Fifth Schedule {inserted by the Geneva Convention (Amendment) Act, 1998} to
the Geneva Conventions Act, 1962. Chapter VI of this Protocol pertains to
‘Civil Defence’, wherein it has been defined in Article 61 in the following
manner:
“For the purposes of this Protocol:
‘civil defence’ means the performance of
some or all of the undermentioned humanitarian tasks intended to protect the
civilian population against the dangers, and to help it to recover from the
immediate effects, of hostilities or disasters and also to
provide the conditions necessary for its survival. These tasks are:
a. warning;
b. evacuation;
c. management of shelters;
d. management of blackout measures;
e. rescue;
f. medical services, including
first-aid, and religious assistance;
g. fire-fighting;
h. detection and marking of danger
areas;
i. decontamination and similar
protective measures;
j. provision of emergency accommodation
and supplies;
k. emergency assistance in the
restoration and maintenance of order in
distressed areas;
l. emergency repair of indispensable
public utilities;
m. emergency disposal of the dead;
n. assistance in the preservation of
objects essential for survival;
o. complementary activities necessary to
carry out any of the tasks
mentioned above, including, but not
limited to, planning and
organization.”
6.3.2
Police, Home Guards and Fire Services
6.3.2.1
The police are among the first responders in any crisis. This response normally
comes from the nearest police station or police outpost. Their immediate
responsibility is to communicate the information and mount rescue and relief
efforts with whatever resources those are available with them. It is essential
therefore, that policemen at field level who would be the first responders are
sufficiently trained. The training need not be generic but specific to the types
of crisis anticipated in an area. More importantly, they should be fully
involved
in the preparation of the local crisis/disaster plan and they should be fully
conversant with the area.
6.3.2.2
The role of Home Guards is to serve as an auxiliary to the police in the
maintenance of internal security, help the community in any kind of emergency
such as an air-raid, fire, cyclone, earthquake, epidemic, etc., help in
maintenance of essential services, promote communal harmony and assist the
administration in protecting weaker sections, participate in socio-economic and
welfare activities and perform civil defence duties The total strength
of
Home Guards in the country is 5,73,793 against which the raised strength is
4,87,239. The organization is spread over in all States and Union Territories
except Kerala. Home Guards are raised under the Home Guards Act and Rules of
the States/Union Territories. They are recruited from cross-sections of the
society who are willing to give their spare time to the organization for
betterment of the community.
6.3.2.3
Although, both Civil Defence and Home Guards are voluntary corps, the essential
difference between the two is that Home Guards on duty are like any public
servants. This is because the primary task of Home Guards is enforcement of
law. Section (5) of the Bombay Home Guards Act reads as follows:
“5.
Powers, protection and control -
(1)
A member of the Home Guards when called out under section 4 shall have the same
powers and protection as an officer of police appointed under any Act for the
time being in force. (2) No prosecution shall be instituted against a member of
the Home Guards in respect of any thing done or purporting to be done by him in
the discharge of his functions or duties as such member except with the
previous sanction of the District Magistrate”.
6.3.2.4
Thus, a Home Guard could be very effective in any activity assigned to him
during crisis management, provided he is properly trained in that activity.
Therefore as has been suggested for policemen, each Home Guard should also be
mandatorily trained in crisis management. The HPC recommended that the Home
Guards should be placed under the operational and administrative control of the
State Level Disaster Management Agency.
The
Commission is not in favour of this, as basically Home Guards perform policing
functions and it is best that they are under the control of police. In case of
crisis, they would, however, perform the tasks assigned to them by the
concerned authority.
6.3.2.5
Also in several state laws it is prescribed that the qualification of a person
to be a Home Guard should be ‘Primary Pass’. This should be revised to at least
a pass in the 10th class given the
increasing responsibility and complexity of tasks to be entrusted to them.
6.3.2.6
The fire services have been set up by the state governments with the Government
of India providing technical and financial support. There is, however, no
uniform structure of Fire Services in the country. In some states they are managed
by the municipal authorities whereas in a few states, the police controls the
fire services but in a large number of states it is organized as a department,
with fire stations spread all over the state. In most of the states the Fire
Services are not supported by legislation. Although Fire Services have been
playing
a
crucial role in all types of disasters, the focus has been on fire related
crises. There is an urgent need to train and equip the Fire Services to handle
all types of crisis/disasters in line with international best practices where
they have been modernized as multi-hazard forces. It would also be appropriate
if they are renamed as Fire and Rescue Services.
