It’s not the flooding only, stupid!

Despite having a rich understanding of nature, humans have failed to live with it. Simply because they have been trying to capture it and all such acts are likely to face a disaster. Just consider this. There will be no damage if an earthquake takes place in a mountainous region that is not inhabited and doesn’t have any infrastructure or floodwaters inundate a desert where no one lives. Most disaster experts agree that a disaster takes place when a hazard clashes with vulnerability. Therefore, it is reasonable to argue that it is not the rain alone that has caused losses. Poor governance or lack of governance has created vulnerabilities. The rainfall only exposed the fragilities of human settlements.

After the 1997 floods, the PATTAN organisation surveyed to find out about flood-related losses in Sargodha and Muzaffargarh. Surprisingly, there was an inverse relationship between the level of flooding and losses. Sargodha where the level of flooding was much lower than Muzaffargarh, losses were three times higher. The main factors were population density and land use. In Sargodha, river Jhelum crop cultivation along riverbanks was more than 90%, while in Muzaffargarh it was as low as 30%. Similarly, the population density in the riverine belt of Sargodha was higher than Muzaffargarh. The construction of a canal parallel to the left bank of river Jhelum would trap the water. The floodwater having high velocity could penetrate large areas, but it can’t go back to the river because most of it is trapped in low-lying areas. This causes subsequent disasters in the form of epidemics or diseases. Despite being aware of areas that are vulnerable to earthquakes and drought, we have repeatedly failed in managing disasters.

The following two exclusionary practices appear to be responsible for recurring disasters in Pakistan: 1, exclusion of disaster-prone people in decision-making and implementation, and 2, absence of coherence in development planning. I would also add the inability of civil society to hold state officials and ruling parties accountable for negligence.

Global Network of Civil Society Organisations for Disaster Reduction (GNDR) recently completed a global study i.e., Views from the Frontline, which covered 52 countries. It was the largest independent global review of Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) at the local level. It aimed to strengthen the inclusion and collaboration between at-risk people, civil society and government in the design and implementation of policies and practices to reduce risks and strengthen resilience. It also established a local baseline and local monitoring process to measure progress towards achieving an inclusive “people-centred” approach to resilience-building, as promoted within the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (SFDRR) and SDGs.

In Pakistan, a study conducted by PATTAN during 2019-20 involved interviews of more than 1,700 households, 150 NGOs and 150 local government officials in 15 districts across the country. The respondents (residing in disaster-prone regions) ranked the following six disasters in Pakistan as the most devastating and frequent: flooding, followed by earthquakes, epidemics, droughts, pollution, and heavy rainfall. Interestingly, many respondents also viewed poverty and inequality as disasters. More than 90% of disaster-prone communities said they have never been consulted or involved in disaster risk assessment, planning and implementation by state institutions, which is negligence under the law.

The study found a higher percentage of disability in disaster-prone areas than the national average. For instance, one in five respondents reported having disabled persons in the family, while 37% said they have chronically ill family members, which is worth considering. More than one-third of disaster-hit people were likely to state that disasters severely caused economic losses. Almost half of the respondents believed that disaster-related losses have increased manifold in the recent past and almost the same percentage of people were likely to say that complete rehabilitation and recovery were not possible.

When they were asked who helped them after the disasters, only 16% mentioned the government, 31% to 34% mentioned friends or relatives, and NGOs or religious organisations respectively. Primordial social networks and NGOs play substantive roles during and after disasters. Therefore, it can be concluded that the state has failed to respond to disasters. The current wave of urban and rural flooding substantiates many findings of PATTAN’s study.

The study also aimed to assess vulnerable people’s awareness about the environment and DRR policies/projects and their involvement and participation in risk reduction assessment, planning and implementation. Contrary to the policy of the National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA) and its Act 2010 and plan, as many as 97% of respondents observed they had never been made aware of DRR policy and plans. Most residents blamed local influential and corrupt state officials for poor implementation and disaster management.

Although this year’s rainfall is 400% higher than the previous years, disasters in the previous years were of the same magnitude. Despite frequent disasters, the successive rulers have continued violating state policies and guidelines regarding the inclusion of marginalised and vulnerable women and men in disaster-risk planning and implementation. The absence of empowered local governments, non-functional and crony disaster management bodies at the local level and lifeless national and provincial disaster management commissions tell the tale of our disaster governance – which is disastrous governance.

In terms of demand, there is no organised demand from any organised platform. NGOs appear to have become spineless as their networks are afraid of taking a pro-people position and holding officials accountable. The buzzword – accountability has lost its meaning. So, what is to be done?

1st, don’t blame nature, build a vulnerability and governance-based disaster narrative. 2nd, pressure political parties to incorporate ‘DRR and inclusive-risk-governance’ in their respective manifestoes. 3rd, align NDMA Act with local government acts and set minimum standards considering article 140A of Pakistan’s constitution. 4th, pressure governments to make community and women’s participation legally mandatory in decision-making and implementation structures and processes. 5th, establish DRR committees at all levels of local government structure. 6th, build capacities of disaster-prone communities through periodic training and education. 7th, enhance the sensitivity of students through education curriculum and drills. 8th, build a strong platform for the articulation of demands of vulnerable people and create linkages of rural communities with urban networks and social movements.

Finally, common sense must prevail. For instance, everyone knows flooding takes place in certain months and glacier melts also accelerate during the same months. We also know what the pathways of floods and torrents are. If we know all that in advance, then why don’t the authorities act in advance? They can’t hide their criminal negligence by blaming nature. They must involve the people in disaster risk management and reduce the impact of disasters.

Published in The Express Tribune, August 9^th, 2022.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.