6.3.2.7
A Standing Fire Advisory Committee was constituted by the Ministry of Home
Affairs on the recommendation of the Conference of Chiefs of Fire Services in
India in 1955. The Standing Fire Advisory Committee was renamed Standing Fire
Advisory Council in the year 1980. This Council has been giving recommendations
to the Government of India on various issues pertaining to Fire Services.
6.3.2.8
An issue which arises while examining the structure of Fire Services is whether
they should be handed over to the municipal authorities or they should continue
as a department of the State Government. Bigger cities like Mumbai have their
own Fire Services under the control of the Municipal Corporation. If Fire
Services are kept with the local governments, this may ensure a
well-coordinated response by all the concerned agencies in case of a crisis.
However,
small municipalities may not be able to support a separate Fire Service wing.
An added problem would be of jurisdiction in case the crisis arises outside the
limits of any such municipal body. Moreover, it is necessary to get the latest
practices, equipment and technology in disaster and rescue management, and this
would be possible only if there is a centrally located body which carries out
research and keeps itself abreast with the latest developments and then disseminates these
through appropriately designed training programmes and is able to procure
expensive equipment that may be beyond the financial capacity of local bodies.
The Commission, on balance, feels that for bigger cities (population exceeding
2.5 million), Fire Services should be totally under the control of the
municipal authorities. In the remaining parts of the state, the Fire Services
should be organized as a department.
However,
within a district, full operational control should be given to the District
Crisis/Disaster Management Authority. However, in the long run, as the
capabilities of municipal bodies are built up, Fire Services may be transferred
to them in a phased manner. The state level set up should lay down policy
guidelines, carry out capacity building programmes, carry out research and
development etc. The department should also be
professionalized
by inducting persons with the required expertise at all levels.
6.3.2.9
A model bill for the Fire Service was drawn up in October, 1956. The Bill
provides guidelines to formulate the State Fire Service Act and includes
matters pertaining to the setting up and maintenance of the Fire Service, the
appointments of various ranks, discipline, deployment, powers of the members of
the Fire Service, levy and collection of fire tax etc. The Standing Fire
Advisory Council in its various meetings has been recommending the adoption of
this bill by the states.
6.3.2.10
The model bill proposed in the 1950s is quite out of date. It would be
desirable to have these provisions revised. It would be better if the Fire and
Rescue Services are structured under the Crisis/Disaster Management Law. The
law should inter-alia provide a mandate for dealing with all types of
crisis/disasters. The mandate of the erstwhile Fire Services should be
broadened and Fire and Rescue Services should become an integral part of the
State Crisis/ Disaster Management set up. The role of the local governments and
the District Crisis/ Disaster Management set up vis a vis the Fire and Rescue
Services should be clearly laid down in the law. It should be ensured that the
operational control of the Fire and Rescue Services is given to the local
authorities/District Disaster Management Authorities.
6.3.3
Armed Forces/Territorial Army/Ex-Servicemen
6.3.3.1 Armed
forces have invariably played an important role in rescue and relief operations
in all major disasters in the country. The constitution of specialized NDRF battalions
would reduce the pressure on the armed forces, but with widespread presence,
availability of highly trained, dedicated and well equipped human resources,
and their capability to react within a short time-frame, the armed forces would
continue to play a vital role in rescue and relief during all major crises.
Territorial Army units should also be incorporated in crisis management
planning and operations. The potential of ex-servicemen available throughout
the country should also be tapped for disaster management. They should be
mobilized for creating a voluntary disaster task force at the local level.
6.4
Setting up Integrated Emergency Operations Centre (EOC)
6.4.1
As stated in para 3.12.3.8, the responsibility for disaster management at the
national level has been shifted to the Ministry of Home Affairs (after the
Gujarat earthquake) except drought (which continues to be with the Ministry of
Agriculture) while specific types of disasters like rail accidents, atomic
accidents, chemical disasters, biological disasters etc are dealt with by the
subject ministries, some of which have round the clock EOCs. In all types of
crises, getting early warning is critical to take precautionary measures or
mount appropriate rescue and relief efforts without any delay. This would be
possible if all the nodal ministries (for the designated type of crisis) have
full time EOCs. It would be even better if there is only one unified EOC at the
national level with personnel equipped and
trained to handle information related to any type of crisis. If a ministry is
already running a control room, the same could be housed in this integrated
EOC. Such an integrated EOC could then be accessed by all agencies in the
country or even by an international agency to pass on any information about an
impending crisis. It would also be possible to have a robust communication link
for this EOC with a large degree of redundancy built in so that the
communication system becomes virtually fail proof. After getting the first
information about any crisis, the concerned nodal ministry may immediately take
steps to bolster the EOC by deputing more staff. Such an EOC should also have
links to various electronic media channels and try to capture information
about any crisis from these media channels, as many channels now
have excellent reporting systems right down to the district/block levels.
A similar arrangement should also be made at the state and district
levels.
7 RECOVERY
7.1
Relief and Rehabilitation
7.1.1
The International Strategy for Disaster Reduction (ISDR) defines recovery as
the “decisions and actions taken after a disaster with a view to restoring
or improving the pre-disaster living conditions of the stricken community,
while encouraging and facilitating necessary adjustments to reduce disaster
risk”.
7.1.2
While emergency response is vital as it is aimed at saving human lives and
providing relief, the ultimate objective of any crisis management is
restoration of devastated livelihoods. This restoration should not only
encompass social, economic and psychological rehabilitation, but go beyond by
addressing the underlying cause of disaster. Recovery efforts following rescue
and relief in any disaster, can be classified into short term and long term.
The short term activities for recovery are debris clearance, providing
semi-permanent shelter and ensuring sanitation and restoring lifelines, while the long term
activities involve building a safer and
more
sustainable livelihood.
7.1.3
The damage caused by floods, earthquakes and cyclones is on a much larger scale
than other disasters and recovery after these disasters poses a challenge. In
disasters like drought, the relief phase is prolonged and since there is no
damage to the infrastructure and property, the rehabilitation is confined to
restoration of livelihoods which can get subsumed in normal development
programmes. Recovery in case of epidemics is more in the form of sanitizing the
locality against any future recurrence and may involve counselling of the
victims. Industrial disasters being quite varied in nature, the rehabilitation
in major ones like the ‘Bhopal Gas Tragedy’ could involve rehabilitation
efforts spanning over a generation of victims apart from restoring livelihoods
and providing social and
psychological assistance. Rehabilitation following disasters such as landslides
and avalanches is localized and is of a similar nature as in earthquakes
but on a smaller scale. Finding safer sites near such locations often poses
challenges and resistance.
7.1.4
The first step after stabilizing the situation by providing sufficient relief
is to assess the damage. A meticulously executed assessment exercise would
provide an ideal base for the rehabilitation efforts. This exercise is best
carried out through multi-disciplinary teams which go into all aspects of
damage (social, economical, psychological) in participation with the local
community - based on guidelines already referred to (para 6.2.6).
7.1.5
Based on the assessment of the damage and the needs, a recovery strategy has to
be formulated. The
strategy
should include all interventions - economic, social, political and
psychological. The resources should be identified and the roles and
responsibilities of all concerned should be defined.
7.1.6
Following any major disaster, a number of players arrive on the scene and as
already stated, ensuring proper coordination amongst them becomes very
important. Recovery activities are taken up by government agencies, local
bodies, international agencies, Voluntary Organisations and others, through
separate, overlapping and uncoordinated interventions. This leads to imbalances
in the scale of operations, duplication of efforts in some areas, gaps in
others and leakage and misuse of resources. Therefore establishing a framework
for coordination is necessary for effective recovery. The role of Voluntary
Organisations including international ones like the Red Cross is extremely
useful for downscaling the impact of disaster. Voluntary Organisations are
often better equipped to handle some aspects of accident relief and
post-disaster rehabilitation. The district administration should set up a
Voluntary Organisations’ coordination centre to coordinate the relief and
rehabilitation activities of the Voluntary Organisations so that they are not
concentrated in a few pockets.
7.1.7
It is often observed that postdisaster recovery efforts tend to focus on rapid
and visible solutions to restore normalcy at the cost of sustainable
development. The post-disaster recovery phase provides a ‘window of
opportunity’ for disaster risk reduction and risk reduction aspects should
therefore be built into the redevelopment process. This aspect in respect of
shelter is highlighted by UNHSP.
7.1.8
“Shelter is one of the most visible and immediate needs in post-crisis
settings. Relief efforts are often focused on providing shelter quickly,
without taking into account the impact of short-term shelter strategies.
Long-term shelter strategies help not only to focus on determination and
implementation of realistic and permanent reconstruction plans for the affected
communities, but also to tie up with rebuilding community confidence and
support structure for civic responsibility and urban governance, through
participatory planning of reconstruction.
Shelter issues are closely bound to mitigation aspects as well. The development
of disaster resistant housing is a major factor reducing vulnerability to
disasters. However, shelter issues in mitigation go beyond the structural.
Rights to ownership and security of tenure make an enormous difference to the maintenance,
management and development of shelter, particularly in urban areas. When people
have security where they live, they are better able to manage space and engage
in activities that will reduce, rather than increase their
vulnerability41.”
7.1.9
Normally, it is seen that the recovery efforts have a tendency of tapering off
with the passage of time. The Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery has
also observed “the general experience that once the initial flurry of
activities of providing rescue and relief is over, the attention received by
the recovery efforts goes on declining steadily over a period of time and
‘business as usual’ sets in”42. This decline in
recovery effort with the passage of time needs to be arrested. This could be achieved by setting up
monitoring mechanisms in which the community is involved and periodically
taking up impact evaluation studies through independent agencies. The recovery
plan should incorporate measures to reduce vulnerability by building community
resilience. This could be achieved by capability building of the community and
awareness generation and preparing local crisis management plans. 7.1.10 A
system of accountability needs to be evolved during the relief and
rehabilitation phase. This system should ensure that the relief material
reaches the target groups and that the funds are being utilized efficiently and
optimally. A grievance redressal mechanism should also be put in place.
7.1.11
After the recovery phase, it is necessary to conduct a detailed evaluation of
all aspects of crisis management. This should bring out the strengths and
weaknesses of the disaster management machinery and also provide the basis for
future improvements. Such an evaluation should be carried out by an independent
professional agency through the NIDM, in all major disasters. This evaluation
should also include a quick audit of the expenditure incurred.
Box 7.4: Guiding Principles for
Post-Disaster Recovery
1. Mainstreaming disaster risk reduction in the
recovery/ development process
2. Improving/maintaining coordination
3. Promoting participatory approaches and
decentralized planning and programming for recovery
4. Enhancing safety standards and integrating risk
reduction in reconstruction and development
5. Improving the living conditions of the affected
communities and sectors
6. Building local and national capacities for
increased resilience, risk management and sustainable development
7. Taking advantage of ongoing initiatives
8. Gender sensibility
9. Demonstrative effects
10. Monitoring, evaluating and learning
(Source: United Nations Development
Programme Bureau for Crisis Prevention and Recovery - Disaster Reduction Unit)
7.2
Revisiting the Financial Procedures
7.2.1
In pursuance of their mandate to recommend measures for “financing relief
expenditure on account of natural calamities”, successive Finance Commissions
have included recommendations to enable states to respond to the immediate
requirements of funds to deal with the emergencies caused by such calamities.
At present, such arrangements are in the form of the Calamity Relief Fund (CRF), a
readily available source of meeting immediate
expenditure
sharable between the Union and the states in the ratio of 3:1; and the National
Calamity Contingency Fund (NCCF), a source of meeting additional
fund requirements for particularly severe natural calamities financed solely by
the Union Government from the surcharge on certain central taxes. These funds
have generally enabled the states to respond to alleviate the immediate
distress caused by natural calamities and give some compensation for loss. Long
term rehabilitation and preparation could not receive the requisite
attention due to paucity of
resources.
7.2.2
Section 46 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 envisages establishment of two
funds, namely, “National Disaster Response Fund” and “National Disaster
Mitigation Fund”. Similar funds are also to be established at the State and
District levels.
7.2.3
Long term mitigation measures, being capital intensive, have to be carried out
as part of the national plan or the state plan of the concerned
Ministry/Department. Modalities of integrating projects taken up under the
Mitigation Fund and other projects taken up under different schemes would have
to be worked out. NDMA may be requested to finalise such modalities and also
recommend guidelines for use of the Mitigation Funds at the National, State and
District levels. Similar guidelines would also have to be worked out for the
‘Response Fund’.
7.2.4
With the establishment of the National Disaster Response Fund, and the National
Disaster Mitigation Fund, the CRF and NCCF may cease to exist at the end of the
award period of the Twelfth Finance Commission (2005-06 to 2009-10). The
quantum of assistance from these new funds for each state and its details and
conditions of release may be suggested by NDMA - on the basis of a transparent
criteria - rather than once in five years by the Finance Commission. It is desirable that both
the funds are made operational from April 1, 2007, with an initial annual
contribution of Rs 5000 crores each from the Government of India, in addition
to the CRF and NCCF, which may cease to exist at the end of the award period of
the Twelfth Finance Commission.
7.2.5
Experience of the manner in which the existing funds have been administered has
brought to light a number of anomalies. Some of these are:
(i)
Delay in initiation of relief expenditure, particularly from the CRF in case of
droughts where states often wait for additional allocations from the NCCF
before commencing distribution of relief on the ground.
(ii)
Absence of accounts for relief expenditure separately for a calamity under
‘each head of relief’; at present annual accounts are compiled on ‘over-all’
basis.
(a)
Lack of transparency about the basis on which assistance from the NCCF is
sanctioned.
(b)
Absence of concurrent evaluation of relief efforts - this leads, among other
things, to allegations of misuse and partisanship, with or without
justification.
MANAGEMENT
OF SPECIFIC CRISIS SITUATIONS
(EPIDEMICS
AND DISRUPTION OF ESSENTIAL SERVICES)
10.1
Epidemics
10.1.1
That epidemics may assume crisis proportions when an outbreak is geographically
widespread and the causative strain is of a particularly virulent variety is
understood. It is, however, also clear that the entire system of public health
is based on the validated premise that, given an adequate regimen of
surveillance and safeguards, epidemics can be prevented from assuming crisis
proportions. Figures of mortality relatable to causes of death provide ample
testimony to the fact that in the last several decades the toll taken by
epidemics has shown a significant declining trend. The decline is also the
result of advances made in medical sciences and through improvement of more
efficacious therapeutic agents. It is, therefore, encouraging to note that,
over the years, fewer epidemics have assumed the nature of catastrophe.
10.1.2
The complex nature of control of epidemics is evident from the fact that in the
Constitution of India all the three legislative lists of the Seventh Schedule
enumerate some aspects of the matter as follows:
List-I;
entry 28 “quarantine” and entry 81 “inter-State quarantine”;
List-II;
entry 6 “Public health and sanitation”;
List-III;
entry 29 “prevention of the extension from one State to another of
infectious or contagious
diseases”.
10.1.3
Pending the enactment of a new law which is under consideration of the
Government, the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897 continues to deal with management
of epidemic related diseases. It is an omnibus legislation which essentially supercedes
all laws in force in the event of outbreak or a threatened outbreak of a
‘dangerous epidemic disease’ and authorizes the Union and State Governments
(when authorized by the Union), to resort to all necessary measures to deal
with the emergency through temporary regulations. The Act also empowers search of vessels and other means of transport
and detention and segregation of any persons suspected to be suffering from an
epidemic disease. Power has also been given to the governments on how funds required
to deal with operational requirements including payment of compensation, will
be provided.
10.1.4
This legislation is outdated and needs comprehensive modifications. This is
evident from the fact that to deal with the situation arising out of the detection
of Avian Influenza in certain parts of Maharashtra, this year, slaughter of
poultry birds in the affected areas had to be ordered under the provisions of
the Bombay Police Act! While such ad hoc measures display commendable
innovation, it is clear that epidemics-related emergencies need to be dealt
with more normatively.
10.1.5
The Public Health Emergency Bill currently being considered by the Ministry of
Health and Family Welfare in the light of responses of the State Governments
and other agencies concerned seeks to achieve this end. There is a provision
for the Union or State Governments to declare a particular area as ‘epidemic or
bio-terrorism affected’. Upon such declaration, action can be initiated under
the provisions which apart from measures like inspection and quarantine etc.,
also seeks to empower government to prohibit activities which lead to or are
likely to lead to epidemics or bio-terrorism. The schedule annexed to the
proposed legislation also lists out epidemics which fall within the purview of
the Act.
10.1.6
Many states also have laws on the public health system as a whole which has the
responsibility of preventing, containing and managing epidemics. Mention may
illustratively be made of the Madras Public Health Act, 1939 which deals with a
whole range of issues with a bearing on all aspects of public health and
sanitation relevant to prevention and management of epidemics. The legislation
treats public health in its entirety and covers aspects like water supply, sanitation and
drainage within the same framework. An innovative feature of this law is that
it includes what can be referred to as quality of life within the domain of
public health and introduces control of all activities or inactions that may
cause ‘annoyance’ to the public thereby bringing in irritants like sound
pollution within its purview. Such legislations, it need hardly be emphasized,
are more conducive to comprehensive management of epidemics.
10.1.7
The Commission’s terms of reference requires it to deal with crisis management
aspect of epidemics in the context of administrative reforms. The Commission
would, therefore, not like to address technical and general public health
issues even though they are germane to an effective management of
epidemics-related crises. The Commission would only like to note that a
comprehensive, well planned public health system is the most dependable bulwark
against epidemics-related crises and to deal with such crises, should they
arise despite preventive measures.
In this connection the Commission notes the efforts to develop a model
indicative Public Health Bill and strongly recommends its early finalization
with the hope that State Governments will move speedily for its enactment.
10.1.8
The Commission also notes that the enactment of the Public Health Emergencies
Bill is now proceeding satisfactorily in the light of the feedback received
from the States. The emerging scourge of bio-terrorism also needs to be taken
adequate note of and care has also to be taken to facilitate incurring of
expenditure on emergent basis (for which enabling provision exists in the 1897
Act).
10.1.9
The manner in which the Disaster Management Act, 2005 defines the term
‘disaster’ leaves no doubt that an epidemic of extraordinary severity spreading
rapidly is covered by it. The Act also overrides the provision of any other law
(Section 72). As such, it is clear that management of epidemics-related crisis
would also fall within the jurisdiction of the National Disaster Management
Authority and that apart from the legislation being contemplated by the
Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, it will be imperative that the planning
and preparatory exercises
envisaged in the Disaster Management Act, 2005 are also undertaken. In any
case, bio-terrorism is the cutting edge between the public health and general
disaster management systems as the National Disaster Response Force will be a
substantive ‘first responder’ in such contingencies under the technical
supervision of public health professionals. The Public Health Emergencies Bill
has to provide for this coordination.
10.1.10
Further, while the public health infrastructure in the country is being
upgraded and strengthened, it is quite possible that a severe, widely prevalent
epidemic could overwhelm the coping capacity of the functionaries. It is,
therefore, also imperative that the contingency plans dealing with such
situations draw upon the general system of disaster management by developing
formal and well defined linkages.
10.2
Disruption of Essential Services
10.2.1
With rapid development, industrialization and urbanization, the life of
citizens depends on a wide range of essential services like power, transport,
telecommunications and drinking water supply. Any disruption in these services
would lead to large scale hardship to people. Such disruptions may be caused by
accidents, sabotage or strikes. It has been observed that often during natural
disasters such essential services are severely hit. It is, therefore, necessary
that the community and the administration should be prepared to meet such
eventualities.
Dealing
with such situations would have specific technical aspects but there could be a
host of administrative measures which would be required to mitigate hardships
during such crisis. The Commission is not going into the details of each one of
these situations but would like to emphasise that while drawing up disaster
management plans these types of crises should not be lost sight of. It is
essential to formulate ‘standard operating procedures’ and mitigation plans for
these crises also.
No comments:
Post a Comment